Книга третья. Авраам и его время

In the southern part of Mesopotamia, in the so-called Chaldea in ancient times, on the right bank of the Euphrates, about ten miles from it, there is the village of Mugair, founded on the ruins of an ancient city, the remains of which are still visible today. This city, as can be seen from the inscriptions on the monuments, was Ur, called after its location Chaldean, the birthplace of Abram, that great chosen one of God, who had the great honor of becoming the ancestor of a new race chosen by God. 112 In ancient times, Ur was much closer to the shore of the Persian Gulf, from which it is now separated by a large strip of alluvial land, and conducted extensive maritime trade. The name Ur or Uru is the Semitic form of the Akkadian Eri, which means "city", and was probably given to this city as the most important in this area or as the first settled place of residence of its once nomadic inhabitants. The newest name for this place means “tarred,” apparently due to the large amount of resin found in the surrounding area. Even if it was not located on the shore itself, then, nevertheless, located at the wide lower reaches of the Euphrates, it was in fact a maritime city and served as a port for Babylonia. Native inscriptions constantly speak of the ships of Ur and the brisk trade carried on by its inhabitants. This city was of extremely great importance even 2000 years before Christ. was the capital of the powerful monarch of Uruk, who founded a great church dedicated to the moon god Gurkha, the remains of which are still visible today. This monarch was an independent sovereign and owned the entire strip of land stretching north to Niffer, ancient Khalne. The splendor of his buildings and the vastness of his construction enterprises prove that he possessed great means and lofty plans. Following an erroneous tradition, some interpreters, both ancient and modern, identified Ur with the Greek Edessa, the newest Orpha, which, apparently, was once called Orra. This city, lying in upper Mesopotamia, acquired great fame in Christian times as the capital of that king Abgar, who, according to legend, wrote a letter to Christ, and even to this day retains traces of the tradition of Abram in the names of its mosque and lake. But increasingly probable news that has reached us forces us to believe that Ur is in its own Chaldea, an alluvial country on the shores of the Persian Gulf, and there can be no doubt that Mugair, as the inscriptions testify, was precisely Ur of the Chaldeans. 113 Even the tradition cited by Eusebius from Eupolemos, a pre-Christian Greek historian, that Ur, or, as he calls it, Urias, is the Babylonian city of Camarina or Chaldeopolis, corresponds to this particular view; for, as Professor Rawlinson observes, these names indicate that the city was sacred to the moon god, which Ur was. 114 The remains of the city consist of a series of low mounds, located in an oval shape and extending about three miles. The most prominent mound is that on which the church was erected, and it rises 70 feet above the surrounding plain. The church was built of large bricks, erected on an extremely large basement and faced the four main cardinal points. Initially, this basement rose in ledges, on the topmost of which there was a sanctuary containing an image of the god. The church was surrounded by luxurious date groves, and thanks to its enormous volume and tower-like height, this building was visible from all parts of the city and forced every resident and passerby to turn to Gurkha, the great moon god, in prayer. There is one feature in the building itself which confirms the circumstance indicated by the inscriptions, that it was the work of two different monarchs, the earlier of whom apparently reigned 2200 years before Christ. In the lower floor the bricks are held together with resin, and in the upper floor with lime. The cylinders bearing the name of the founder were found laid at the corners of the building, as was the custom when laying the foundations of Chaldean buildings. Among the buildings erected by the builder of this church was a palace called the house of the supreme prince (Rubu-Tsiru), the ruins of which can still be seen today. What this monarch left unfinished was completed by his son Dungi. This son of his, among other things, extended his father’s kingdom to the north, so that traces of his construction work can be seen in the restoration of the church of Erech, as well as in the church that he erected in Babylon. Abram was probably born around this time. Present-day Chaldea presents an extremely monotonous and uninteresting picture. Being a completely alluvial country, owing its existence to the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, it is a low-lying plain, devoid of any mountains or hills. But its amazing fertility is beyond doubt, and with an industrious population, under better external conditions, it should present a striking contrast with its present nakedness and desolation. Instead of the present sad stripes of desert sand, here there once were well-irrigated and cultivated fields, which were a source of wealth for the industrious peasant. Herodotus, who himself visited this country, describes its fertility this way: “This country is little irrigated by rain, but the root of the grain bread is nourished in other ways. It is fed by the river - not by its flooding, as in Egypt, but by artificial irrigation. In the whole world there is no bread so fertile. It is true that no attempt is made there to breed fig trees, grapes 115 or olives; but it is so rich in grain bread that it usually yields two hundred and in the best years three hundred. Wheat and barley often have stems four fingers thick. As for millet and sesame, I cannot say, at least from my personal experience, to what amazing heights they grow; because even what I said regarding the works of Babylonia should seem incredible to those who have never visited this country. The whole plain is covered with palm trees, most of which are fruitful, and from which the inhabitants prepare bread, wine and honey.” 116 Recent travelers also recognize the productive power of this soil, while at the same time lamenting the carelessness and indolence which have led to its present miserable condition. The two main natural products are wheat and the date palm. The first grows so quickly and luxuriantly that it is mowed twice and then cattle are driven out on it in order to prevent excessive growth of the stem and force it to grow into an ear. The beautiful date palm adds some charm to the monotonous landscape and constitutes a precious accessory to the country. Its benefits have become a proverb. In addition to supplying the inhabitants with bread obtained from its fruits, wine and honey from its juice, it provides fuel, rope, vinegar and a special kind of mud for fattening livestock. Fruits of the genus pom-garnets, apples, grapes and tamarisk are obtained in great abundance. But there is a lack of large timber in the country, and cypress, acacia and palm are only occasionally found here and there. To compensate for this lack of timber, the Chaldeans resorted to huge reeds, which are almost a feature of this area and from which the Arabs still make their houses and boats. Reeds were also used to build some of the great Chaldean buildings. The canes of this reed were usually used to make a frame, which was covered with bricks. There were no stones for buildings in the country; if there was a need for stones, they were usually floated from afar along rivers. But excellent clay, found everywhere, and sun-dried bricks, fastened with earthen resin, constituted the usual material from which buildings were erected. Thanks to the extreme fertility of the surrounding area, the country's industry was vibrant, and the population, distinguished by its peaceful industrial character, enjoyed complete prosperity and stood at a high level of civilization. The extraordinary transparency of the air, in which the stars glow rather than simply shine, gave rise to early observations of the celestial bodies. Astronomy, with its sister astrology, was the favorite subject of a special class of scientists who also studied mathematics, legislation and methods of government. Writing was already well known, and there were even entire libraries, although instead of books there were clay tiles with writing depicted on them. Of the industrial arts, textile production, metal working and engraving were especially famous. Unfortunately, this entire rich civilization was thoroughly saturated with the grossest idolatry and the wickedness inseparable from it. Instead of altars to the true God, churches and churches to idols rose everywhere, the service of which often took on a rudely sensual and shameful character. The main deities were considered to be the sun and the moon, followed by other minor deities like the lesser planets and stars. Churches were built to them, cities were dedicated, images were made from them, which received the meaning of household gods (teraphim), who were entrusted with protecting the welfare of individual families. If the upper classes retained traces of purer religious ideas, then among the lower masses complete superstition prevailed, often taking the crudest forms. Believing that the destinies of human life and nature itself are controlled by capricious deities, devoid of any moral sense, the people resorted to propitiatory sacrifices and prayers even in such cases where it would be necessary to resort to simple prudence and ordinary means. Instead of using e.g. medical remedies for diseases, they resorted to all kinds of conspiracies and lamentations. Much of the Babylonian literature now extant consists of various formulas for eliminating disease and witchcraft. There are also many treatises on fortune telling and omens. From all this it is easy to conclude that popular religion was at a low level, and therefore could rather contribute to the moral decline than to the rise of its adherents. The population of Chaldea was of mixed origin, but mainly of the Cushite tribe, as the Bible testifies (Gen. 10:8-10) 117. But in Ur, as one of the original capitals and the most important port of the country, one could meet representatives of various tribes and nationalities. The ships of Ur traded with Ethiopia and the countries lying along the shores of the Red Sea, the name of which extended to the Persian Gulf and even to the Indian Ocean; Thanks to these relations, the people came into contact with foreign peoples, and undoubtedly many strangers from various countries settled in their city. Among the others, that Semitic family settled there, from which Abram, the father of the believers, the friend of God, came. The distant ancestor of this family was Eber, who descended through Arphaxad from Shem. Arphaxad, in the sense of the name of the country, is a region lying in the north of Assyria, on the border of Armenia; From this area, the Jews or descendants of Eber moved to the south. The usual reason for such migrations was undoubtedly that restless thirst for change and the search for new fields of life, which seem to be innate to a person in order to encourage him to strive for perfection. It is not known what actually forced this family of Semites to exchange their beloved shepherd lifestyle for settling down in an industrial, lively, restless city. In this city, with their simple pastoral habits, they must have felt extremely alienated among a population completely devoted to trade, arts and construction. The idolatry found everywhere must have seemed to them an extreme perversion of their own pure religious traditions. In the open air, in the free air of the plains, they could worship the Lord, as their ancestor Noah had worshiped; but here the atmosphere was filled with idolatry, and everything around them could only obscure their highest religious beliefs and incline them to a false religion. The father of this Semitic family was Terah. He formed his own family in Ur, consisting of three sons: Abram, Nahor and Haran, who in turn married, and the last two had their own children, and Abram's wife, Sarah (his sister on his father, but not from the same mother), was barren. The position of this family in an idolatrous country was undoubtedly difficult. The most disgusting idolatry for him reigned all around. Chaldean Ur itself, as already said, was even the center of local idolatry and was famous for its churches to idols, among which the most revered was the Moon. All this weighed so heavily on the pious family of Terah, and especially his eldest son Abram, that they, not seeing the possibility of remaining any longer in an idolatrous and wicked country, the inhabitants of which, perhaps, were also hostile to them for their true faith and not worshiping idols, intended to leave it completely and move to the land of Canaan. But various connections with the country still kept them from doing this, and they only moved to another Chaldean city of Harran, where they settled 118. Harran, the name of which has been retained by one village to the present day, lay on the Balikha River, a tributary of the Euphrates in upper Mesopotamia. The word Harran is probably Akkadian and means “road,” which may indicate that this city was located on a large road from east to west. And indeed, located in an area from which many roads diverged to the famous fords of the Tigris and Euphrates, Harran was an important commercial point and was in trade relations with the Phoenician Tire. It was dedicated to the same deity as the city of Ur, namely the god Moon, whose symbol was a conical stone with a star on top. From ancient times this entire district belonged to the rulers of Babylonia, and Harran was its border city, commanding the great road that led to Syria and Palestine. It was an area sheltered by mountains and rivers and exhibiting great diversity in soil and climate, due to its elevated position and abundance of water. Harran itself lay in the center of a rich alluvial plain renowned for its wonderful fertility. As one recent traveler described it, “With every step forward from Orpah, on the way to Harran, the hills on the right and the plains on the left recede further and further, until you find yourself in the middle of a vast plain, dotted sometimes with oases of extremely colorful flowers, sometimes with rich and verdant pastures covered with herds of sheep and goats, together with a few camels grazing under the supervision of the son or daughter of their owner. Looking at this picture, it is easy to understand why the sons of this open country, the Bedouins, love it so much and cannot part with it: no other country would be so suitable for them. The air is so fresh, the horizon is so distant and man feels so free that this country seems to have been specially created for those whose life consists of wandering and who recognize no authority other than their own... The village of Harran itself consists of several conical houses, like beehives, built of stones laid on top of each other without any clay or lime. These houses have light holes in their roofs, and are nestled at the base of a ruined castle, built on a hill that makes Harran visible from the entire surrounding plain. The main inhabitants of the area are Bedouin tribes who live a pastoral life in the surrounding area. One of these tribes, the Anazeans, pitched their tents made of black goat's hair at the foot of the hill, between it and the source of Rebekah. Women came here in the evenings to draw water, and everything around bore the imprint of the most distant times” 119. Terah and his sons once lived in this area. Meanwhile, the environment did not remain without influence on this pious family: Terah himself, towards the end of his life, apparently succumbed to idolatry (Joshua 24:2), and thus danger threatened faith even in this refuge. Then the Lord determined to take a person from this particular family in order to make him His chosen instrument in preserving true religion in the world. The divine choice fell on Abram. He was undoubtedly the most religious and pious member of the family, and, according to Jewish tradition, he showed extraordinary devotion to the true religion even in childhood. While still a youth, Abram, seeing the gross idolatry surrounding him, was anxiously occupied with the great question: are people doing the right thing in idolizing the heavenly bodies? One day, says legend, looking around the earth and looking at the sky, the youth Abram began to think who could have created all this. Then the sun rose in all its brilliant splendor, and Abram thought that this must be the Creator of everything. And he bowed to him and worshiped him all day long. When, however, with the onset of evening the sun set, Abram doubted that the Creator of all could be so darkened. But then the moon rose to the east in its enchanting brilliance, and countless stars sparkled around it. “In truth,” the youth cried, “this is the Creator of the universe and the stars of His servants!” And he bowed to the moon and deified her. However, the moon slowly rolled to the west, the stars faded and the daylight rose again in the eastern sky. Then Abram said: “No, it cannot be that any of these heavenly bodies could be the Creator of the world; they obey only the will of the Invisible, to whom they owe their existence, and from now on I will only idolize Him, I will only worship Him.” And he adamantly adhered to this true faith until the moment when God’s providence made him his chosen one. And the Lord said to Abram: “Get out of your land, from your kindred, and from your father’s house, and go to the land that I will show you.” To encourage him in this feat, the Lord immediately added a great promise: “And I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will magnify your name, and you will be blessed. 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” (Gen. 12:1, 2). Here lies the promise of a threefold blessing, partly earthly and partly spiritual. Abram must go to the land in which he will establish his dwelling; from him will come a great nation, and in him, and through him, all the nations of the earth will receive blessings. Only time could reveal the full meaning of this promise. How far Abram himself understood it, we cannot say; but from it he was to learn a new lesson concerning the essence of God. Now he saw in the Lord not only the great Creator, but also the wise Ruler; he recognized His ruling Providence, knew that it was by the will of God that he should settle in the land to which he was directed, that in this new place of residence he and his offspring would receive some extraordinary blessings, and that from his seed something wonderfully good would happen for all mankind. This solemn promise took possession of his entire soul, directed his entire life, forced him to look with extraordinary love at the land of Canaan, with which this blessing was inextricably linked. Abram at this time was 75 years old. He was a married man and, although he had no children, he was still quite settled in his homeland; therefore, to leave everything and go into an unknown land required strong faith in the voice of revelation. But Abram was strong in faith. In his father’s house, he courageously fought against the invasion of idolatry, and now, hearing such a great promise, which in patriarchal times could not be higher for a believer, he “obeyed by faith the calling to go to the country that he had to receive as an inheritance; and he went away, not knowing where he was going” (Heb. 11:8). Moreover, he left not only the country, but also his relatives and his father’s house. True, on this new journey he was accompanied by his nephew Lot, who remained an orphan after his father Haran, but Nahor with all his household and family remained in Haran or the area known as the city of Nahor (Gen. 24:10; 27:43; 28:5, 10), in the neighborhood of which for many years later, as Assyrian inscriptions show, the names were constantly found together Canaanite and Jewish type. He selflessly broke with all these attachments. He was a comparatively lonely man when he set out on this journey to the promised land with his wife and nephew. But he took with him all his property that he and Lot had, as well as all the household members born in Haran; herds of sheep and cattle, slaves and household members - all this accompanied the great wanderer. It was more of a relocation of a tribe than a relocation of a family from one place to another. Having no intention of ever returning, he left nothing behind him. He set off into the desert like a wanderer who was leaving his former home forever and never hoped to see it again. Judging by some data, it can be assumed that the possessions of Abram and Lot in the herds were very significant, and in any case the caravan was very numerous, as can be judged by the fact that Abram a few years later in the promised land could, if necessary, gather 318 servants suitable for military purposes. As a result, one can think that the entire caravan consisted of no less than 1000 souls. For such a number of people at least a hundred tents were required, probably made of black goat hair, as the Bedouin tribes make them at the present time. Thus we have a picture of the patriarch's migration, giving us a vivid idea of ​​his wealth and power. All these household members undoubtedly learned the true faith from their master. The expression "took all the people he had in Haran" has been interpreted by both Jewish and Christian commentaries to mean that Abram converted them to the true faith and introduced them to the promise of Jehovah. There is no doubt that it was difficult for him to break with old attachments. A man with ambitious plans, a warrior excited by a passion for conquest, the head of a family striving to accumulate wealth - each of them might feel the desire to move out of his peaceful homeland; but Abram was none of them. Looking at the matter from a simple point of view, he had nothing to gain and much to lose through this relocation; but obedience is inseparable from self-sacrifice. The journey was difficult and dangerous, the future was completely unknown and the upcoming blessing was intangible: so what? God has commanded and must be obeyed. This severance of family ties was necessary; this was part of the divine plan for the selection of the chosen race. Abram saw this need in breaking with old attachments, in removing himself from the evil influences of superstition and idolatry, and he surrendered to the guidance of a higher hand with unconditional faith. The further he went from his home and his native country, the closer he came to God; The less he could rely on others, the more he tried to rely on the almighty hand of God that supported him. Everything was leading to the best; each test was only preparing the way for the final test. Here a new step was being taken to promote true religion. Any attempt to look back in such circumstances would be fatal to this divine plan, just as it would be contrary to Abram’s entire previous life. This was a kind of renunciation of the world that he had to make. Here was a foreshadowing of the harsh lesson that the Gospel teaches: “If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, and indeed his own life, he cannot be My disciple. So anyone of you who does not renounce all that he has cannot be My disciple” (Luke 14:26, 33). And so the caravan of God’s chosen one moved through the deserted desert towards the land of promise, a land about which he had no idea. This was a significant moment in history. In a childless man searching for a land unknown to him, one cannot help but see the great teacher of that glorious truth, which is destined to conquer all false systems and form the basis of every true religion, namely, the truth that God is one. It was a great victory, before which the exploits of the Alexanders, Caesars and Napoleons fade into insignificance. Here the foundation stone of the building that was to be completed in the New Jerusalem was laid; here the final identification of that new race was made, from which the Messiah, the bloodless victor, the blameless conqueror of the fallen world, was to come. Alone in his communication with heaven, lonely in his hopes and motives, meeting with but little sympathy in his closest friends, Abram, firm in his trust, relying on invisible help, made his way with firm confidence. Lot, apparently, did not penetrate much into the depths of his uncle’s heart; even Sarah’s faith was weak. Tears, cries and regrets accompanied the father of believers at the first stage of his life's career; quite a few sad glances were directed back across the river, where these glances met a corresponding response from the relatives remaining in Harran; but Abram himself walked firmly forward, as if seeing Him who is invisible. He was not wavered by any fears or bad forebodings, the path was smooth for him, and in what it would lead to, Abram completely relied on God. Nothing is reported about the route Abram took to Canaan. The writer simply says: “And they went out to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to the land of Canaan” (Gen. 12:5). Tradition has tried to fill this brief narrative with various details, albeit of dubious merit. Thus, I. Flavius ​​120, following the native writer Nicholas, declares that after leaving Harran, Abram with his entire caravan arrived in Damascus and reigned there for some time, but was forced by an uprising of the people to retire from here to Canaan. His name, however, he adds, is still famous in this city, and to this day there is a village known as “Abraham’s dwelling,” lying about two miles from the northern gate of the city. Justin the Philosopher 121 also apparently cites the same tradition, although in him it is accompanied by obvious errors. Thus, he writes: “The Jews originated from Damascus, the most famous city in Syria, which received its name from its king Damascus. After him Azel reigned, then Ador, Abram and Israel.” In the person of Azel, one can perhaps see the Syrian Azael - the usual name of later kings, and in Ador Ewald sees Eliezer, since Ador or Ader was only a dialectical variation of Eliezer. Holy Scripture does not provide any confirmation for these stories, except for the occasional mention that Abram's steward, Eliezer, came from Damascus (Gen. 15:2). But there is nothing incredible that the patriarch could choose this particular path to enter the promised land. The resettlement of Abram with numerous herds and a large caravan was, of course, very difficult, and in general this journey could only be successfully completed in a direction that would deliver all the necessary supplies of food and water. The immediate route through the poor Syrian desert would present insurmountable difficulties for such a caravan; Meanwhile, a large caravan route led to Damascus, along which merchants and sometimes armies were constantly moving, and this route could undoubtedly supply abundantly with all the needs of life. It avoided the dangers of the desert by passing along its northern border and descending into the oasis of Damascus from the north, where it connected with one of the great highways from there to Egypt. These southern tracts went past the center of Palestine, which was covered with mountains and did not offer any convenience for travel; they walked either along the eastern border of the country, crossing the desert in the south, or along the coastal strip, which was relatively low-lying. The difficulties of the more direct caravan route from the eastern countries were greatly reduced in subsequent years by the founding of the desert city of Fadmora, a city which, under its subsequent name of Palmyra, gained great fame in history. The oasis in which this ancient city stands has undoubtedly always been a favorite stopping place for caravans stopping to rest in the hot Syrian desert; but this oasis is surrounded on all sides by a vast area of ​​sultry country, as a result of which the northern route, although longer, was in any case more convenient and easier for relocating such a large caravan. So eg. the nearest source of water to Palmyra on the Damascus Road is in Kuryetein, about 60 miles from the city, and the entire intermediate space is a barren plain, devoid of any pastures, springs or foliage. The rich springs of this area make the oasis a kind of paradise among the dead desert, and one can think that this oasis is the village of springs (Hatzar-Enon), which is mentioned by the prophet Ezekiel as being located on the eastern borders of Damascus and Imath (47:17; 48:1). The country lying to the west of Kurietein is described by the latest traveler: “Here we are in the desert. The soil is covered with small fragments of flint and, as it were, scattered lime, through which here and there frail grass or half-dried heather pokes through. In all the space visible to the eye there is neither tree nor any green bush, and animal life is equally rare, because, except in rare cases when a herd of gazelles or a party of Bedouins comes across along the way, we move for whole hours without seeing any living creatures. All around us are sandy soil, undulating plains and exposed mountain rocks; above us is a cloudless sky and a fiery sun, pouring streams of scorching rays onto the burnt landscape from morning to night.” 122 Chapter 11. Abram's Arrival in Canaan It is not known exactly how long Abram stayed in Damascus, 123 but now he moved on further to the land of promise. It is most likely that Abram headed to Canaan by the southern route, which led along the eastern side of the lakes of Merom and Gennesaret, and crossed the Jordan along the Jisr-el-Medzhamia bridge or near it, about 12 miles south of the last of these lakes, and from there he headed to the area later known as Bethsan or Scythopolis, from where, having crossed The Gilboa ridge, the road stretched to Samaria and the south of the country. And now the large caravan route from Damascus to the south goes in this exact direction, and due to the physical characteristics of the country, this route could not have changed much since ancient times. “And Abram walked through the land (along its length) to the place of Shechem” (Gen. 12:6). Here this “Jew”, i.e. as the word signifies, "passed over from the other side" of the great river, the river Euphrates, made his first stop in the land of promise under the oak or terebinth of Morea. Who or what Moret was is unknown. It could be the name of a chief who was famous in that area, or it could mean “exalted” (according to translation 70) and “famous” or “glorious” (according to the Vulgate translation), or it could be in etymological connection with the verb meaning “to see”, and thus indicate the vision that Abram had here. Be that as it may, Abram pitched his tent in this oak grove and rested after his long wandering. That particular oak tree, under which the great father of the believers rested, was revered for a long time and existed until the time of Jacob, because, as the writer of everyday life says (Gen. 35:1-4), Jacob buried the foreign gods he had taken from his household “under the oak tree that is near Shechem.” The location of Shechem is extremely beautiful. It lies in a closed valley, sheltered by Gerizim to the south and Ebal to the north. The bases of these mountains, where they rise beyond the city, are no more than two hundred fathoms apart from each other. The valley floor is nearly 1,800 feet above sea level, and the summit of Gerizim rises 800 feet even higher. Anyone who has ever been to Heidelberg will agree that the picture opening up from the base of these mountains is very similar to this beautiful German city. The position of the present city, which may be thought to have been the location of the ancient Palestinian city, lies precisely at sea level; and streams issuing from numerous springs flow down the opposite slopes of the valley, irrigating the greenery and fertilizing the soil in all directions. The somewhat deserted appearance of the adjacent mountains represents only a kind of artificial contrast in order to further enhance the beauty of the green fields and gardens that fill the valley. “In all Palestine,” says the traveler Clark, there is nothing more beautiful than the view of Nablus (Shechem) from the surrounding heights. When the traveler descends from these hills, the city seems to be drowning in the luxury of the most delightful and fragrant flower beds, half-hidden by rich gardens and slender groves of trees around the entire beautiful valley in which it stands.” “The whole valley,” says Robinson, is overflowing with vegetable gardens and orchards of every kind, watered by springs which gushed out in various parts and flowed to the west in refreshing streams.” “There is no longer a trace of the desert here,” says another traveler; there are no longer wild thickets here, but everything is covered with greenery, everywhere the shade is not from the terebinth oak and carob tree, but from the olive groves, so delicate in color, so beautiful in shape, that for their sake we would willingly part with all other trees” 124 . This country, by the time Abram arrived in it, was no longer deserted. “The Canaanites then lived in the land” (Gen. 12:6). The descendants of Canaan, the son of Ham, under various tribal names, settled in the lowlands of Palestine, along the seashore and in the Jordan Valley. The name Canaan was originally applied only to that strip of land that the Greeks and Romans called Phenicia and lay between Lebanon and the sea; but since this tribe, having settled there in their separate branches, spread throughout the entire surrounding country, the whole land began to be called Canaan, and its inhabitants, despite their different origins, generally began to be called Canaanites. The language they spoke was very close (if not identical) to Hebrew; The prophet Isaiah (19:18) calls the Hebrew-Phoenician language “the language of Canaan.” In their relations with the ancient inhabitants, the Jews, apparently, did not need translators at all and themselves directly entered into all communications with them. The proper names of Canaanite persons and places are entirely Jewish and can be explained by Jewish etymology 125 . It is, of course, possible that the Israelites translated native names into their own language, giving them an unambiguous Hebrew name, just as they modified Assyrian and Egyptian words into Hebrew forms; but there is no doubt that the remains of the Phoenician language that have come down to us have the closest resemblance to the Hebrew, and that the Phoenician language was precisely the language of Canaan, this is already accepted on sufficient grounds 126. Abram, apparently, did not enter into relations with the primitive inhabitants of Canaan. Traces of troglodytes were discovered not only in Edom, where the Horites were known to have lived, but also in Beit Jibrin, on the borders of the Shephelah plain and in Lebanon, where their flint tools were mixed with the bones of reindeer and wild ox. The Bible often mentions a gigantic native tribe of the Rephaim, who lived mainly in Bashan and whose capital was Ashteroth-Karnaim, which took its name from the two-horned goddess whom they worshiped. These tribes were also found in the west among the Philistines, and they left their name in the fertile plain near Jerusalem, which was the scene of some remarkable events in Jewish history 127 . The descendants of this gigantic tribe were subsequently known under the names of Enakims, Emims and Zuzims. There is no reason to believe that this tribe in general was particularly superior to the average tall height of ordinary people, although by chance individual individuals of enormous stature could appear. The Jews, recalling the legends of early times and endowing these inhabitants of the distant past with monstrous qualities, applied the term rephaim to the dead, perhaps connecting this idea with the idea that Sheol was the abode of these fallen giants. Another ancient people, the Avim, lived on the seashore to the south. Abram entered into relations only with the conquerors of these native inhabitants. In Shechem he found that the Canaanites owned the country. This people descended, as stated above, from Canaan, the son of Ham, and, differing in many respects from the peoples of Semitic origin, apparently invaded from the southeast, gradually spreading to the northwest, and settled in Sidon and other strong places along the coast, as well as on the western side of the Jordan valley as far as the Lake of Galilee. Another people with whom Abram entered into relations were the Amorites. Their very name seems to indicate that they lived in a mountainous region. Their original place of residence was beyond the mountains, along the shores of the Dead Sea, and south of the later territory of the tribe of Judah; but in patriarchal times they occupied the central and south-eastern regions of Palestine, and among them there also remained some remnants of the native population. They were a warlike and brave people, and the alliance with them made it possible for Abram to subsequently successfully defeat the Elamite conquerors. In complete contrast to this warlike tribe stood the peaceful Hittites, or sons of Heth, a branch of that great people, the discovery of whose historical role is one of the main triumphs of modern research. Their city of Hebron is most closely associated with the life of Abram, and even contains his tomb. The sacred historian mentions (Num. 13:22) that Hebron was built seven years earlier than Zoan or Tanis in Egypt, and this seems to suggest that the Hittites formed part of the Hykses who made an invasion of Egypt about this time, and some of them remained behind in southern Canaan and settled there. The patriarch had the most friendly relations with the Khet tribe who lived near the oak groves of Mamre. He grazed his flocks among them and it was to them that he turned to purchase the cave of Machpelah. They were an enlightened and highly civilized people. One of their southern cities was known as Kiriath-Sepher, that is, “city of books,” a name that indicates the existence of an entire library in it; They also own many inscriptions discovered recently. Their clothing, as can be seen from the depiction on the monuments, even in their southern location, was reminiscent of Cappodacian origin. They are always depicted in boots with turned up toes, the kind that are still worn by mountaineers in Asia Minor. In appearance, they are squat and broad-shouldered, yellowish in color, with black hair but no beard. Such, undoubtedly, were Abram's friends, the sons of Heth, at Kiriath Arba. The Perizzites, the village dwellers, were probably the same Hittites, only under a different name and living in different areas. The Philistines are mentioned as inhabitants of Gerar in the southwest. Whether they even then gave the name Philistia to the seaside coast of Canaan and the sea route to Egypt is difficult to determine. It can be considered certain that they settled on the island of Crete and inhabited this island, probably at the same time as they appeared in Canaan. This may explain their connection with Kaftorim, unless, as Ewald suggests, the name Kaftorim meant the whole island of Crete or part of it. A remarkable monument of this people existed on the island of Malta some forty years ago, although since that time it has been subject to great deterioration. This monument is known as the “stones of prayer” (Hdjar Cham) and consists of a church of the roughest work, within the walls of which images of female deities, probably Astarte, were found. In front of these statues were stone altars, and in a special room there was a carved altar of palm wood, a Phoenician symbol, together with the high priest's seat, on the back of which were carved two snakes and an egg. This church, according to assumptions, was erected by one of the inhabitants of Palestine who fled from it, fleeing the victorious procession of Joshua. But the Philistines in patriarchal times, obviously, still had insignificant power and led a peaceful shepherd’s life, completely not showing that restless activity and military art, which later made them terrible enemies during the times of Saul and David. This later change in their national character is explained, perhaps, by the introduction of a fresh element into their midst, thanks to the migration here of other “foreigners,” as they are called in the Greek translation 70. The religion of the Canaanite tribes consisted of the idolization of nature, which gradually degenerated into immorality and cruelty. The Hittites borrowed many of their deities from Babylonia, since among them Abram found traces of the religion that he rejected in his homeland. Their main deity was Istar or Astarte, whose worship they performed everywhere they lived, and spread it among their Syrian neighbors. Other tribes also worshiped Baal under various names: El, Moloch, Adoni. As in all similar systems, peoples who deviated from revealed religion usually sanctified their own passions and lusts, covering up their licentiousness as if by divine permission. To appease the forces of nature, they made human sacrifices and, coming from the opinion that the more expensive the offering, the more mercy the offerer could receive, they did not hesitate to kill even their own children on the altars to their gods. Traces of primitive idolatry can still be seen in stone circles, obelisks and dolmens, although subsequent Jewish kings, in their religious zeal, destroyed most of them in Judea. At the same time, a purer religion was maintained in some places. Melchizedek was a priest of the Most High God (Elion). Whether this term Elion, as Eusebius of Caesarea says, was applied to the Phoenician deity or not, in any case it is clear that Abram recognized this king of Salem as a worshiper of the same God whom he himself worshiped. Abimelech (Gen. 21:22 et seq.) also knew about God (Elohim), whom Abram also recognized; and although in the plural form of this word many saw traces of polytheism, however, since this word is combined with a singular verb, it was undoubtedly used not only in order to gradually introduce faith in one God, but equally in order to prepare the minds of people for the full disclosure of the doctrine of St. Trinity. In any case, in Canaan at this time, along with idolatry and polytheism, the tradition of true religion was preserved, and Abram, who was recognized as a worshiper of the one God, was not persecuted or despised on this basis. In his relations with the local residents, he, of course, did not miss the opportunity to instill in them a purer teaching and convert them to the true religion, which, for example. it is evident from the fact that he used the local term El-Olam, “the everlasting God,” and identified him with Jehovah (Gen. 21:33); but there is not the slightest indication that he thereby exaggerated the faith of his listeners or attributed to them a faith that they essentially did not have. The example of such a man, in the midst of a corrupt religion and abominable vice, must have produced in itself a good influence, and led to the conclusion that the God of whom a man of so high a character was the worshiper was not the same as the gods of the heathen. One of the peculiarities of Palestine was that it could support a much larger population than its small size would suggest. The area of ​​western Palestine is only 15,000 square miles, but it is so intersected with hills and valleys, it was so well irrigated and fertile when cultivated, that a very dense population could find abundant food in it. When the number of the Israelites was made on the plains of Moab (Num. 26), the people belonging to the nine and a half tribes that were to populate western Palestine consisted of two million souls. This would amount to 135 souls per square mile, which is much less than how many people live in some countries now: in Belgium there are 143, in North Holland - 202 and in South Holland - 205 inhabitants per square mile. In the best of times there was not a single uninhabited place in Palestine; every mountainside was a garden, vegetable garden, or vineyard. Towns and villages were visible in all directions; the mountains, plains and valleys were covered with dwellings. The many ruins of the present day amaze and puzzle every traveler. All this presupposes a large population and tireless work, since this country under other circumstances could soon turn into a barren desert, which it appears to be at the present time. Apparently, it was in the same neglected state at the time of Abram’s settlement. At that time there were still few cities in it; if we exclude the cities of the Jordanian environs, then the Bible mentions no more than half a dozen cities throughout the rest of Palestine, and the population, apparently, was even more sparse than now. From seven to ten different tribes lived in it, but most of them were very small in number, not connected by common citizenship, were not governed by any one supreme leader, and were so divided among themselves that they did not even need to quarrel over lands. Abram did not encounter any difficulty in feeding his flocks wherever he wanted; the large number of his household made him a strong leader of the tribe and the natural head of the union of native leaders when they were threatened by a common danger. About the physical and moral characteristics of these tribes, about their customs and morals, despite the remoteness of time, we can form some idea from the study of their successors, if not descendants, the fellahs of Palestine. These are not Arabs, like the Bedouins who roam the desert, or the Belladines who live in the cities; they differ from the Arabs in dress, features, customs and language, and although they have not remained alien to Jewish, Greek, Christian and Mohammedan influences, yet they may be considered representatives of the ancient inhabitants whom the Israelites found living in the country at the time of its conquest, and who at an earlier time formed a sparse population of the regions where Abram pitched his tent. The Jews did not destroy them completely and lived with them; and in course of time these natives more and more accepted the religion of the victors and lived in common with them, although never mingling with them. So at the present time, although they accepted Mohammedanism, they still retained many of their ancient superstitions. Among them are traces of their ancient polytheism; their love for the "heights" and their reverence for famous trees, sanctuaries on the mountains and their veneration of special oak forests are as noticeable as at the time when the prophets raised their voices against them and pious kings used all their efforts to overthrow these superstitions. The remarkable accuracy with which they preserved the names of localities shows the continuity of the tradition passing through their hands. They offer propitiatory sacrifices according to a completely Phoenician rite; have superstitions regarding the moon that are completely different from the usual Arabian myths; they use amulets and other objects made completely in Phoenician style; their holidays, their language, their customs, their stories take us back to prehistoric times and amaze us with their antiquity, in comparison with which the Muslim conquest seems like a completely recent event. One must think that these fellahs have greatly degenerated since the time of Abram, because the travelers who studied them say that they represent the worst race of humanity in the east. They are devoid of any moral sense. “Lies are the salt of man,” says one of the proverbs. They always call on the name of God as evidence of the truth of their words and at the same time, without any embarrassment, they break their oaths. Robbery, theft and murder are common among them, provided they can commit these crimes secretly and without fear of punishment. Women are reduced to the status of mere childbearers or beasts of burden. Children have no moral education and grow up completely ignorant of what is good and what is bad. True, in their early years they are not devoid of intelligence, but after adolescence they do not develop at all and, marrying almost in childhood, they acquire various dirty habits and freeze in ignorance, which is not eradicated from their nature. The fellahs are hospitable in their own way and always offer a snack to a passing wanderer, but their funds are meager and their sources are very doubtful. They live in miserable huts, dark, dirty and devoid of any comfort, sometimes built of stone or generally of clay and covered with rough logs and earth. The furnishings consist of several pots, cups and rough rugs. They eat meat only when it is necessary to kill an animal in order to prevent its natural death from exhaustion, or on major annual holidays; Their usual food is barley or millet bread, wild mallow, sour milk, butter, cheese and eggs. They have only one virtue, if one can call it a virtue, namely love for their homeland. This does not mean that they have any patriotic feelings or care for the general welfare of the country and revere their rulers. Their love relates directly to the soil on which they live; with extreme tenacity they cling to those hills or valleys where their ancestors lived and died. Having no idea of ​​​​acting with common forces for any common cause, completely not caring about each other, if, without being in open hostile relations, they never leave their native village, unless they are forced to leave it by recruitment or some other similar reason, and even then their only dream is to return as quickly as possible to their miserable homes. If such were the villagers in Palestine when Abram first appeared there, then the inhabitants of the cities undoubtedly stood at a higher degree of civilization and were familiar with the best ways and orders of life. They were engaged in trade and various crafts, and they even had public legal proceedings at the city gates. It was in the vicinity of these more permanent dwellings that Abram established his temporary residence. His way of life presented a pleasant contrast with the way of life of the natives. Simple and alien to any luxury in his habits, he pitched his tent in some favorite place, erecting a separate tent for his wife and her maids. He had food in abundance; it consisted of unleavened cakes, whipped cream or butter, and meat from freshly slaughtered kids or calves. Slaves, whether born in the house or acquired by purchase, were treated well and formed a well-ordered community, over which the head of the clan had unconditional power, limited by natural goodness of character. To this day, the “law of Abraham,” as the unwritten code, preserved from primitive times, is called, is preferred by the fellahim to the law of the Koran and is usually enforced by the sheikh and the elders of each tribe. The women of Abraham's caravan did not at all resemble those pitiful downtrodden creatures that the women of the surrounding tribes were. Although they went to fetch water from a public well and prepared food for honored guests, this was by no means a humiliation for them, but was in full agreement with the primitive simplicity of their customs. The mutual love of Abram and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah, Jacob and Rachel, and the respect with which they treated each other, constitute a beautiful picture of family happiness, a picture that clearly shows a high concept of the position that women occupied in the patriarchal household. And so, when Abram settled on the soil of Canaan, he received a new revelation, which explained to him the purpose of his resettlement. Obedience in this way in his life came before knowledge of his purpose. The Lord appeared to him again and made a definite promise to this childless man: “To your descendants I will give this land” (Gen. 12:7). And he believed this word. Its fulfillment was beyond human will and might seem incredible to a more carnal soul. But Abram did not waver in his faith. As always, so now, his faith triumphed over vision. As proof of this trust and his reverence, he erected an altar to the Lord. This is what he did wherever he had to stop during his wanderings. He did not erect a house or a permanent dwelling that could provide him with special comforts of life, but he prepared everywhere a place for the worship of God. Just as Noah, upon leaving the ark, offered a sacrifice of thanksgiving on the renewed earth, so the father of the believers showed his faith and sanctified the earth by building an altar to the Lord who appeared to him. This was evidence of his true religion, which he accepted with all his heart; this was his protest against polytheism and idolatry of the peoples around him. Whether due to their inherent tolerance or indifference, the Canaanites did not put up any opposition to this religious act of his, and of course did not see that this was a preparation for that great future when their land was to become the property of the descendants of this particular patriarch and become a place of service to the Lord, the one, true God. From his camp in Shechem, Abram moved further by easy marches to the vicinity of Bethel, then called Luz. The Canaanites, perhaps, looked suspiciously at this stranger from a distant country and made his position in the open valley unsafe; and perhaps the need to find new pastures for countless herds could force him to change the place of his first stop to the mountainous region between Bethel and Ai, cities located about three miles from each other. The location of Bethel, now Beitin, has never been lost in history. This village stands some fifteen miles north of Jerusalem on a large ridge that divides the country and from which a steep slope leads to Jericho, which was twelve miles away. Several permanent springs irrigate the limestone rocks of the surrounding area and maintain greenery among the rocky soil. The very site of the altar built here by Abram was subsequently identified with the ruins of Burj Beitin on a small rocky but fertile plain east of the village. And how many sublime thoughts must have been associated with these altars subsequently, as witnesses of the same God in different places! The memory of the life of our ancestors, which was not written down anywhere, was preserved in these visible signs. The stories of legends were confirmed in these external objects. The children of distant generations could recognize in them the work of their great ancestor and could see that this land was dedicated to Jehovah and intended for their possession. They could thus clearly imagine the Invisible, could recognize in everything the hand of God who guided the one who erected these sanctuaries, and as a result could entrust their future to His guidance. No matter how desolate and pitiful the appearance of the present Bethel may be, it has always been held in high esteem as a sacred place. The too scanty layer of soil on the rocks deprives it of vegetation, and although there was enough water in the valley, collecting in a huge pond, which apparently dates back to ancient times, it never provided good pastures. “The whole surrounding area,” says the newest traveler 128, is gray bare stone or white limestone. The miserable fields are surrounded by stone walls, the shacks are haphazardly built from stone; the hills to the east are composed of solid rocks, and only here and there are covered with scanty fig tree gardens; ancient tombs are carved into the low cliff, and a large reservoir south of the village is excavated into the rock. This place seems to have been turned into stone, and from this it is easy to imagine that the lonely patriarch (Jacob) found nothing softer here than a stone instead of a pillow for his head, when he slept on a naked hillside and had a wonderful dream about a ladder.” It was in this ancient religious sanctuary that Abram pitched his tent; he watered his cattle at the springs in the pond, and in it his maids filled their jugs with water. From the surrounding heights in subsequent times one could see from here the top of Solomon's temple; and this place, later disgraced by the worship of the calf, was also in sight of Mount Moriah, where the sanctuary of the true God of heaven and earth represented a silent protest against the idolatry newly introduced by Jeroboam 129 . Chapter XII. Abram in Egypt In the promised land, Abram led a quiet shepherd's life, stopping in one place or another as long as there was a supply of food and water, and when they were depleted, he moved to another more fertile area, but all the time he “continued to go south,” to the southern region of Palestine, which was called Negeb in Hebrew. Wherever he went, he made a sacrifice and “called on the name of the Lord.” He forced his household to worship Jehovah, and undoubtedly, to the extent possible, he also acted as a missionary to the surrounding pagans, preaching the true religion and demonstrating through his deeds the faith that animated him. But then a new test befell him. “God’s athlete,” as St. says. Ambrose, “trained and tempered by adversity.” The land that was promised to him and into which he moved as his future inheritance, being so miraculously guided towards it, could not support him any longer. There was a severe famine. Abram had to either leave his present location or starve to death from lack of water and pasture. A country like Canaan, partly only cultivated, without any artificial irrigation and mostly dependent on the annual rains for the very existence of its pastures, often suffered from drought. Similar great famines subsequently occurred during the time of the prophets Elijah and Elisha 130; The same disasters are mentioned by the prophet Amos: “For this reason I gave you bare teeth in all your cities and a shortage of grain in all your villages, and I withheld the rain from you three months before the harvest” (4:6-8). Under such dire circumstances, the people of Palestine naturally turned their attention to Egypt. In this country, although rain is not uncommon on its northern shores, the main source of fertility was the river, and by its regular floods it made the vast low plain through which it flowed as if it were a paradise of fertility. Without depending on local rainfall, Egypt was thus able to enjoy a complete surplus in grain when other countries around it were suffering from famine; and herbs, and vegetables, and food of all kinds were there in abundance at all times of the year. It was there that Abram went to live for a while. The writer of everyday life says nothing about Abram taking this important step under instructions from above, and subsequent circumstances rather lead us to believe that in this regard he was guided by his own impulse. It is still impossible to determine exactly the time of Abram’s arrival in Egypt, as well as who the pharaoh who occupied the Egyptian throne at that time was, given the current state of biblical-historical science. I. Flavius ​​calls him Necho in one place, and Pharaoth in another 131. Other Jewish writers call him Rikayon or Rakayon, adding that he came out of Shinar and achieved royal dignity by force and deceit. Malala 132 calls him by the name Paraho, which seems to be only a corruption of the name Rikayon, and which is probably the same as Necho I. Flavius. That Egypt, even at this early time, had a very important significance and considered itself a very venerable antiquity, this is beyond doubt in view of the monuments that have reached us; but the fog of its ancient records has not yet been cleared by science, nor has the chronology of its various dynasties been established with precision. According to one assumption, Abram arrived in Egypt during the reign of foreigners there, the so-called Hykses or shepherd kings; but it is more probable that it was during the reign of the last king of the famous Twelfth Dynasty, one of the greatest in the history of Egypt. 133 In any case, when Abram entered the borders of this country, the spectacle of a completely new world, unprecedented for him, should have opened before his eyes. Huge pyramids at this time had long been towering on the banks of the Nile, since at least eight dynasties had already passed since the founding of the first of them. In the northern part of the Delta, quite a few Semitic peoples settled, for various reasons they sought refuge here, and they not only cultivated this area well, but also filled it with vibrant industry and trade, while to the south of them the entire Nile Valley was under the rule of one pharaoh; the Nile floods were under strict government control; a special large reservoir was made to drain excess water every year, precisely in the famous Lake Meris, and the country was covered with cities, settlements and villages, the first being decorated with large churches and palaces, the ruins of which still excite wonder among travelers. Richly cultivated soil was visible in all directions, large water-lifting wheels, rotated by oxen, were working everywhere, spreading fertile moisture in all directions, although countless streams and vast canals already carried life-giving moisture from the Nile River to all surrounding fields. Plowing or threshing oxen, accompanied by songs of workers; huge herds of cattle or sheep, fragrant vegetable gardens and rich orchards and vineyards added charm to the whole picture with every step the traveler took forward. There was no shortage of other pleasant details in the picture. The horse was still unknown in Egypt, but numerous and often beautiful donkeys replaced it for all sorts of peaceful purposes. The population (now of mixed blood, but originally of Asian origin, precisely a branch of the same Kushites who founded the Babylonian kingdom) was of a calm and complacent character, although high-ranking nobles and priests looked at the poorer classes with undisguised contempt. In general, the country enjoyed a happy life. Hospitality was one of the sacred customs of the country, and if the whole day was spent in labor, then the evenings were usually spent in songs and dances, to the sound of trumpets and harps. Ordinary clothing consisted of linen, multi-colored for the people in general, but completely white for the priests; Moreover, more noble women often dressed in such thin and transparent clothes that this could not always be reconciled with modesty. Hunters loved to hunt crocodiles or hippos with dogs; birders had especially trained cats to hunt birds in the reeds along the banks of the canals and the Nile, along the waters of which many ships glided - from a light shuttle and a heavy barge loaded with stones for public buildings or all kinds of provisions, to the magnificent yachts of the nobility or the pharaoh himself. The unlimited ruler (pharaoh) received divine honors from his people, as a direct descendant of the gods. The sciences and arts flourished, and there was already significant literature on various branches of knowledge and especially on anatomy and medicine. In large, rich capitals and cities, numerous churches and obelisks rose, lined with polished granite, and everywhere one could see many sphinxes and all kinds of statues and idols - made of stone, gold, silver, bronze and ivory. The tombs, richly decorated with paintings and sculptures with the embalmed dead (mummies) resting in them, represented entire cities of the dead, and the liveliest social life was in full swing all around. The pharaoh's palace in Memphis was teeming with all kinds of priests and magicians who served as close advisers to the pharaoh. Noble nobles lived in magnificent houses, filled with all sorts of servants, all kinds of servants and slaves, and all the surrounding life testified that Egypt rightly deserved the name of a land of wonders. All this, undoubtedly, should have amazed Abram no little (although he had seen something similar in his homeland in Chaldea); but he, however, had already heard a lot about Egypt and was even partly familiar with the nature of the government and the morals of the country. He knew that the Egyptians, having very high principles of morality in literature, at the same time in life turned out to be an extremely sensual people and devoted to all kinds of vices. Sensuality, luxury and drunkenness were common in this country. The king himself had many wives, and the most beautiful maidens from everywhere were constantly brought to his harem. The dignitaries around him tried to curry favor with the pharaoh in front of each other, drawing his attention to the most beautiful women, and an example of this is the story preserved in the so-called Orbini Papyrus. 134 This narrative tells how the sight of one accidentally noticed lock of hair leads to the conclusion that its owner must be the “daughter of God” and may be worthy of the attention of the pharaoh, as a result of which she was brought into the royal harem. Knowing such customs of the country, Abram, entering it, found it necessary to take some precautions. For this purpose, he agreed with Sarah that she would pretend to be only his sister, since otherwise, if the pharaoh liked her, the Egyptians would kill her husband, which actually happened, as the monuments of ancient Egypt show. This fear is not at all contradicted by the fact that Sarah at that time was already more than 60 years old, since there are examples of women retaining their beauty until very old age. Moreover, Sarah was not weakened by the pains of childbirth or exhausted by caring for children. Her beauty could well have been preserved until this time, since she lived until she was 127 years old and at 90 years old was still capable of becoming the mother of Isaac 135. That Sarah was a woman of extraordinary beauty is self-evident; Abram's fear when approaching the dissolved Egyptian court thus had every reason. A Papyrus in Berlin tells a story very similar to this incident in the life of Abram. It tells how the overseer took away a donkey from one worker, and he had to bring a complaint to the boss Meruitens, who finally brings this matter to the king, the pharaoh of the eleventh dynasty and thus around the same time when Abram moved to Egypt. Having interrogated the worker, the king says: “He does not answer anything said to him, let a written report be made for us and we will consider the matter. His wife and children will belong to the king; guard him strictly and provide him with food.” The worker's wife and children thus became the royal property, and the courtiers began to take care of the maintenance of their husband 136. What Abram feared happened exactly. Any new newcomers, as was the custom among the Egyptians, were immediately brought to the king's palace. On the border itself lived special officials whose duty it was to keep an eye on all such events, and some of the dealings made by these officials under similar circumstances have come down to us. One written copy has reached us, containing formal permission for a shepherd tribe to settle in the northern Delta (during the time of Pharaoh Menephtha). It shows that foreigners were always brought personally to the king in order to obtain permission to stay in the country, and if this was refused, they were immediately sent back abroad. In rocky tombs hewn out of a steep hill on the eastern side of the Nile, midway between Memphis and Thebes, in the village of Beni-Ghassan (the sons of Ghassan), an ancient Arab tribe that had long settled in this place, we then have a striking picture of the reception by a high dignitary of representatives of a Semitic tribe, quite similar to the tribe of Abram and precisely from the time of the patriarch. This is precisely the tribe of Amu or Semitic foreigners who were nomads, like the Jews, and arrived in Egypt with their wives and children, all their animals, as well as household members and even weapons, which obviously served as proof of their political independence. The details of the picture give us the opportunity to better understand the circumstances of Abram’s appearance before Pharaoh. The court scribe introduces into the palace the chief of the tribe, dressed in a sack-like cloak reaching to the knees and consisting of red, white and green flowers, intricately trimmed with all kinds of decorations. Both he and his closest companion took off their sandals. The chief brings with him a stone goat as a gift; when presenting it, he bows with outstretched arms, and the one standing next to him holds the antelope by the collar and horns. The third one, following them, is wearing only a skirt. The next four people are dressed in long, narrow shirts, adapted to the hot climate: two of them are in white, the other two are in red, white and blue with the most exquisite patterns. All four are holding their weapons in their hands: spears and bows, along with a special weapon made of bent wood, similar to an Australian boomerang for throwing, or perhaps a curved stick, still used by the Arabs to control camels. Behind them comes a donkey, laden with boxes, filled partly with the light colored materials for which Canaan was famous, but partly also with children, two of whom poke their heads out of them. Next follow four women without any coverings, in a tightly pulled shirt, which still serves as the only clothing of Arab girls, one side being supported by a shoulder clasp, and the arms and the other shoulder being completely bare. On their feet are red shoes, trimmed with white at the top. All the figures have open heads, but all have abundant hair, the women's hair being tied around the head with a ribbon. Ahead of them is a boy with a spear, wearing a short shirt, and behind them is a second donkey carrying a spear and apparently a shield; the procession consists of two men, the first of whom plays a large stringed instrument, holding it in front of him, and the other carries a bow with a quiver and a club in his hands; their only attire consists of a kind of trimmed and highly decorated skirt, reaching from the waist to the knees 137 When the court dignitaries learned of the arrival in Egypt of the noble chief of the tribe with his beautiful sister, they immediately drew the attention of the pharaoh to her, and Sarah was taken to the palace with the aim of arranging an honorable wedding in due course. Her supposed brother-in-law, in order to ensure his consent in this matter and in the form of payment for the bride, was given good gifts, as was in accordance with the customs of the country. Abram was gifted, among other things, with “flocks and herds, and donkeys, and male and female servants, and mules, and camels.” Critics have argued 138 that some of the animals mentioned here among the gifts were not yet known in Egypt at that time, but recent research has fully proven the accuracy of the biblical narrative. In this listing, the absence of a horse is noteworthy; besides the fact that the horse could be of little use to the patriarch, it was not of native origin in Egypt and, in all likelihood, was still completely unknown there, since it was first introduced only by the Hykses after Abram. As for the other animals mentioned, they are often depicted on monuments. In the tomb, next to the great pyramid, there is an image together with an inscription stating that the deceased lying in this tomb had no less than 2235 ordinary sheep and goats and 973 of the higher kind, a total of 3208 heads. Cattle were bred in huge numbers in Egypt; its bones were found at a considerable depth in the Delta, and monuments show that already in the most ancient times the inhabitants used it in the same way as at the present time. In one inscription from the twelfth dynasty, an official named Ameni proudly declares that he collected in the district of Saga, of which he was chief, a herd of 3,000 oxen with calves and heifers. The ox was the most common animal used for arable land, and dairy production occupied a very significant place in the food of the Egyptians and in their religious ceremonies. Diodorus says that in his time 360 ​​cups were filled daily with milk, as a sacrifice, by the priests who performed the mysteries of Osiris. In later times, there were special officials who had supervision over the oxen and heifers that belonged to the god Ammon. The scribe Anna, whose tomb was discovered at Qurna, had as his epitaph his duty to sell the dairy products of these cattle. The existence of numerous donkeys in Egypt is proven by the image of Beni-Ghassan and even more ancient tombs near the pyramids, which depict entire herds of donkeys. Rich people proudly proclaim in their epitaphs that they owned thousands of them. In later times, the god Set, to whom the donkey was dedicated, was, however, considered an evil god, as a result of which the animal dedicated to him became “an abomination to the Egyptians”; but even after that, the donkey was still in great use for riding and carrying heavy loads, although it was dedicated to Set by throwing it from the top of a cliff. By the time Abram arrived in Egypt, he was the subject of considerable respect, as even now in Africa, where, as Becker says, the name “donkey” is considered more of a compliment than an insult, since this animal itself was considered noble and can be quite intelligent in these countries. The mention of camels as a gift to Abram has long been considered by hostile critics as proof of the later origin of this part of the book of Genesis; but the latest research sufficiently shows that this animal was known from the earliest centuries in Egypt. Although, it is true, there are no images of him on monuments, this was probably due to one of those numerous laws, according to which the artists of these times limited their images to well-known figures drawn according to certain rules. Roosters and chickens, which were extremely numerous along the banks of the Nile from the most ancient times and which were even sacrificed to the god Anubis, for the same reason are not found anywhere in the images on the monuments. But in any case, there is no doubt that the Egyptians were already quite familiar with camels, since they had long been used in the Sinai Peninsula, which was at that time under Egyptian rule. By giving this gift to Abram, Pharaoh thought that he had done all that was necessary on his part to provide Sarah for his harem, and he really wanted to make her his wife (Gen. 12:19). But the Lord appeared in this regard as Abram’s patron. The destined mother of the chosen race should not have been subjected to such injustice. The house of the pharaohs was struck by a mysterious illness and prevented the intended marriage. Frightened by this circumstance, the king, according to I. Flavius, asked the priests about the reason for the ulcer that had befallen him, and the latter explained to him that he was struck by it because he intended to marry an already married woman. Alarmed by this discovery, he called Sarah and learned from her about her real relationship to Abram. At the same time, the pharaoh showed extreme gentleness, since he did not at all think of taking revenge for the deception that almost forced him to commit a serious crime. Calling Abram, Pharaoh said to him: “Why have you done this to me? Why didn’t you tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say: she is my sister? And I took her as my wife. And now, behold, your wife; take it and go." At the same time, he did not even demand that Abram return the gifts given to him, but since the famine in Canaan had already passed, Pharaoh simply ordered him to be escorted out of the country, at the same time giving his servants instructions to provide him with all assistance in his journey and to accompany him. How long Abram's stay in Egypt was is unknown, but in all likelihood it was no more than a few months. As a result of his visit to Egypt, Abram became “very rich in cattle, and silver, and gold.” These metals were well known to the Egyptians of his time, but were still little in use in Palestine. The silver mines of Egypt in the eastern desert enriched the country with both silver and gold, and at the same time their sources were also tribute from Ethiopia, central Africa and other countries. The use of silver even before Abram is proved by the crown of the Twelfth Dynasty pharaoh, now preserved in Leiden. It is made of gold and silver and consists of a wide plate composed of both these metals, the less precious being covered by the more precious. During the Nineteenth Dynasty, gold was used for all kinds of decoration, as can be seen in the paintings of the tombs of Beni-Ghassan. Amenematus I had a palace that was richly gilded throughout, decorated with lapis lazuli arches, and its walls were decorated with precious stones and bronze. Towards the end of the ancient period of Egypt, even tombs were commonly gilded. The Egyptians were engaged in gold panning in Nubia during the reign of Amenemat I, and copper and mercury mines were developed in the Sinai Peninsula from the earliest times, so even then there was already mention of “overseers of the golden treasury.” In later times, precisely during the reign of Ramses III, as one painting in the Medinet Habu church shows, the wealth of the pharaohs was enormous. The treasury depicted on it is overflowing with a mass of gold and silver in bags, jugs or heaps, and the cheaper metals lie around in large masses, like simple building stones. If we add to this the golden chariots, golden chairs and footstools, gilded doors and columns, vessels made of gold and the general gilding of rooms in the palaces of the pharaohs of the modern period of history, then the royal wealth sufficiently justifies the words of one of the pharaohs to a servant to whom he wanted to give special honor that “he will wear gold around his neck, on his back, on his legs for having faithfully served the king in everything.” 139 According to the testimony of I. Flavius, Abram went to Egypt not only to feed himself in this country, but also to study the Egyptian religion and to talk with the priests regarding the God whom they believed, and if he found their belief unreasonable, he had in mind to teach them a more sublime religion. When, according to his research, it turned out that the native beliefs were completely empty and not based on anything, he took every opportunity to prove the superiority of his own faith, and with the clarity of his arguments and the persuasiveness of his speech, he acquired the fame of a learned philosopher, and was revered as a miracle of wisdom and holiness. The Jewish historian adds to this that he taught the Egyptians the knowledge of the stars and arithmetic, which he himself learned in Chaldea. But this last legend clearly betrays its apocryphal nature, since the Egyptians have long been famous for their knowledge of astronomy and mathematics. No longer able to remain in Egypt, Abram, together with his nephew Lot, quietly moved back to Canaan through the heights of the Negeb or southern country, which at that time was much more fertile than now, and headed towards his former camp between Bethel and Ai. Similar movements of tribes had the same character at all times, and from here it is easy to get an idea of ​​\u200b\u200bthis journey of Abram and Lot from the description of the movements of one Arab tribe. “We found ourselves,” writes Layard, among widely scattered herds of sheep and camels. As far as the eye could see, to the right, to the left, and in front, everything represented the same moving mass. Here stretched long carts of oxen and ponies, loaded with black tents, huge cauldrons and assorted carpets. Elderly women and men, no longer able to walk, were loaded onto animals along with household items. Children, hidden in sacks under the saddles, stuck their small heads through narrow holes, balanced on the back of the animal by kids or lambs tied on the opposite side. Then the young maidens, dressed only in a narrow Arab shirt, which revealed rather than hid their beautiful forms; mothers with their children on their shoulders; boys, drivers of flocks of lambs; horsemen who pranced with their long spears across the plains of the vast steppes; camel drivers, armed with short hook-shaped sticks and leading their thoroughbred horses on the reins; foals jumping among the herds; high-born women, sitting under the cover of huge wings that hung like a butterfly on both sides of the camel’s hump, and no less colorfully and magnificently dressed - such was the motley mass through which we had to move for several hours.” One has only to cross out the horses from this description and we will have before us a complete picture of Abram’s journey. Chapter XIII. Abram's victory Upon his return from Egypt, Abram settled in the vicinity of Bethel, where he resumed his worship, "calling on the Lord." Possessing complete prosperity, Abram thought of finding peace here for a while. But that's not what happened. What Christ said to his followers is true of all God’s servants: “in the world you will have tribulation”; This is precisely what the great patriarch had to personally experience. The reason for this was the very prosperity that God had endowed him with. The herds of Abram and his nephew were now so large that they began to lack pastures, and the shepherds of both began to start disputes and quarrels among themselves over pastures. This was further facilitated by the fact that the country itself was not their property, but was occupied by the Canaanites and Perizzites (Gen. 13:7), the former living in fortified cities, and the latter living in forests, mountains and villages. The disputes of the shepherds naturally soon attracted the owners of the flocks themselves to this matter, and it turned out that Lot mixed into this dispute a clear desire to free himself from the influence of his uncle. This was a new test of Abram's faith, and he did not disgrace it. To end this dispute, Abram said to Lot: “Let there be no discord between me and you, and between my shepherds and your shepherds: for we are relatives. Is not the whole earth before you? Separate yourself from me. If you go to the left, then I go to the right; and if you go to the right, then I’ll go to the left.” Lot took advantage of this generous offer from his uncle and chose the best part of the pastures for himself, taking the entire rich surroundings of the Jordan - a country that, “all as far as Zoar, was watered with water, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt.” Abram himself, believing in a better promise, remained in the meager pastures of Bethel. The features of the area give us the opportunity to determine the very place where this noble example of self-sacrifice on the part of the great patriarch took place. Abram apparently built his altar on the top of the “mountain east of Bethel,” where he and Lot then stood, and from which the entire surrounding area, like a map, spread out before them. Now the surrounding country is nothing but a row of dark brown and rounded limestone rocks, rising in naked hills, without any tree vegetation on them; but at that time it probably presented beautiful avenues with open pastures, shaded by wooded slopes, stretching into the distant blue in all directions. But the richest place in the country, namely the Jordanian environs, lay to the east and was, as it were, at their very feet, precisely where the deep hollow of the river turns into an open valley, before its waters are finally lost in that lake that is now called the Dead Sea. If Sodom and Gomorrah lay in this northern part, they were certainly visible from their rich greenery; the vegetation, traces of which still remain today, once attracted the eyes of anyone who looked from the hills onto the environs of Bethel. The abundant waters that still flow from the high western plain even now support rich vegetation here. But used, as was the case in ancient times, for the purpose of irrigation in all directions, these springs made the entire surrounding area a true garden of the Lord, as if part of the blessed Egyptian country, which Abram and Lot had just left with its richest pastures and fields. The beauty of the area was not limited to its natural properties: on the great highway of eastern trade lay the Jordanian cities and promised to the discerning eye of Lot a rich market for the sale of the products of his herds, as well as luxuries and all kinds of everyday comforts. More devoted to the world than Abram, he chose this very tempting country, forgetting that external advantage can be too expensive if moral or spiritual injustice is associated with it. Choosing this rich valley, and with it the depraved civilization that had developed to terrible splendor amid temptations and under the influence of a warm, relaxing climate, he turned his face towards the direction where this earthly paradise lay spread out before him, lying 1300 feet below the level of the Mediterranean Sea, and, having received the permission of his uncle, pitched his tent at the gates of Sodom. Abram, for his part, as stated above, remained in the poorer pastures of Bethel, and for this faith, combined with self-sacrifice, the Lord rewarded him with the third promise: “Lift up your eyes, the Lord who appeared to him said, and from the place where you are now, look to the north, and to the south, and to the east, and to the west. For all the land that you see I will give to you and to your descendants forever. And I will make your descendants like the sand of the earth; if anyone can count the sand of the earth, then your descendants will also be counted. Arise, walk through this land into the length and breadth of it: for I have given it to you (and to your descendants) forever.” Abram moved his tent and settled near the oak grove of Mamre in Hebron. This was Abram's third encampment in the Promised Land, and it became his usual place of residence there. The exact location of his site may be indicated by those ruins of an ancient fence mentioned by Josephus, which is still visible to the north of Hebron. “There,” says the Jewish historian, “stood the terebinth, under which the patriarch received the angels”; This oak, in its antiquity, is the same age, as it was then supposed, to the world itself. It was supposedly burned already in the 17th century A.D., having served for thousands of years as an object of high reverence. Here at last Abram could rest peacefully, as if at home, in a beautiful valley abounding in springs and terebinth groves, enjoying the coolness of an excellent climate, since the area itself lies almost 3000 feet above the surface of the sea. If Lot enjoyed the tropical luxury of Sodom, then Abram had the refreshing air of the hills, the slopes of which were covered with groups of gray olive trees and were picturesquely interspersed with groves of pomegranates, fig trees, apricots and almond trees, all around stretched out waving fields of wheat and barley, interrupted by green gardens and vineyards, so famous that, according to the beliefs of the Jews, grapes were first planted on these fertile slopes by the hand of God himself. His herd then had only to move to the nearest heights beyond the boundaries of this peaceful refuge in order to find vast pastures for themselves on the surrounding hills. Meanwhile, Lot, having separated from his uncle Abram, settled in the lower part of the Jordan Valley, which at that time was occupied by five rich cities. These cities - Sodom, Gomorrah, Seboim, Adma and Bela (or Zoar) formed the union of the five cities; each of them had its own special king, but at their head was the king of Sodom. The population of these cities was distinguished by outrageous corruption of morals and depravity, disgusting and unnatural vices. But Lot paid little attention to this, since he was exclusively guided by everyday impulses, caring about providing himself with all the comforts of life. At first, perhaps, he intended, as far as possible, to stick to his former shepherd's life, as a result of which he pitched his tent near Sodom. But he did not stop at this decision for long. The delights of city life turned out to be too strong for his weak character. Little by little, he left the shepherd's life, settled in this wicked city, became a resident of Sodom and succumbed to the influence of this life so much that he even married off his daughters to Sodomites. The zeal with which he once followed the example and leadership of his uncle weakened significantly; the man who had once left his native land and his country in order to freely and quietly serve his true God, now confined himself to a fruitless protest against the idolatry and wickedness of his neighbors, and thought that he was fulfilling his duty by refraining only from imitating their vices and maintaining his faith in Jehovah. Sodom, the main of these cities, as well as other cities allied with it, owed its foundation to the tribe of Ham, the same one that erected the towers of Babylon, the churches and pyramids of Egypt and turned out to be such a fierce enemy of the Israelites in subsequent times. To what height of enlightenment and civilization they reached at this time is impossible to determine, since we have no monuments or remains by which to judge their well-being; but we know that they enjoyed extreme prosperity, were in an unusually fertile country and on a large trade route between Egypt and the East. As a result, the inhabitants became extremely rich and lived luxuriously; they had long ago lost faith in the one true God with its limiting influence and worshiped deities whose service consisted in the vile encouragement of human passions and lusts. The relaxing influence of the tropical climate in which they lived further contributed to the penetration of depravity and depravity into the environment of these inhabitants. Their civilization did not elevate them to true enlightenment and sophistication, but it all consisted of the most convenient and complete sensual pleasure. “This,” says the Lord through the prophet Ezekiel, “was the iniquity of Sodom, your sister and her daughters: pride, satiety and idleness, and she did not support the hand of the poor and needy. And they became proud and did abominable things before Me, and when I saw this, I rejected them” (16:49, 50). The unnatural vice with which Sodom was especially distinguished was a sign of extreme moral decline, and the people among whom such a vice prevailed had apparently already fallen to such an abyss of evil that, of necessity, they had to be subject to destruction, and they soon received a very terrible warning, namely in the form of a grave disaster that befell both the entire city and Lot 140 who settled in it. Fourteen years before this time, precisely when Abram was still in Chaldea, the kings of the east, under the leadership of Chedorlaomer, king of Elam, made an invasion of Syria and, among other conquests, also subjugated the inhabitants of the Sodom pentacle. Elam was a country east of Babylonia, embracing what is known as Suzgan, and lying partly in the mountains and partly in the plain. It was inhabited by a Turanian tribe, completely different in character from the Babylonians, with whom it was in constant war. Babylonia itself was fragmented into separate principalities and was unable to resist external invasion; from here it happened more than once that the Elamites gained the upper hand and for a time even ruled over the entire country. The Assyrian monarch Assurbanipal, identified with Sardanapalus, tells in one of his inscriptions how 1635 years before his time, i.e. Around 2280 BC, the king of Elam, named Kurdur-Nankhundi, invaded Babylonia and took with him the image of the goddess Nana, who was worshiped there. For many years after this the Elamites maintained dominance, and Chedorlaomer was probably a descendant of Kurdur-Nanhundi and the ruler of the Babylonian kings mentioned with him (Gen. 14:1). It is already clear from this that this narrative of the writer of everyday life, which had hitherto been subjected to all sorts of critical doubts on the part of rationalists, finds brilliant confirmation in the latest research and shows that it was compiled according to undoubted documents 141. The very names of these kings, allies of Chedorlaomer, are apparently borrowed from exact records in the national annals. The first mentioned is Amraphel, king of Shinar or southern Babylonia; the Greek translation calls him Amarfel, and his name, although it does not find an identical correspondence in the inscriptions, contains, according to Professor Sayce, a very similar element to the name of the king named Amar-Aku mentioned on the monuments. The primacy is given to him as the representative of the great kingdom founded by Nimrod, from whom some writers consider him to be the fourth successor. Then Arioch, king of Ellasar, is mentioned. Ellasar is Larsa, a city on the eastern bank of the Euphrates, a little southeast of Erech or Sharqi, and is now known under the name of the Senkere mounds. Arioch ruled that part of southern Chaldea that was not part of the kingdom of Amraphel. The name Arioch appears as the name of a Babylonian in Dan. 2:14. It is not without reason assumed that this is one and the same person with the Akkadian Eri-Aku, “servant of the moon god,” who, in an inscription found at Mugaira and now in the British Museum, calls himself the son of Kurdur-Mabugs, “king of Elam” and “father of the west,” i.e. Syria. Kudur and Eri are equivalent terms meaning "servant", the former being an Elamite word and the latter an Akkadian word. Kudur appears to have been a component of many Elamite names, and the biblical Chedorlaomer (or 70 Khodorlogomor) is actually Kudur-Lagamar, “servant of Lagamar,” an Elamite deity, just as Kudur-Mabuk means “servant of the goddess Mabuk.” It is very possible that Chedorlaomer and Kudur-Mabuk were brothers, and that Arioch was appointed by the first of them as a vassal king over Sumir, i.e. southern Babylonia. The fourth of the allied kings is called Fidal, king of Goim. The Hebrew word Goim here appears to be identical with the word Gotim, signifying the strip of land north of Babylonia, extending to the mountains of Kurdistan and containing within its borders what was afterwards the kingdom of Assyria. The inhabitants of this country are often mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions under the name Guti or Kuti, Vidal, in the Greek translation 70 called Fargal or Falga, finds a correspondence in the Akkadian word Kar-Gal "great judge", or Tur-Gal "powerful youth". In view of such striking coincidences, to classify this entire narrative in the realm of myth or allegory, as some German critics do, is to clearly deny historical facts and not agree with conclusions completely sufficient to convince any unprejudiced mind. There is nothing unprecedented in this invasion from the east. This was not the first time that the Akkadian peoples invaded the lands of the setting sun with arms in their hands. Long before this, Sargon I and his son Naramsim made an invasion of Syria; there they met significant resistance, but they still managed to penetrate to the Mediterranean Sea, where they left behind carved slabs on the shore. They even crossed the sea to the island of Cyprus. Kudur-Mabuk is called, among other things, “the father of the western country,” and this expression means that he ruled over Canaan. Neither the Babylonians nor the Assyrians ever attached the name of Canaan to this country; for them it is the "western" or "back" country, and we know that this term included Tire, Sidon and Samaria, Edom and Philistia, the country stretching to the Mediterranean Sea. During one of these invasions, Chedorlaomer established his power in the Jordanian plain and maintained it for twelve years. His goal was undoubtedly to keep the path open to the rival kingdom of Egypt, the main road to which lay through Araba in the vicinity of this five-city. It was very important for the Elamite victors that these small kingdoms along the high road recognized their authority over them. Whether these five cities were located north or south of the Dead Sea is not known with certainty; but in any case, they lay on the path of the march of troops from Damascus to Egypt, and it was in their power to hinder or facilitate the troops passing through their borders. When Lot settled in this valley, the Sodomites still recognized the supremacy of the Elamite monarch over themselves. But in the thirteenth year of their subjugation, the five kings of these cities, having concluded a mutual alliance with each other, became indignant and refused to pay the usual tribute. The consequence of this was that Chedorlaomer, with the three mentioned allied kings, moved to pacify and punish them. Having set out in the usual way from the Euphrates to Syria, he and his allies first of all attacked the Rephaim in Bashan (Gen. 14:5), one of the primitive tribes of the country, whose capital Ashter was located about six versts from Edrei. Turning from there to the south, they attacked the Zuzims who lived between Arnon and Jabbok, and the Emims who lived in Kiriathaim. Then the Horites, or the inhabitants of the caves of Petra and Mount Seir, fell to their weapons; then heading north near Kadesh, they invaded the country of the Amalekites and Ammorites and then moved towards the cities of the Jordan Valley to inflict punishment on them. To protect the cities, the king of Sodom came out against them in alliance with four kings of other cities in the valley. The hostile forces met in the Siddim Valley, which was replete with many tar pits. One recent traveler drew attention to the Arabic word Siddt, which the inhabitants of the Jordan Valley apply to the rocks or marl blocks that exist in the neighborhood. According to a more ancient explanation, Siddim is the plural of the Hebrew word sadeh, “plain.” They chose this area for their camp in the hope that the tar pits, while serving as protection for them, would serve as a kind of trap for the enemy, whose cavalry and chariots could find a strong obstacle for themselves in such features of this area. But their hope was completely crushed. Devoted to luxury and relaxing vices, the inhabitants of the Jordan Valley could not withstand the seasoned and skilled warriors of Chaldea. The pits on which they relied so much served to their own destruction. As soon as their battle chain was broken, everything fell into terrible confusion, and they were completely defeated. Their troops were put to flight, the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fell into pits in fear and died, and the rest fled to the mountains. These pits in some places were very deep and their existence is now proven by the appearance of floating masses of resin at the southern corner of the Dead Sea, the waters of which now cover this valley. In the same area there are also a special kind of swamps in which animals often die. Taking advantage of this victory, the winner seized all the property of Sodom and Gomorrah with all their supplies, and set off on a return campaign with great booty and many captives. Among the captives was Lot, who at that time lived in Sodom. He himself chose this city as his place of residence, and he himself had to bear the consequences of his choice; he shared with the Sodomites the pleasures of their city and with them he had to share the disaster that befell them. He was now threatened with the terrible fate of spending the rest of his life in difficult captivity, but from this he was spared by his magnanimous and courageous uncle Abram. Having captured rich booty, the victors set off on the return journey to their homeland, heading north along the Jordan Valley. Abram at this time was still living near the oak tree of Mamri, where he received the sad news of this event. Some of the survivors, knowing his concern for Lot and recognizing him as the head of a powerful tribe, hastened to him with a message about the misfortune. This amazed Abram extremely, but he did not hesitate for a single minute and immediately began the task of delivering his nephew. Although he was a “Jew”, i.e. a migrant from beyond the Euphrates River, but he still had no shortage of friends and allies in this new place of his residence. Allied with him were three powerful Amorite leaders, whom he now called to his aid. No matter how unpleasant it was for him, the peaceful patriarch, to take up military affairs and interfere in worldly affairs, here the very circumstances of the matter required his intervention, since he considered it his duty to take care of the release of his nephew Lot. He immediately armed all his own servants born in his house, numbering 318, and, together with his allies, set off in pursuit. The victors had already reached the vicinity of Laish, later called Dan and in later times constituting the northernmost border of the kingdom of Israel, at one of the sources of the Jordan. Some wonder if Dan-Iaan is certainly here in northern Perea, since Lais did not stand on any of the roads from the Valley of Siddim towards Damascus. But I. Flavius ​​clearly says that this area was located near one of the sources of the Jordan, and bl. Jerome, for his part, confirms this testimony. This place can be defined both by its natural features and by its current name. It is now called Tell el-Qazi, “the hill of the judge,” the words Dan and Qadi being synonymous. Below the site of the ancient city, surrounded by a dense grove of oleanders, there is a rocky pool, 50 paces wide, in which an extremely abundant fountain gushes out, forming a significant stream even at its very beginning. This is considered the third source of the river. The main source is in Bayne. The source in Dan is called Leddan, and the smallest and most northern is called Gashbani in Gashbeiz, and they, joining each other at Sheikh Yusef, eight miles below Dan, form the Jordan River, which there is 50 feet wide. Chedorlaomer and his army camped in this area. Considering himself completely safe from persecution, he did not even take any precautions against an accidental attack. It was certainly not Abram's intention to openly confront the enemy in a proper battle. His goal was to save only his nephew, and not to gain military glory. As a result, he resorted to military stratagem. He divided his detachment into separate parts and proposed to attack the enemy at night. He did not oppose the main forces of the enemy, but decided to attack them at separate points, using the tactics of Gideon, when he divided his small detachment of 300 people into three parts and unexpectedly attacked the Midianites (Judg. 7:16), or the plan of Saul, when he gained great glory as a conqueror by defeating the Ammonites (1 Sam. 11:11). And so, having attacked the carelessly sleeping enemy at night from various sides of his camp, Abram led him into extreme confusion, defeated him on his head and sent him into disorderly flight. Having thus freed all the prisoners, together with Lot, his nephew, as well as all the property captured by the enemies, he pursued the fleeing enemies further than the Anti-Lebanese mountain range to a place known as Chova, which Eusebius of Caesarea identifies with a village near Damascus, inhabited by Ebionites. At that time, this village was pointed out as the exact place where Abram prayed to God upon his return from the persecution of the Mesopotamian kings; but most likely Khowa was located halfway between Damascus and Palmyra, on the direct road to the east, where the village bearing this very name is located. With great booty and freed captives, Abram returned in peace to the Jordan Valley. Such a great feat, which brought such great benefit to the inhabitants of the country, could not pass without an expression of special gratitude. The glory and influence of the patriarch increased enormously from this feat, and the gratitude of the people was expressed in every possible way. First of all, the king of Sodom came out to meet him to congratulate him on this success and to receive his share of the spoils from his hands. The place of this meeting is called “Shave Valley, which is now the royal valley.” This is probably the northern part of the Kidron Valley, where the “royal tombs” are now located and where the childless Absalom erected a monument to himself so that his name would not be forgotten 142. Filled with gratitude for Abram's courageous feat, the king of Sodom wanted to thank him in some way for his great service. Turning to Abram, he told him: “Give me the people, and take the property for yourself.” This was a common condition under such circumstances in eastern countries. Strictly speaking, all the returned booty belonged to the liberator, and not to its former owners; but now it was inappropriate to insist on such a right, and the generous Abram did not want it. The Patriarch resolutely refused this proposal. He waged the war not for his own enrichment and not for self-interest; generous and magnanimous, as always, alien to any greed, he solemnly answered the king of Sodom: “I lift up my hand to the Lord, the Most High God, that I will not even take a thread or a shoe strap from all yours, lest you say: I have made Abram rich.” He was not some mercenary warrior who needed payment for his military exploits. Moreover, for him, as a true worshiper of the one God, it would be indecent to place himself in some obligatory relationship with the Sodomites and accept a reward from their hands, defiled by sin. All he agreed to was to accept some of the provisions for his slaves and allies. Another king who came out to meet the victorious Abram was Melchizedek, king of Salem, and this meeting was accompanied by extremely remarkable circumstances. Tradition has collected many different tales around this mysterious person. According to the writer of everyday life, Melchizedek “brought out bread and wine; He was a priest of the Most High God, and he blessed him and said: Blessed is Abram of the Most High God, ruler of heaven and earth, and blessed is the Most High God, who has delivered your enemies into your hands. Abram gave him a tenth of everything.” This narrative presents several difficulties to which no more or less satisfactory solution has yet been given. The presence of Milchizedek, “priest of the Most High God” (El-Elyon), among the seemingly pagan population of Salem is in itself extremely striking. His appearance with the sacrifice of bread and wine is too unexpected for us already because we are accustomed to seeing among the population immersed in idolatry only Abram as the bearer of the true faith. But this meeting becomes even more striking due to the fact that Abram himself occupied, in comparison with Melchizedek, a lower position and received a blessing from him. Who he is, from what tribe or people is left without any explanation. Suddenly he appears on the pages of biblical history for one brief moment, and then his name is no longer found for a thousand years, and it appears again only in the book of Psalms (Ps. 109); Another thousand years pass before his name again appears in the Epistle to Hebrews, so that some kind of mystery is associated with his name, giving special interest and greatness to the person himself. I. Flavius ​​explains his very name in the sense of “righteous king,” and the ap. Paul in his Epistle to the Hebrews means “king of righteousness.” It is undoubtedly of a Semitic character, as are Abimelech, Adonizedek, and some suppose it to mean “my king Zedek,” taking the latter word to be one of the titles of God. But the ancient interpretation is much more plausible. The place in which he was king is a matter of dispute. Usually by Salem they mean Jebus or Jerusalem; but other opinions were also expressed. Bl. Jerome, although he says in one place that Salem was the original name of Jerusalem, in which Melchizedek was king, in another place clearly states that Salem mentioned in the book of Genesis was not the same as Jerusalem, but was the name of a city near Scythopolis or Bethsan, where in his time the ruins of the palace of Melchizedek were still visible. This city did lie on the ancient route from Damascus to Egypt, but it was too far to the north to fit the account of Melchizedek's meeting with Abram, which seems to have taken place somewhere near Jerusalem. According to another assumption, Salem is one and the same with that Salem, near Aenon, where John the Baptist baptized (John 3:23) and which is identified with a village abounding in magnificent springs and lying on the opposite side of the valley of Nablus or Shechem. Based on the account given by Eusebius of Eupolemus, who states that Abram was solemnly entertained at Argarizin, some argued that the meeting took place on Mount Gerizim, since this very name is actually Gar-Garizim. But no particular importance can be attached to any of these opposing opinions. It is best to follow the testimony of I. Josephus and the Targums and see in Salim the city of Jerusalem, as the psalmist says: “and his dwelling was in Salim and his abode in Zion” (Ps. 76:3). If so, then here we find the amazing circumstance that the Old Testament prototype of the Divine Son of David was king in the very city where David himself reigned. But if we consider this point of the issue resolved, then there are still so many different opinions regarding the personality and origin of Melchizedek that nothing can be said with absolute certainty. Some heretics considered him the Holy Spirit; Origen and Didymus saw him as an angel; the Jews, in order to explain his obvious superiority over Abram, identified him with Shem, the most pious of the sons of Noah, who, according to their genealogies, lived “before the time of Isaac.” Some Christians, both in ancient and later times, thought that he was the Son of God appearing in human form; but this in itself would destroy its representative character, which the apostle dwells on with such insistence. Paul in the letter to Hebrews. He could not be a type of himself, and he could not be said to be “made like the Son of God” (Heb. 7:3) if he were the Son of God himself. The Apostle also expressly declares that his genealogy does not come from the tribe of Levi, and he could never have called him “without father and without mother” if he considered him specifically Shem; and, moreover, the difference between the priesthood of Melchizedek and Levi would not be so sharp that an entire argument could be based on it. There is no reason to doubt that he was a historical figure. As for his nationality, nothing can yet be deduced from his Semitic name, since this name could only be a Hebrew translation of his original name. He lived among the descendants of Ham and was apparently recognized as the head of one of the Canaanite tribes. If he had been of Semitic origin, he would hardly have been considered in such sharp contrast to Levi and the Jewish priesthood; his priesthood would not have had that independent character which is attributed to him. As for the fact that he was a priest of the one, true God, monotheists, despite the darkening of primitive religion, were also found as individuals among pagan peoples, both at this time and at a later time, such as Job in the land of Uz and Balaam in Pephora. From this we can conclude that he was of the same origin as the inhabitants around him, although he retained that revelation of the true God that passed from Noah to his immediate descendants. For the first time in the Bible, we meet here with the often subsequently used term “God Most High,” whose priest is called Melchizedek. That this means the true God is evident from the fact that Abram himself uses the same name together with the sacred name of Jehovah when he answered the king of Sodom: “I lift up my hand to the Lord, the Most High God.” It is very possible that Melchizedek did not know the name Jehovah; and that is why he blessed Abram with the name of God, as the Lord or Creator of heaven and earth, whom he knew only by these properties. Abram adds to this the title of the one, only self-existent Deity. There was something more sublime in the Melchizedek priesthood than mere leadership over a tribe, and Abram himself recognized the superiority of his priesthood. “You see how great is he, to whom Abram the patriarch gave tithes of his best spoils. Those who receive the priesthood from the sons of Levi are commanded to take tithes according to the law from the people, that is, from their brothers, although these also came from the loins of Abram. But this one, who was not descended from their lineage, received tithes from Abram, and blessed him who had the promises. Without any contradiction, the lesser is blessed by the greater” (Heb. 7:4-7). But since “no one of himself accepts the honor of the priesthood, but is called by God” (Heb. 5:4), then undoubtedly Melchizedek was not a self-proclaimed priest, but received this special gift from the Lord and performed sacred service among the pious followers who gathered around him from among the pagan population, over whom he reigned as king in this city of the world. His priesthood gave him the responsibility of making sacrifices and distributing blessings, which he did when he met Abram. Philo testifies that on this occasion he sacrificed the first fruits of the spoils, but the biblical historian says that he brought wine and bread, therefore he offered them as a sacrifice and made a libation at the same time according to the custom of that time. Bread and wine could hardly be intended to reinforce the soldiers, since in this regard they were already supplied with everything necessary from the booty; but after bringing a certain part to God, the rest was distributed to him for consumption, as happened in the case of peace offerings. These emblems of God's gifts to man were also symbols of divine blessing and were meant to represent that this great benefactor of the population deserved the best gifts of the earth. Ancient writers unanimously see in this circumstance a prototype of the establishment of St. the sacrament of the Eucharist, the great bloodless sacrifice that Christ, a priest according to the order of Melchizedek, offered for his faithful. This offering of the fruits of the land to Abram could also contain a visible confirmation of the promise that all this land in the future would belong to him. That the patriarch humbly accepted the blessing from this royal priest, as an inferior, submitting to a superior, is completely in accordance with his humility and faith. Seeing in Melchizedek a faith similar to his own, and recognizing in him not just the head of the tribe, but a great priest, Abram bowed low to him to receive a solemn blessing from him and gave him a tithe of all the spoils he had taken from the Elamites. Was this just a natural impulse of a grateful human heart? There were no written regulations yet in this regard; but we know that Jacob at Bethel (Gen. 28:22) dedicated the tithe to God; and this custom, as is known, was preserved among the pagans in various countries. Thus, Croesus advised Cyrus to demand that his Persian troops pay tithes to Zeus, which they considered fair and legal. The Carthaginians, according to Diodorus Siculus, also dedicated tithes of all their income. Xenophon imposed on the inhabitants of the land that he owned near Scythian the obligation to pay tithes for the maintenance of the church of Artemis. In general, the offering of a tenth of one's property to Almighty God seems to have been a natural law, the origin of which, like that of sacrifices, is lost in the mists of antiquity, since the later regulations of the Mosaic legislation on this subject were only a confirmation of a long-existing custom. The general character of Melchizedek makes one involuntarily see in him a wonderful prototype of Christ. His very name and title are full of deep meaning. “King of righteousness” and “King of Salem”, which means “peace” - such names especially go to the one who is the Lord of righteousness and the Prince of peace. Melchizedek was a priest not from the clan of Aaron, but from a completely special tribe; and he blessed Abram, the father of the believers, in whom all the families of the earth were to be blessed. So Christ is the one, universal High Priest of all peoples and all ages, who sacrificed Himself for all, now intercedes for people, and whose office, as Intercessor and Intercessor, extends to the entire human race and to all ages, and who blesses His people with the gifts of love and grace. Melchizedek, king and priest, was higher than Abram, like Christ, who is the King of kings, the great High Priest, so that in comparison with Him all other priests are only passing shadows. Surrounded by the mysterious halo of eternity, he stands completely alone; he has neither ancestors nor descendants; we know neither about his birth nor about his death; his priesthood and his life seem to have no beginning, nor is there an end to them. Likewise, Christ, as the divine High Priest, has no earthly kinship and His ministry is endless; by His human nature He did not have an earthly father; and He is one and the same yesterday, today and forever; He was from the beginning, He is from eternity one, immortal and living forever and ever. Thus, in his whole character, in his office, in the very manner of his appearance on the pages of sacred history, Melchizedek presents abundant material for deep reflection; and these properties of his truly make him a type of Christ, the High Priest of all mankind. Chapter 14. God's Covenant with Abram When the promise of a son was given, God reminded Abram how much he had been the subject of His special care from the time he was commanded to leave his homeland and go to the land promised to him. Although Abram believed the words of God, the question involuntarily came to him: “Sovereign Lord! why should I know that I will own it? There was no doubt about this question, but only the bewilderment of the natural mind, amazed at the incongruity of the promise with reality. He wanted to have some outward sign that what he heard or saw was reality, not a dream or some ghostly vision, but a formal revelation that could leave him with a firm conviction for the following time. Gideon also asked for a sign to prove that the Lord had spoken to him (Judges 6:17, 36ff.). So King Hezekiah was subsequently given a sign in the form of the return of the shadow that he would receive a miraculous healing from a fatal illness (2 Kings 20:8). God condescended to Abram’s request and gave him a sign. He announced to him that Abram must henceforth enter into a special union with the Lord, into a covenant with Jehovah, according to which Jehovah himself would subsequently become the king of the people descended from Abram, and this people would, as a result, enjoy His special care and leadership. But this high advantage must be acquired through suffering. Abram must undergo various trials, from which, however, his faith must be increasingly purified and strengthened; the people descended from him will have to go through a harsh school of life and in the country of slavery, among foreigners, must achieve the sanctification destined for them. They will have to endure all kinds of vicissitudes, sorrows, oppressions, during which they will learn to recognize that divine hand that guides them and waits for the time to deliver and bless them. And in this way a formal covenant was concluded between God and the patriarch. This was not the first time that God's covenant with man was established; such a term is applied in the Bible to the divine promise that was given to Noah after the flood that the human race would never again be subjected to such a disaster. But the covenant with Noah was general in nature and was not accompanied by any special spiritual blessings. Now God makes a covenant with one particular man and his posterity, agreeing to grant him special and great advantages under certain conditions. According to the custom of the time, the covenant was confirmed by sacrifice. The patriarch had to take the animals that were the best in his possession and subsequently only were sacrificed according to the law, namely a heifer, a goat and a ram of three years of age, therefore, in full age and strength. The number three itself undoubtedly had a special meaning. In St. In Scripture it generally appears as a symbol of God and St. Trinity. Thus, the cherubim exclaim: “holy, holy, holy.” These three animals Abram had to divide each into two halves and put these halves one against the other; at the same time, he also had to take a turtle dove and a young dove and, without cutting, place them one against the other, as was subsequently established by the Law of Moses (Lev. 1:17). When all these preparations had been made, the contracting parties were to pass between the victims as a sign that the same fate that befell the sacrificial animals would befall every covenant breaker. The custom of such confirmation of contracts was known in general in ancient times. In classical antiquity, there were cases when contracting parties mixed their blood to confirm the agreement. Thus, Herodotus says that when the Arabians wanted to confirm some kind of agreement, a third person, standing between two contracting parties, made an incision in the palm of the hands of both contracting parties and, having sculpted a piece from the clothing of each of them, dipped it in blood and anointed it with seven stones placed in the middle, at the same time calling on the gods. He also tells about the Scythians, Lydians and Medes that on the occasion of concluding an alliance, the contracting parties cut their bodies and mutually licked their wounds or, mixing blood with wine, drank this drink. When making the covenant with Abram, there was no such shedding of blood. This was left for the future, when, with the further development of the promise, the rite of circumcision was established; There was no formal sacrifice, since there was no burnt offering on the altar or sprinkling of blood; but the essence of the sacrifices was the killing of the victims, which is what took place here. For his part, Abram personally performed the duty of passing between the dissected animals, and the Lord God deigned to appear in the guise of smoke and flame, which also passed between the dissected victims. When everything was ready, Abram waited for the ritual to take place, sitting all day with his victims and driving away the birds of prey that swooped down on the corpses. Some saw in this an indication of the efforts of some unclean people, namely the Egyptians, to prevent the fulfillment of God’s covenant and their failure in this regard. Others recognize a spiritual meaning in these birds of prey, representing enemies of the soul who would steal the good seed from the Christian heart and prevent it from enjoying the union with God made possible by the atoning sacrifice of Christ. When the sun slid its last rays over the tops of the surrounding hills, a deep sleep fell on Abram, as it once did on Adam when Eve was created from his rib, and at the same time “horror and darkness fell upon him.” His spirit was horrified by the presence of God, and the thought of the sad future awaiting his offspring darkened his spirit. In this state, he heard the voice of God, which told him: “Know that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will enslave them, and will oppress them for four hundred years; but I will bring judgment upon the people to whom they shall be enslaved; after this they will come out (here) with great property, and you will go to your fathers in peace, and you will be buried in a good old age. In the fourth generation they will return here, for the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites has not yet been filled.” There was light and darkness, disaster and prosperity, sadness and consolation. The future was gloomy and the following years proved the truth of this prediction. This is precisely the prediction given to Abram when he was thrown into a deep sleep. His posterity, it is true, will inherit the land on which he stood, but first of all they must go through a severe school of testing, live in a foreign country, be subjected to all kinds of oppression and insults for four centuries, but then deliverance will come; this promised land will again receive them enriched and blessed; their trials will end, and they will enter into their appointed inheritance. But why couldn’t they immediately take possession of the land assigned to them? For two reasons. First, they were not yet numerous enough to populate the land, nor were they strong enough to clear it of its present inhabitants. Secondly, the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites (the most powerful Canaanite tribe, taken here as the representative of the entire population) “has not yet been filled.” They were lawless, but God, in His infinite forbearance, expected that as a result of various warnings and punishments, as well as under the influence of the sublime example of the saints, they might still repent and reform. The Lord, in His omniscience, of course, knew that their corruption and lawlessness would increase even more in the future, but He withheld His punishing hand until it became obvious that their correction was impossible and that they only burdened the earth they inhabited, acting even contrary to the very laws of nature and natural religion and becoming a source of moral corruption for everyone who came into contact with them. Then only they should have been exterminated and made way for a better people who could use the gifts of God for more worthy purposes. Thus Abram was consoled for the calamity that was about to befall his descendants. Everything had to lead to a good end over time. As for himself, he himself will go to his grave in peace and join his ancestors in another world, although his body will lie in this distant land. He is promised a long and blessed life: “you will be buried in a good old age,” and then God more definitely shows what exactly is the possession that He promises to the descendants of His faithful servant: “To your descendants, He said, I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates.” The Egyptian River is undoubtedly the Nile or its eastern branch; and the Lord promises that the Israelites will be masters of the land from the Nile Valley to the Euphrates. This was God’s intention, and it was actually realized in the following time, namely in the brilliant age of the reign of Solomon, who truly “ruled over all the kings, from the river Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the borders of Egypt” (2 Chron. 9:26). All these promises required great faith from Abram, because their implementation was contradicted by reality. Abram was already approaching old age, but was still childless. The promise itself did not say that the offspring promised to Abram had to come from Sarah. Ten years have already passed since his migration to Canaan; Abram was 85 years old, and Sarai was only ten years younger than him. In view of these circumstances, the fulfillment of the promise seemed hopeless. Pondering this in her heart, and thinking that her own barrenness was preventing the fulfillment of the promise, Sarah, more impatient than her husband, was unwilling to wait any longer, and resorted to other means to bring about the fulfillment of their mutual desire. At ap. Peter Sarah is portrayed as a great example of marital obedience, "for she was subject to her husband, calling him master" (1 Pet. 3:6). But now she, apparently, herself draws up a plan of action and persuades Abram to do something that he had never even thought about and that could even somewhat outrage his feelings. If in Sarah that self-denial is commendable, which, in order to achieve a great goal, forced her to deprive herself of the most precious advantage of a woman and put another in a position that legally belongs to her, then the only thing that can be blamed in her is that impatience, due to which she did not want to wait for the fulfillment of the will of God, but tried to hasten it with her own efforts. She had a slave named Hagar, whom she brought with her from Egypt and who was probably given to her by Pharaoh. An ancient legend says that she was the daughter of a king by one of his concubines, and the pharaoh gave her as a slave, convincing her that it was better to be a slave in the house of a man so beloved by God than a mistress in her own family. The name Hagar means "flight" and could have been given to her here in anticipation of the event that awaited her - her flight from her mistress, or because she left her homeland in Egypt to become a stranger in a foreign land. It was this woman that Sarah persuaded Abram to take as a concubine, under the condition that the child born from her would be considered her own. Abram was not a polygamist; he preserved the primitive marriage law received in Eden and violated only by such lawless and sensual people as Lamech was. But this pure view of married life did not prevent concubinage under certain circumstances. The slave was at the unconditional disposal of her mistress, who could dispose of her as she wanted. The shame of infertility was so great that such measures taken to avert this misfortune were considered natural and permissible. Moreover, the main motive that compelled Abram and his wife Sarai to resort to this agreement was purely religious and had nothing sensual or rude. The concubine, apparently without any formal betrothal or marriage ceremony, occupied the position of a secondary wife, at the express command of her mistress, who herself continued to occupy a position of dominance in relation to her and did not lose any of the rights belonging to her. The children from this union were considered legitimate. In any case, they were considered as an additional family and could well count on support from their father, although “of course they did not have full equality with the wife’s sons. Generally speaking, the children of concubines inherited from their father by will rather than as natural heirs. The concubine lost her rights and privileges upon the death of her master, and although she could no longer be sold as a slave, she could in any case be released without any security. The Law of Moses also permitted concubinage and provided only a few rules against its abuse. People learn the highest law of morality only gradually. The patriarchal customs of the Mosaic legislation were only a preparation for the better law proclaimed by Christ. The stern purity of Christianity was preached by word and example, the old sensual customs were purified and modified, and not abolished by force, which would have aroused extreme bitterness in many; and then only the holiness of heart and body, which the Son of God preached, found an echo in the hearts of men and was accepted by His followers. Explanation ap. Paul's attitude towards Hagar towards Abram and Sarah shows how God directs all evil to good. Here was the prototype of the synagogue and the church, the Jewish and Christian covenants. The ritual law was given only for the time until the promised seed came; when the church was still barren, the synagogue took its place; but finally Sarah became the mother of many nations and Hagar had to leave (Gal. 4). When Hagar conceived, she, considering herself as the mother of the promised heir, began to treat her barren mistress with contempt; she saw how much her master loved and respected her and wanted to be Sarah’s rival in her noblest feelings. This led to its natural consequences: displeasure and discord. Just as Peninna later upset Hannah, “causing her to murmur because the Lord had shut up her womb” (1 Sam. 1:6), so Hagar, becoming proud as a result of her position, began to offend the arrogant mistress in her tenderest feelings. Although generous enough to make such a great sacrifice for a great cause, Sarah could not now endure the constant superiority of her servant over herself. Her offended feelings made her not only cruel to her concubine, but also unjust to her husband. Although she herself convinced Abram to enter into this relationship with Hagar, it was she who began to blame him for the consequences of her own impatience; since he did not immediately take her side and did not want to take revenge for the neglect with which the slave treated her, she grumbled at him and placed all the blame for this on Abram. “You are to blame for my offense,” she passionately exclaimed: “Let the Lord be the judge between you and me.” Abram, of course, found it difficult to act cruelly with the future mother of his child, but he could not finally resist the persistent complaints of his wife. Her natural rights could not be diminished and thus the source of discord had to be removed. He acted as any person in his position would do, caring for the peace and welfare of his home. He did not consider it necessary to interfere in the disputes between his wife and her maid, but left her to take all such measures as she considered necessary to punish the slave for her insolence and to maintain her power. “Behold,” he said, “your maid is in your hands; do with her what you please." But Sarah, under the influence of the trials she experienced, was so unjust that she began to oppress Hagar in every possible way and made her life so difficult that the latter was forced to leave the house of Abram and fled completely alone into the desert, perhaps intending to return to her homeland. She set off along the road to Sur, that part of the Tikh desert, close to Egypt, which received its name from the rocks surrounding it on all sides. Exhausted by the difficult journey, she joyfully saw a small oasis in the lifeless desert and sat down there to rest at the source that gave fertility to this very oasis. It was a place frequently visited by travelers, and Moses speaks of it as a well-known station between Kadesh and Bared—somewhere on the ancient road to Egypt, on the southwestern border of the Negeb. Here the “angel of the Lord” appeared to her. This name is often found in the Pentateuch and in other places and everywhere has a very mysterious meaning. Here, under the guise of an angel, there was, as it were, a real theophany, the manifestation of the word of God, since the angel of the Lord speaks here as God, and Hagar speaks of him in the same sense; he not only brings her a message from Jehovah, but he himself identifies himself with Jehovah. Appearing to Hagar, the angel of the Lord exclaimed: “Hagar, maid Sarin! where did you come from and where are you going? And when she told him what the matter was, that she had run away from her mistress Sarah, he ordered her to return to her mistress and submit to her, promising her at the same time numerous offspring from her son Ishmael: “By multiplying, I will multiply your descendants,” the angel told her, “so that it will not be possible to count them from the multitude. 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.” Many peoples recognized God under the name El; the name Jehovah was reserved only for the chosen people. Although her son would not retain in his name the memory of the great name of Jehovah, Hagar was told that this promise had come to her from the Lord and that mercy was now given to her from the God of Abram. Then the angel revealed to her the character and future fate of her son and his descendants: “he will be among people like a wild ass; his hands are against everyone and the hands of everyone are against him; he will live in the presence of all his brothers.” Here the character of those tribes (Arabian Bedouins) that descended from Ishmael and still live the life of their ancestor is clearly outlined. They actually lived in the presence of their brothers, inhabiting lands on all sides of the Promised Land, and were found everywhere between Egypt, the Euphrates, in northern Africa, in southern Asia, everywhere retaining the same characteristics. Huge armies were fought against them, but they were never completely subdued. They themselves constantly raided neighboring countries, but never liked the constraints of settled life. Living in constant hostility with each other and with the whole world, they constantly wander through the desert, recalling in their way of life, as well as in their legends, the indomitable personality of their great ancestor. Struck and amazed by this prediction, convinced that the one speaking to her and predicting her distant future was God himself, Hagar accepted this revelation and gave the one who appeared to her a new name: “You are the God who sees me!” she exclaimed, i.e. You are the God who sees everything and who is visible to me. This semi-pagan woman was thus brought to the knowledge of the true God in the angel who appeared to her and, believing in him, she was filled with amazement and gratitude for her salvation. During the following centuries, the memory of this great event was constantly maintained by the very name given to the source of Be'er Lahai Roi, i.e. “the source of the Living One who sees me.” Obeying divine inspiration, Hagar returned to her mistress and submitted to her, and in due time she had a son, who was named Ishmael. It is always very difficult to make peace with injustice, and when this injustice is accompanied by the expectation of cruel reproaches and cruel treatment, the task becomes even more difficult. If Hagar conquered all such feelings in herself, then this says a lot about her generosity. But the blessings of God are always acquired by self-denial and obedience. She had a great future ahead of her as the mother of Avramov's son. In order to become the foremother of a powerful family, she could gladly endure temporary troubles; real slight grief could be patiently endured in the hope of the glory that would befall her. Ap. Paul instructs us (Gal. 4) to see in the descendants of Hagar a type of the Jews, Israel according to the flesh, and in the descendants of Sarah a type of Christians, spiritual Israelites. This difference appears even more clearly in the circumstance that subsequently led to the final expulsion of the slave. Now we see only the long wait by the church for a future salvation and the introduction of what could only serve as a temporary substitute for the thing itself. Both had to happen according to the will of God; but this great promise was more glorious than the law and could not suffer damage from it; and the latter, as the apostle explains, was given only temporarily and accidentally, “because of transgressions, until the time of the coming of the seed to which the promise refers” (Gal. 3:19). Abram was already 86 years old when Ishmael was born. We have no details about his life for thirteen years after this. He, apparently, still lived near the oak grove of Mamri, sending his herds from here under the supervision of shepherds to pastures and leading a peaceful, happy life among his people. Meanwhile, his son grew up and immediately declared himself self-willed; brave, power-hungry, recognizing himself as the heir to his father's great possessions, declaring a penchant for a wandering life and, as far as one can judge, did not meet with special love from Sarah. But the fulfillment of a great event was approaching. Abram had a new revelation and the covenant was renewed with him. The Lord appeared to him again and, revealing Himself under the name of God Almighty (El-Shaddai), repeated to him the previous promises with even greater clarity and confirmed them with a mysterious symbol. This confirmation of the omnipotence of God was necessary in order to make it clear to His hearers that what seemed inherently impossible was possible for Him. A new test of faith was approaching, and in order to prepare Abram for the work of obedience required of him, God commanded him to always live before His face and lead a life alien to any sin or disobedience. “I am God Almighty,” the Lord told him; “Walk before Me and be blameless,” or, in the literal expression of the original, “be perfect.” This is obviously the same requirement that Christ subsequently made to His disciples: “be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.” This ideal far exceeds human ability; but for a person the very desire and desire to achieve it is already saving, and whoever strives for perfection fulfills this commandment and is acceptable to God. This new revelation contains three things that clarify the old covenant. The first concerns the seed. “And I will establish My covenant between Me and you,” said the Lord, “and I will greatly, greatly multiply you.” And when Abram fell on his face in reverence, God continued to speak to him and said: “This is my covenant with you: you will be the father of many nations... and I will make you very, very fruitful, and I will make nations of you, and kings will come from you.” As a sign of this great promise, and to continually remind him and his posterity of its importance, Abram's very name was changed to "Abraham" by the insertion of the letter "a," 143 one of the cardinal letters in the name Jehovah. Abram or Abu Ramu, as it appears on Babylonian monuments, means “high father,” i.e., the head and chief of the tribe; but the new name means in Arabic “father of multitudes,” and was thus a suitable name for one who was to be the founder of powerful nations. As a matter of fact, from him came the twelve tribes of Israel, the Ishmaelites, the descendants of Keturah and the Edomites. But the literal interpretation does not exhaust the meaning of the promise. It embraces all who are sons of Abraham by faith, under whatever climate and in whatever century they live. Whether Abraham understood this promise in this particular sense at that time is unknown; but even beyond this infinite meaning, even in the literal sense of the promise, there was something so new that it could not help but strike his imagination. Not only the people will consider him their ancestor; many nations would come from him, which prediction suggested that at least another son should be born from him, which prepared him for the amazing revelation that followed. The second point of revelation concerned the blessing that was to belong to the beloved race. God seemed to oblige Himself to act towards him with special favor. He gave them the right to expect from Himself such mercies, to which no other people had the right and which had never been granted to anyone among humanity. The relationship between them will be the same as that between a father and an obedient family. This blessing was then further explained in its miraculous meaning. God will make an everlasting covenant with Abraham and his descendants, that He will be their Lord, their guardian and benefactor, and they will be His faithful servants, worshipers, honoring and obeying Him only and not any other god. The third feature of this renewed covenant concerned the promised possession, which was also stated with greater precision and completeness than had previously been the case. “And I will give to you and to your descendants after you, the land in which you sojourn, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession.” Abraham could not, of course, foresee how much the self-will and apostasy of his descendants would hinder the fulfillment of this promise. It violated its part of this agreement and the gift was taken away from it. But who can say that if the descendants of Abraham return to the Lord in humility and repentance and look with faith at Him Whom they crucified, they will not again take over? In any case, we know that the heavenly Canaan, the kingdom of heaven, is open to all believers, and that it constitutes the eternal possession of the true seed of Abraham. This special promise was confirmed by a special act. Thirteen years ago the divine presence passed between the cut-up sacrificial animals as a sign of the gracious acceptance of the covenant on the part of the Lord; Now blood had to be shed on the other contracting side, namely on the part of Abraham, as a sign of the obligation to fulfill the part of the contract that fell to his share. Raised to the dignity of a covenanter with God Almighty, he was to seal his commitment by the symbolic rite of circumcision, which was to serve as a confirmation and seal of the covenant, a sign that man was in complete union with his God. And this obligation was extended to the whole race of Abraham: every male child, whether belonging to his seed or of slave origin, whether born in his house or bought with money, had to undergo this rite on the eighth day after birth. The punishment for neglecting this establishment was supposed to be excommunication, cutting off from the people of God, and even, apparently, death. Later decrees attached extremely great importance to circumcision: it became a necessary seal of Jewish nationality, the only entrance door to the Jewish church with its advantages; no foreigner could take part in the Passover or be considered a citizen of Israel until he had been circumcised; and even the holiness of the Sabbath should not serve as an excuse for delaying the performance of this rite for more than eight days. Although this operation was usually performed by the father, every Israeli and, if necessary, even a woman could perform it, just as in the Christian church baptism is usually performed by a clergyman, but if necessary, it can be performed by a layman and even a woman. In accordance with the divine commands and with complete readiness of obedience, Abraham, his son Ishmael, who was already 13 years old, and all his household were circumcised on the same day and thus included in the great covenant. Circumcision was not a rite exclusively peculiar to the Jews and introduced now for the first time. It was used in Egypt before Abraham, if not by everyone, then at least among the priests and those who wanted to be admitted to the deepest secrets of religion. One ancient inscription uses the words "uncircumcised" and "unclean" interchangeably. And on the walls of the Church of Khonsu in Karnak, built by Ramses II, there is an image of the operation itself 144. Herodotus claims that the Assyrians and Palestinians borrowed this custom from the Egyptians. But this message was made to him by native priests who were proud of the antiquity of their customs, and therefore cannot have historical authenticity. Many peoples undoubtedly received this rite from Egypt, such as. Calheans, African troglodytes, Meroe Ethiopians; and it is still happening today in the Coptic Church and among Abyssinian Christians. Its use became a custom among the Kaffir tribes of southern Africa and even among some natives of the islands of Oceania and America. It is difficult to say how widespread it was among the Syro-Arab tribes. The Philistines and some of the Canaanite tribes were not circumcised, as is evident from various circumstances mentioned in St. Scriptures; and from the history of Zipporah (Exod. 4:25) it can be concluded that it was not particularly strictly observed among the Midianites. I. Josephus says that the Arabian Ishmaelites were circumcised in the 13th year, which obviously has its source in the tradition regarding their ancestor Ishmael. Mohammed found this custom already existing and was himself circumcised when he published the Koran; but he himself, apparently not considering circumcision a religious rite, does not mention it in his laws. His followers, however, strictly observed it as a positive decree, and it is now used among all Mohammedans. During his stay in Egypt, Abraham could become acquainted with this rite there, so that when it was offered to him by God in this new revelation and in its new meaning, the patriarch was already prepared for this symbol and could immediately understand its religious significance. This meaning was lost or not taken into account among many of those peoples who had this custom, so that among them it had only a sanitary, physical or superstitious meaning. Philo, in order to recommend this institution of Israel to the Gentiles, declares that there were four reasons for its introduction, namely, to prevent a certain disease peculiar to hot countries, to preserve the purity of the body, to create analogies between the external organs, which produce life, and the heart, which produces thought, and to increase fruitfulness; but he himself was inclined to consider circumcision a symbol of self-denial in the matter of pleasure and a symbol of the elimination of pride and arrogance. The biblical account of the establishment of this rite, however, does not say a word regarding its hygienic or protective usefulness; it only indicates the higher base. It was the outward sign of the covenant between God and Israel, and the means of obtaining the benefits of that covenant. In this way, the Jews were supposed to be different from other peoples. God used a custom that already existed among some peoples, but gave it a spiritual meaning and symbolic importance, just as He gave a new meaning to the rainbow after the flood, although it had already existed before; or just as Christ did not invent the rite of baptism, but used an already existing rite, giving it only a new meaning and new grace. Those who were circumcised were assured by the performance of this rite that they had entered into a new relationship with God, and thus agreed to fulfill the duties which this relationship imposed on them. The pain caused by the operation could indicate the severity and strictness of the law that was to be given subsequently, but could now serve as a sign of dedication to God and spiritual purification; it showed that natural forces must be used moderately and reverently, in accordance with the purposes of the covenant, which had in mind the fulfillment of the divine plan. This decree did not apply to women, for whom no equivalent ritual was required. It depended on their subordinate position. Woman was created for husband, and the husband is the head of the wife; thus she was sanctified in her husband and with her husband; not as a woman, but as a wife, she became a participant in the covenant. The exact position of unmarried women in this respect is nowhere defined, but it may be assumed that in their regard the father's consecration imparted the benefits of the covenant to the daughters as well. The reason that circumcision had to be performed on the eighth day was completely symbolic. Of course, the child, due to his weakness, could not endure such an operation before, but choosing the first day of the second week of life has a very clear meaning. Number 7 in St. Scripture is of extreme importance. It can be considered in two ratios: as 61 or as 43, and its meaning depends on these two ratios. In the first case, its symbolic meaning is determined by the narrative of creation. In 6 days God created heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested from work. Likewise, the works of creation, in order to find peace and sanctification, must be united with unity, i.e. by God; the affairs of the world must return to God, where they will be calmed and sanctified. On the other hand, just as 4 is the image of the world (with its 4 corners and 4 winds), and 3 is the image of St. Trinity, so 4 in conjunction with 3 represents the world united with God, creation reunited with its Creator. Thus, 7 is a cherished number expressing harmony, unity, perfection and peace. The use of the number 8 is closely related to the number 7, constituting what in music is called an octave, a return to the first, the beginning of a new circle. As a day outside the seven days of the creative week, it means new life; hence he expresses the idea of ​​renewal, rebirth, resurrection; As a result, in relation to the child, the eighth day was considered as if it were his second birthday, the beginning of a new life and new development for him. We Christians see in it a type of the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who rose from the dead on the eighth day and gave us the circumcision of the Spirit, by which we put to death the old man, crucifying the flesh with its passions and lusts and putting on the new man, created according to God in true righteousness and holiness (Eph. 4:22 et seq.). After the new confirmation of the covenant, an astonishing revelation was made to Abraham that Sarah herself would give birth to a son, the elderly woman would become a mother. As a sign of her admission to the blessing promised to her husband, her name was changed to Sarah (with the last letter in the Hebrew form of that name changing i to h, signifying the title of Jehovah). She who was hitherto known under the name “quarrelsome” was henceforth to be called “queen,” the mother of nations, from whom kings should come 145. In joyful amazement at this wonderful message, “Abraham fell on his face and laughed.” This does not mean that he doubted the promise, but it struck him with its extraordinary nature. A thought flashed through his soul: “Will a hundred year old really have a son? and Sarah, ninety years old, will she really give birth?” But he did not express this natural question out loud and suppressed the protest of natural reason. “Not having fainted in faith, as the apostle says, he did not think that his body, almost a hundred years old, was already dead, and Sarah’s womb was dead; He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but remained firmly in faith, giving glory to God and being fully confident that He was able to perform what He had promised” (Rom. 4:19–21). Faith conquered doubt in him, but the promise nevertheless remained amazing and contradicted all experience. At first, it may not have been particularly desirable for him. Over the course of thirteen years, Abraham became accustomed to looking to Ishmael as his heir. His hopes were already focused on this son of his; he had already become accustomed to the idea of ​​making him the head of the tribe and the heir of the promises in his place when he had to go to his fathers in peace. Called to unexpectedly transfer these hopes to another and future son, he could not help but express his fatherly feelings and asked that “even though his son Ishmael may live.” Some explained this exclamation in the sense of the special reverence of Abraham, who seemed to want to say by this: “I do not dare to pray regarding this newly promised son, but grant that Ishmael may find Your favor and live a good life, walking before You.” But it is much more likely that thinking that Ishmael would be replaced for him by Isaac, or even that God had in mind to completely eliminate the latter, as unfavorable in His eyes, Abraham prayed for his preservation and future prosperity. God's answer to his request makes this abundantly clear. God assures him that Ishmael will multiply greatly, will be the father of twelve princes (Gen. 25:12), but he will not be the heir of the great promise. The reason for this is obvious. Ishmael was the son of a slave, and although, in the absence of offspring from a true wife, he could inherit his father’s possessions, however, when a legal heir appeared, he immediately had to descend to the position of his mother. We know how pitiful the position of the slave's son was from the example of Ishmael himself, when several years later he and his mother were expelled from the house of Abraham and were left to the will of fate. With this incident in mind, the Savior said: “A slave does not remain in the house forever; the son abides forever” (John 8:25). Such a person, whose very position was uncertain and dependent on chance, could not be the ancestor of the spiritual children of God, the heirs of the great promise, which had to be fully completed in the Gospel. Then the covenant itself was not from nature, but from grace; the one who received it had to rise above all people with his superior faith. The heir who was to inherit the blessing and transmit it to posterity was not to be the son of worldly assumptions or carnal desires (Gal. 4:23), nor could he be a person whose birth was the result of insufficient faith or natural impatience. In this divine plan, no human speculation was to take place. The heir must be the reward of faith, the son of a miracle. Isaac alone could meet the requirements of the circumstances of the case, and the rights of Ishmael could not be compared with the rights of the son of a free woman. The long-tested patience of the patriarch was to find its reward not in the fruit of an Egyptian concubine, but in the supernatural gift of a son from his own wife. Chapter 15. The Death of Sodom and Gomorrah After confirming the covenant with God, Abraham completely became a “friend of God” and lived in constant and close communication with Him. But while faith grew stronger and the piety of the chosen patriarch grew, the unbelief and wickedness of those evil and lawless cities among which his nephew Lot lived grew and intensified. They quickly overflowed the cup of their iniquity and finally incurred the terrible wrath of God. When Abraham one hot day was sitting at the entrance to his tent near the Mamrian oak grove, he saw three strangers passing through the plain. With truly patriarchal cordiality, he decided to ask them to come to his place and take a break from the daytime heat and fatigue. With the usual oriental ceremony, but at the same time showing more than usual respect in his address, the patriarch bowed to them to the ground. Turning first to the one who seemed to be the main person among the wanderers, he asked him not to pass by, and then immediately took care to give them that pleasant pleasure that is highly valued in the east, namely, he washed the dusty and tired feet of the travelers with water and then refreshed the guests with food after the journey. And his hospitality was rewarded: these were not ordinary strangers, but in their person the Lord himself with two Angels serving Him. Abraham personally served his guests: he brought them newly baked bread, purposely killed a calf for them, and treated them to butter and milk. AND. Josephus and Philo found it difficult to suppose that these celestial visitors actually ate mortal food. The first says that it only seemed as if they were eating, and the last says that they only showed the appearance of being treated to people. Bl. Theodoret asserts that this was not a real consumption of food, because the Angels have only temporary bodies, formed and received by them from the air only for certain purposes, and that the food that entered these bodies was decomposed into elements, just as the sun turns the moisture of the earth into steam, but does not absorb it into itself. But there is nothing incredible in the fact that if they took on human bodies, they could also take food, as people do. It is true that the Angel who visited Manoah (Judges 13:16) refused to eat his bread; but the action of the three Angels who visited Abraham can be equated to the action of the Savior after His resurrection, when, in order to confirm the faith of His disciples, He ate baked fish in front of them (Luke 24:43). So these three Angels, condescending to Abraham's request, gave him the opportunity to verify their presence and assure him that what he saw was not a simple intangible vision. At the end of the meal, they asked about Sarah, who was right behind them in the tent and could hear everything that was happening. She apparently did not fully share her husband's faith in the promise of her son. The natural impossibility of such an event struck her, as a woman, with greater force. And yet it was necessary that she also believe and act as a voluntary participant in this matter. This was the purpose of the visit of the three Angels. But they did not immediately turn to her themselves. The modesty of her sex and the dignity of her position kept her confined in her own quarters, but what the strangers said was intended for her, and was extremely amazing to her. And so, during the conversation, the Lord revealed himself to Abraham. No one except Jehovah could make such a promise as He did, saying to Abraham: “I will be with you again at this time (next year), and Sarah your wife will have a son” (Gen. 18:10). Hospitality was thus rewarded. The hitherto vague promise was finally precisely defined with the very time of its fulfillment indicated. The long-predicted son must be the child of this aged couple, who had long ago given up all hope of a seed and from whom, in the very nature of things, no child could be born. Sarah, hearing this strange prediction from her room, did not believe him and laughed. Her laughter was no longer the same laughter with which Abraham had previously greeted similar news, i.e. a laugh of joyful amazement, but a simple mockery of the promise itself, which, in her opinion, had no possibility of fulfillment. As a result, she had to listen to a reproach from the Angels who knew her thoughts. “And the Lord said to Abraham: Why did Sarah (in herself) laugh, saying: Can I really give birth when I am old? Is there anything difficult for the Lord?” Then conviction entered Sarah's heart and she was afraid. Forgetting her shyness, she answered loudly from her department and began to assure that she was not laughing. But the Lord told her: “No, you laughed.” Her doubts were soon dispelled. And she believed, as the apostle says: “By faith Sarah herself (being barren) received strength to receive seed, and out of season she gave birth; for she knew that He who promised was faithful” (Heb. 11:11). But the Angels, when visiting Abraham, had as their goal not only to convey the joyful news of the birth of his son from Sarah, but also had another goal, the fulfillment of which they were now ready to begin. They set off on their further journey, and Abraham accompanied them. They were heading towards Sodom, and when, as tradition says, they arrived at Kafar Berukha (now Beni Naim), from where, through a hollow, a view of the hills surrounding the Dead Sea opened, the Lord revealed to Abraham the impending destruction of the cities of the valley as punishment for their vile iniquity. But why did God reveal his advice to man? Because this man was a “friend of God.” He was chosen from all humanity to be the guardian of divine truth. He was the one who had to lead his family along the path of religion and piety. And he should thus have had the opportunity to convey to all subsequent inhabitants of this country about the terrible reason for the destruction of wicked cities as a warning against similar lawlessness. “And the Lord said: Shall I hide from Abraham (My servant) what I want to do? From Abraham will surely come a great and strong nation, and in him all the nations of the earth will be blessed. For I have chosen him so that he will command his sons, and his household after him, to walk in the way of the Lord, doing righteousness and justice; and the Lord will fulfill for Abraham all that he has spoken about him.” The great covenant made with Abraham was conditioned on moral behavior on the part of the people. God has no partiality. Abraham should not have boasted of the love that he enjoyed, but should have remembered that the blessing given to him depended on his righteousness and piety, so that it did not constitute an indispensable property of him and his descendants even in the event of their moral unfitness. The patriarch himself may not have needed this warning; but in subsequent years this truth was often forgotten, and no delusion brought so many terrible disasters as the false belief that the very descent from Abraham already forever ensured the mercy of God for his descendants. The Lord now wanted to show that He had in mind not only one family, but all the tribes of the earth. He now wanted to punish the guilty and show His disgust for sin. But God always tempers His anger with mercy. Speaking in human language, He declared that He did not want to punish without inheritance; He will go and see if the inhabitants are really as corrupt as they seem. And so, two Angels go into the valley, and the third, the representative of the Word of God, remains with Abraham. “And Abraham still stood before the Lord.” He recognized the co-presence of God and, out of his perfect love, eliminating all fear, he approached the Lord and with reverent boldness began to ask for the criminal city. He knew enough about the properties of Jehovah to be sure that He was completely just and infinitely merciful. He already knew that God would treat with complete impartiality even the wicked inhabitants who were to cede the land to the promised seed. The Lord did not want to cast them out until all hope of correction had dried up and until the measure of their iniquity was filled (Gen. 15:16). Abraham would have acknowledged the justice of God even if He would certainly have to punish the guilty; and although he recognized himself as only dust and ashes before the face of God, he nevertheless dared to turn to Him with a prayer to soften His wrath. “And Abraham came and said, “Will You really destroy the righteous with the wicked, and the same will happen to the righteous as to the wicked?” Maybe there are 50 righteous people in this city? Will You really destroy and not spare (the whole) place for the sake of 50 righteous people (if they are) in it? It cannot be that You would act in such a way that You would destroy the righteous with the wicked, so that the same thing would happen to the righteous as to the wicked; cannot be from You! Will the judge of all the earth act unjustly?” And when the Lord promised that if He finds 50 righteous people in this criminal place, then He will spare it for their sake. Abraham, thinking about his relative Lot and encouraged by the leniency with which his request was heard, began to insist on his intercession until he received a merciful answer from the Lord that He would have had mercy on the entire city if there had been not even 50, but 30, 20 or even 10 righteous people in it. From here it is self-evident how great the intercession of the holy people of God is. The pattern of faith has now become the pattern of love; the man who had shown himself so courageous in battle now showed himself bold in prayer; his hands once delivered Lot from mortal enemies, his prayers now deliver him from an even more terrible danger, although salvation now, due to the extraordinary prevalence of the vice, could no longer extend to the entire people. In the lawless cities there were not even the smallest number of righteous people, and therefore their execution was inevitable. Many legends have developed regarding the place where Abraham stood before the Lord. The place where his tent stood under the Mamrian oak is now called Rame or Ramet-el-Khalil, and is marked by the ruins of a larger building, built of huge stones, some of which are more than 16 feet in length. Here, as Sozomen relates, the inhabitants of Palestine annually gathered in huge numbers from all parts of the country for a fair, which was attended indifferently by Jews, pagans and Christians - Jews because they boasted of their descent from Abraham, pagans because Angels appeared to him there, and Christians because the Son of God was revealed there in human form. There they made rich offerings, and many sacrificed animals; spending all their time in prayer, they lived in tents pitched in open areas around a central spring into which they threw their gifts and from which no one dared to draw water at this sacred time. Emperor Constantine, noticing many superstitions that even grew into open idolatry around the Oak of Abraham, ordered the destruction of the altar and statues erected there, and in their place he built a magnificent church, and the ruins existing on this site perhaps constitute the remainder of its walls and mosaic platform. Another sad memory is associated with this place. After the bloody defeat of the Jews at Bethera in 135 AD, when, according to one account, 580,000 people died, numerous captives of all sexes and ages were publicly sold into slavery at this very sacred place. Having parted with the Lord, Abraham sadly returned to his tent, and two wandering angels went to Sodom. In this event one cannot help but see a foreshadowing of the circumstances of the terrible judgment that will subsequently befall humanity. At that time, as we know, “the Son of man will send His angels, and they will gather from His kingdom all temptations and workers of iniquity, and will throw them into the fiery furnace” (Matthew 13:41, 42). “So it will be at the end of the age: angels will come out and separate the wicked from among the righteous.” The Son of Man himself does not carry out the sentence on sinners. He sends Angels serving him for this purpose. So, when He wanted to destroy the criminal Sodom Pentate City, He sent Angels for this and He Himself withdrew. Just as the wind and the storm fulfill His Word and just as He makes His angels spirits and His servants flaming fire (Heb. 1:7), so He generally uses the lowest instrument to carry out His will and He Himself stands, as it were, at a distance from this matter. If only we had the ability to clearly understand the depth of things, we could find a wonderful harmony in the whole Word of God and a wonderful indication of the future in the events of the present. The record of the Old Testament is not a simple story. It is a type and a prophecy, and foreshadows other more important events. When the strangers arrived in Sodom in the evening and entered the city gates, which then, as now in the east, served as a common place for transactions, pleasure and conversation. Lot, who had completely abandoned the shepherd's life and was living in the city, was sitting at the gate. Seeing the strangers, he, following the example of his uncle Abraham, invited them to his house and showed them warm hospitality. In order to test his sincerity, they first declined the invitation and declared their intention of spending the night on the street; but Lot's persistence overcame their refusal, and they agreed to his request and were received by him with special honor. But the inhabitants of Sodom, maddened by unbridled lust, even on the eve of their death did not hesitate to insult the strangers with their lustful and depraved violence. The extraordinary beauty of the angels aroused animal passions in them, and they began to demand that Lot hand over these wanderers to them for vile mockery. Lot, weak as always, guided by good motives, but unable to properly balance the clashing responsibilities, wanted to sacrifice even his daughters to the bestial lusts of the people rather than suffer a violation of the duties of hospitality. But even this sacrifice could not have saved his guests if they themselves had not resorted to their supernatural powers and struck with blindness the vile crowd that wanted to lay hands on them. After this, the punishment could no longer be delayed. The angels announced to Lot the reason and purpose of their terrible visit and ordered him to notify all his relatives about this and flee from the city with them. His wife and two daughters were at home, but his sons lived in the city among other residents. He apparently also had other daughters and sons who had already become completely at home with the Sodomites, as can be assumed from the words of the Angels (Gen. 19:8, 12). Lot hurried to them with a message about the threatening destruction and urged them to take advantage of the remaining time and flee from certain death. But he spoke as if deaf. He obviously had no influence on these people, and in general his news was so extraordinary that “his sons-in-law thought he was joking.” He himself, although convinced of the reality of approaching death, also did not immediately want to part with the city in which he enjoyed luxury and contentment. He hesitated. Then the Angels, commanding him to take his wife and two daughters, forcibly took him out of the city and ordered him to run up the mountain, to run without looking back. But even then he could not completely tear himself away from the place to which his everyday connections tied him, and he begged that at least one of the five cities of the valley, small Bela, be spared for him, in which he could be saved. That's where they went for rescue. But they did not all reach this haven of salvation. They were given a strict warning not to look back, not to look at the city from which they were saved by the grace of God. Lot's wife, whose name is not indicated in the narrative, could not, however, suppress her desire to look at the dwelling she had left behind; With the curiosity characteristic of women, she turned around and looked back, showing at the same time with what reluctance she followed her husband. Why should she leave the place where she lived in such enviable contentment? Is there any truth in the very prediction about the immediate destruction threatening this city? Her untimely regret, her unbelieving doubt were immediately punished - “she became a pillar of salt.” And the Lord Jesus Christ pointed out the lesson represented by her life in few but powerful words: “Remember Lot’s wife” (Luke 17:32). In this area there still stands a rock covered with salt, having the rough outline of a human form, and tradition sees in it the remains of an ill-fated woman, calling this rock (at the foot of Jebel Usdum) “Lot’s wife”; pointing out this circumstance, a sacred writer of subsequent times said: “a standing pillar of salt remained a monument to an unfaithful soul” (Wis. 10:7). At sunrise, Lot reached the city of Bela, which became known as Zoar. On the same day, a terrible execution took place over the other four cities: Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboim. A destructive lava of sulfur and fire poured from the sky, and the next day, in the place where the lawless cities were, only stench and smoke smoked, like “smoke from a furnace,” and the yellow-turbid sulfur lake, now known as the Dead Sea, was agitated. The news of this disaster spread not only to the land of Canaan, but even to distant countries. There is now in the British Museum an ancient tablet containing an extract from an Akkadian poem (with an Assyrian translation attached), which seems to refer to this particular event. This place reads like this: “a storm descended from the deep (firmament) environment; from the midst of heaven came the deserved punishment. The sword (lightning) chopped up the earth like grass. Lightning blazed towards the four winds, destroying like fire. She struck the people in their cities; she destroyed their bodies. There is sadness in the city and country; it struck great and small. She destroyed free and slave alike; she filled (the earth) with grief; in heaven and on earth she raged like a thunderstorm and made everything her prey. People hurried to the place of refuge of their gods and uttered a great cry. They received strong (protection) from their gods and were hidden as if by clothing.” It is not surprising that such a terrible event should have attracted the attention of writers of subsequent times, and we find references to it both in later Jewish and New Testament writers, as well as in pagan ones. I. Flavius ​​says the following about it: “The Sodomite region adjacent to the lake was once a blessed country for its fertility, and was decorated with many cities, but now it is completely burned out. They say that because of the wickedness of its inhabitants it was destroyed by lightning. Even to this day some remains of the heavenly fire and traces of the five cities can be seen; ash appears in the fruits themselves: in appearance and color they seem to be real fruits, but as soon as you crush them with your hand, they turn into dust and ash” 146. St. ap. Jude in his conciliar letter says that “Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities, like them, committed fornication and went after other flesh, being subjected to the punishment of eternal fire, they were set as an example to all workers of evil” (Jude 7). According to the testimony of Ap. Peter, God “condemned the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah to destruction and turned them into ashes, setting an example for future wicked people” (2 Pet. 2:6). Later pagan writers also testify to this event. The Roman historian Tacitus, describing in detail the Dead Sea with its amazing features, then says: “the adjacent plain, once fertile and inhabited by large cities, was destroyed by lightning, traces of which can be seen in the scorched earth, now completely barren.” 147 The ancient geographer Strabo (17:2, 44), speaking about the Dead Sea (which he, however, mixes with Lake Sirbon on the border of Egypt), explains its extraordinary features by the action of underground volcanic forces, although he adds evidence of a tradition preserved among local residents that it was formed as a result of the catastrophe that destroyed Sodom and twelve other cities subordinate to it, most of which were swallowed up by the waters of the lake. All this evidence sufficiently confirms the historical authenticity of the terrible event, but at the same time partly contributes to elucidating the very method of the destruction of cities. This area amazes with its extraordinary abundance of sulfur. “Sulfur springs, says one of the newest researchers (Tristram), flow everywhere along the banks here; sulfur lies in whole layers or scattered in pieces throughout the desolate plain; At the same time, the resin floats up in large masses from the bottom of the lake, seeps into the cracks of the rocks, is mixed with sand on the very stretch of the shore, or even appears with an admixture of sulfur again, as if due to some extraordinary shock.... The ignition of such a mass of flammable substances - whether from lightning or from some other reason - together with an earthquake throwing resin and sulfur out of the lake, are capable of themselves causing devastation on the adjacent plain.” 148. This feature thus in itself makes the manner of the city's destruction quite clear. For this there is no need to even assume the action of underground volcanic forces. Everything points precisely to the ignition of flammable substances found there in such abundance, and this ignition could have occurred from lightning or from another reason, turning the entire valley with the cities into a smoking oven, as was the case according to the testimony of the biblical narrative. Pliny says that in Lycia in his time there were the so-called Ephaestus Mountains, which consisted of such a flammable substance that it could even be ignited with a brand; from the fire, the sand on the river banks became hot, and the water itself, due to its sulfuric property, not only did not extinguish the fire, but intensified it. In view of this circumstance, it becomes clear why there were no traces of the lost cities, even if we assume that not the entire valley was flooded by the lake. They could have been built from the same flammable substance that killed them. This catastrophe naturally produced a profound change in the surrounding area, which turned from a luxurious oasis into a gloomy desert. All these, of course, were only secondary reasons, serving only to clarify the method of destruction of the wicked cities; but behind them stands the main and first reason - the will of the Righteous Judge, who uses the most natural reasons as an instrument and means of implementing His holy justice. As for the location of the Sodom Pentacity, it has not yet been determined with sufficient accuracy; but most modern geographers believe that these cities were located north of the Dead Sea, in that part of the Jordan Valley that is now flooded. This itself suggests that the Dead Sea already existed before the catastrophe, since it served as a pool into which the waters of the Jordan flowed, but it was undoubtedly smaller in size and had other properties, perhaps it was as transparent and lively as the Lake of Galilee or Gennesaret. 149 The destruction of the cities of Sodom is one of the most terrible and remarkable events in the Bible, and references are most often made to it as evidence of the terrible wrath of God for the violation of all moral laws. People make little use of exhortations and warnings, of which only memories are preserved. The great lesson taught by the flood had long since lost its force, and the general decline of religion and morality, the shamelessness and open debauchery that prevailed in these cities, required an extraordinary event to stop the increasing evil and show the wrath of God on depravity. That is why here, among the industrial population, where armies, travelers, merchants and caravans constantly passed, a terrible monument to the wrath of God was erected, which could be seen by everyone and the story of which could spread to the ends of the earth, so that people could be admonished by it and understand that God gives a warning before He strikes, but that when He lowers His punishing hand, it is irresistible. Lot's subsequent story is sad and humiliating. Due to his weakness and mistrust, he was afraid to live in Zoar and retired with his daughters to one of the caves that abound in the hills hanging over the Dead Sea, and there he unwittingly became the culprit of a monstrous crime. He, like Noah after the flood, indulged in intoxication. His two daughters, thinking that the rest of the human race had perished, took advantage of this condition to restore the family, and their sons were born, Moab and Ben-Ammi, who became the founders of two nations, called by their names the Moabites and the Ammonites. This story, according to negative criticism, has no historical basis and was allegedly invented by later Israelites to express their hatred of these two tribes. But the origin of these peoples from Lot and their close relationship with the Israelites is confirmed in other places in the Bible. A historian, if he wanted to hide the shortcomings of the holy family and present his ancestors in the most favorable light, would probably omit these details or try to somehow excuse this involuntary crime. Meanwhile, the writer of everyday life talks about this circumstance with complete frankness, bearing the irresistible stamp of truth. A later author, discovering the irreconcilable hatred that existed in subsequent times towards these peoples, could of course invent stories that would disparage them; but he would hardly have been so straightforward as to secure certain rights for them, as Moses did, or to call them the sons of Lot, as he does (Deut. 2:9, 10). The close connection of these two tribes, which we see throughout history 150, confirms the legend about their common origin. No other explanation of this connection would be sufficient, and thus everything shows that the story of their origin has complete historical accuracy. The motives for crime are obvious. On the one hand, it is possible to assume that Lot’s daughters considered the entire human race to be lost, excluding their father and themselves. But besides this, they could have other motives: by saying that “there is no man on earth who would come to them according to the custom of the whole earth,” they could mean the illegality of entering into marriage with the natives. Therefore, realizing the need to preserve their family, where could they find husbands? Who could agree to marry those who were the inhabitants of the wicked and ill-fated city of Sodom? Ishmael, their relative, was still a child. Thus, in their opinion, there was only one way to preserve their family, which they did. At the same time, they knew that it would be impossible to convince their father to knowingly commit the alleged crime. That is why they resorted to intoxicating him to achieve their goal. There is also no doubt that the corrupting influence of the cities of the valley, the open debauchery and corruption that reigned there, lowered their moral level and clouded the greatness of crime in their eyes. And this is how Lot leaves the pages of sacred history, saved, it is true, but with the loss of everything that he considered dear to himself; now he was widowed, homeless, childless, having only heirs of his shame, and presenting a complete contrast with Abraham, who had peace and joy in faith and in whom the Word of Scripture was fulfilled: “Godliness is profitable for all things, having the promise of the present life and the life to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). Despite this, app. Peter calls Lot righteous (2 Pet. 2:7). But human righteousness is relative. Compared with the customs and character of those among whom he lived, Lot's virtue undoubtedly shines brightly; and if his subsequent course of action revealed in him weakness, devotion to the world, and pride, then his actual moral spirit cannot be doubted and is approved. God does not mark imperfection with His approval, but He is merciful in the estimation of His weak creatures, and personal purity and faith receive some praise, even though they be combined with defects in other respects. Lot had to fight against serious temptations, which he mainly brought upon himself, and he successfully resisted the worst of them. He was saved in the midst of general death and destruction (after all, sin always entails punishment), because God saw the good that was in him, although at the same time He punished his foolishness and worldly spirit with various trials. As one star differs from another in glory, so do the degrees of righteousness differ. Lot, of course, in his righteousness stands much lower than Abraham, but he, living among the wicked people around him, rose so morally among them that he fully deserved the apostle given to him. Peter’s epithet of “the righteous”: “for this righteous man, living among them, was daily tormented in his righteous soul, seeing and hearing the works of iniquity” (2 Pet. 2:8). Chapter 16. Birth of Isaac For fifteen years Abraham lived near the Mamri oak grove, but now he again moved his camp to the south of the country. The motivation for this was probably more than just a desire to find better pasture for their herds. The terrible disaster that broke out over the valley of the Sodom Pentacity, the sight of this devastated area, the thought of the devastation that befell Lot and his family, made the entire surrounding area unbearable for the tender-hearted patriarch. Even if he knew about Lot’s salvation, he still could not have any consolation in communicating with him, especially if news of his nephew’s crime reached him. And so he left his former residence and headed to the country where Hagar had once fled from the oppression of her mistress, between Kadesh and Shur, and which Abraham himself had already passed on his way to Egypt and back. Here he moved from one place to another and finally pitched his tent near the city of Gerar. This city lay in a valley leading to Bathsheba, from which it was about forty miles away. Its remains are located in a heap of ruins called Umm el-Jerrar, 15 versts south of Gaza, 45 from Eleutheropolis, where the remains of a cistern and many fragments of pottery can be seen. There the patriarch first came into contact with the Philistines, who in subsequent years lived in Shephelah, i.e. coastal plain of Canaan, waging constant wars with the Israelites. Now they did not yet form that alliance of five cities, which was so strong and terrible during the time of the Judges, but were a shepherd tribe living under the command of a king who bore the title of Abimelech, “father-king.” In subsequent years, they became so strong and acquired such significance that from them the whole country began to be called Palestine, which name completely replaced the ancient name Canaan during Greek rule. While not yet numerous or warlike at this period of their history, they, although not of Semitic origin, warmly received the wandering patriarch and apparently understood his language. At least the very word Abimelech is Semitic, and in the narrative itself there is not a trace that would indicate the need for a translator in their relations with the Jews (cf. 1 Samuel 17). It is possible that, having conquered the original Semitic settlers here, they adopted the language of the conquered tribes, as has happened many times in history. The friendly relations between them and Abraham were at first almost broken due to the same reason that led to the difficulty with Pharaoh in Egypt twenty years ago. Again, here Abraham had to marry Sarah to his sister, because, as the Greek translation adds 70, “he was afraid to say that this was his wife, lest the inhabitants of that city would kill him for her,” and again the matter ended the same, since Abimelech “sent and took Sarah.” If Sarah's beauty were meant here, this would undoubtedly present some difficulties, since Sarah was now already 90 years old; and therefore some critics argued that this story is only a simple repetition of the same story that is placed in chapter 13, but only introduced here by the Elohist, while the previous one was introduced by the Jehovah's Witness. But it must be borne in mind that all the details of these two stories are completely different and there is nothing incredible in the fact that the same danger could threaten Sarah twice during Abraham’s stay among the pagan nations. As for the reason that prompted Abimelech to take her, it must be remembered that her physical powers were revived from the time of the visit of the three Angels, since she became able to conceive and give birth to a child, as a result of which her beauty could be preserved even to this advanced age. On the other hand, Abimelech could simply wish to unite by kinship with the powerful leader of the tribe and thus enter into an honorable marriage for himself and his people. As for the motives that forced Abraham to again resort to hiding the truth, these motives could only be his boundless faith in higher help. God had already provided protection to his wife, and according to Abraham’s faith, He would provide it again. The promise of an heir of his own flesh, lawfully begotten, was to be fulfilled; no accident should have slowed down the fulfillment of God's promise; no matter how dangerous the path, no matter how difficult the situation, there must certainly be a way out of it. And this trust in the all-governing Providence and faith in his higher purpose made Abraham calm and supported his hope for the best in the midst of the most critical circumstances. And his hope was fully justified. God warned Abimelech in a dream not to commit the crime he had in mind. “Behold, you will die for the woman whom you have taken, for she has a husband,” a divine voice announced to him. A written law against adultery had not yet been issued (Deut. 22:22), and yet the heinousness of this sin was already clearly recognized in human society, and here God himself expressed His warning against it. Previously, He had already left Pharaoh to learn the heinousness of this crime from his own consequences and did not personally warn him against the crime; but the king of Gerar was morally superior to the pharaoh; he distinguished between good and evil and wanted to follow the law of conscience; he had some knowledge of God (Elohim) and was ready to accept every message of His will. As a result of this, the dream was given to him. This method of communication was often used at a time when no direct revelations or divine messengers were given. There were similar examples subsequently. Jacob on the field of Luz, Laban during his persecution of his son-in-law, Joseph during his prediction of his future greatness, another Joseph in the matter of betrothal to him by the Blessed Virgin Mary, the eastern sages before their return to their homeland, the apostle. Paul during the great shipwreck - they all received messages from God through dreams. In the present case, the dream explained the cause of the miraculously sent disease that struck Abimelech and his house. She was sent to warn him from insulting Sarah and from unwittingly committing a crime by the king of a people who had not taken part in the gross vices of the Canaanites and among whom some traces of true religion still remained. The king could well say that he acted here not with evil motives, but with sincerity in his heart and innocence in his hand; he could in this respect, in any case, call his people just, and God deigned to reveal and declare the works of His Providence and show them how to treat Abraham and how to reward him for the insult he had inflicted. Abimelech immediately had to return Sarah to her husband and ask for Abraham’s intercession: “for he is a prophet, and he will pray for you, and you will live.” But in what sense was Abraham a prophet (nabi)? We are too accustomed to give this name only to those divinely inspired persons who predicted the future. But the use of this word in St. Scripture is not limited to this meaning. This is the name given to anyone inspired by God or serving as an instrument for communicating His will to people. Aaron, who spoke for Moses, is also called a prophet (Ex. 7:1). “Touch not My anointed, and do not harm My prophets,” says the Lord, meaning the patriarchs (Ps. 104:15). Likewise, already in Christian times, teachers of the faith were called prophets, although they did not predict the future 151. Therefore, Abraham, as a person who enjoyed the special favor of God and was in communion with Him, also receives the title of prophet, and Abimelech willingly recognized him as a sacred person bearing this sacred office, and asked for his intercession in order to make amends for his involuntary mistake. The position of intercessor was no longer new for the patriarch. It formed a necessary part of the wonderful relationship in which Abraham stood to Jehovah from the time of the renewal of the covenant. Just as he had interceded with courageous humility for the cities of the valley before their destruction, so now he acted as an intercessor for Abimelech and offered up a prayer for him to that God who deigned to grant him such a right. His petition was heard; the disease ceased, and Abimelech and his house were freed from the fear that had struck their hearts in view of the plague and the higher explanation that accompanied it. The king, fully aware of Abraham's high position, very meekly reproached him for behavior that could lead both himself and his people to commit a great crime. “And Abimelech called Abraham, and said to him: What have you done to us? How did I sin against you, that you brought great sin upon me and my kingdom? You did things to me that are not done. What did you have in mind when you did this thing?” Abraham excused himself by saying that he had no confidence in the morality of the inhabitants, who were not, as he assumed, worshipers of the true God and could inflict offense and insult on him purely for religious reasons. “I thought,” he said, “that there was no fear of God in this place, and they would kill me for my wife. Yes, she, he added, is truly my sister: she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife.” This apology completely satisfied Abimelech, and he, having endowed Abraham with all sorts of gifts, even expressed a desire to remain on good terms with such an influential person, who not only possessed great wealth and significant military strength, but was also in special relations with heaven, so that in any case he was a mysterious and extraordinary person. As a result, Abimelech invited Abraham to choose the best area in all his land and settle in it. Between the gifts given to Abraham, he also endowed him with money, namely, giving him a thousand shekels of silver. We know nothing about the form and value of this gift. The Hebrew text calls it simply "a thousand of silver," and it is probable, as was the case subsequently with the purchase of the Cave of Machpelah, that it was uncoined metal, in rings or some other form, of a known weight. Before releasing Sarah, the Philistine king gave her a gentle rebuke, expressed in cryptic language that makes it very difficult to interpret. He specifically said to her: “Behold, I have given your brother a thousand shekels of silver; This is a veil for your eyes before all who are with you, and before everyone you are justified.” Various explanations have been offered for this expression. It seems to mean that since Abraham, whom Sarah called her brother, was her husband, she had to cover her face and thus recognize herself as a married woman, in accordance with the custom that existed among that people (cf. 24:64). The money, as some suggest, may have been intended for her as a means of purchasing a veil, so that no one else could fall into the error of Abimelech; but the custom of giving money for the purchase of any utensils is completely alien to the practice and concepts of those primitive times, and would be completely inappropriate here. According to another interpretation, Abimelech meant by issuing silver to induce Sarah and her husband to forget his act in relation to her as a married woman, and the word “veil” was used, perhaps, to remind her that if she had worn this veil, suitable for any married woman, then he would not have made a mistake. Others finally find the keys to these mysterious words in the superstitious reverence that the Philistine king felt for the prophet, as if saying to Sarah: “perhaps he is your brother, as you said: but whether he is a brother or a husband, in any case, he, by virtue of his sacred prophetic character, is a complete protection for you from any insult - a veil that can protect you from the gaze of unclean eyes, not only here in our Philistia, but wherever you are led you your wanderings. The wife of the prophet does not need to fear insult and there is no need for her to resort to lies to protect herself.” “So she received a reproach” 152. This explanation is very plausible; but it is difficult to understand why Abimelech mentions his monetary gift in this regard. Obviously, the whole speech revolves around the gift; the most natural explanation is that he wished by this means to induce strangers to make peace with the insult they had received and forget about the accident. The money Abraham received was intended as a testimony and a sign that Abimelech admitted his mistake, and his apology was accepted. Giving gifts to confirm a famous transaction was a custom that was not uncommon in ancient times. After this event Abraham did not remain long in the immediate neighborhood of Gerar; but, taking advantage of Abimelech's permission, he moved with his herds to the fertile valley running from the sea to Beersheba. This is a well-watered county. A flowing stream passes through the valley, which irrigates a large area, and in the western part of the plain there are many springs that carry fertile moisture everywhere. Throughout the country, water is also obtained by digging wells at greater or less depth. Arriving at his favorite place, Abraham dug a well for his own use, which later became known as Bathsheba. Its location is quite known. It is now called Bir es-Seba, and is located in Wadi es-Seba, which stretches for several miles from east to west, and then, turning north, connects with Wadi Ghuzze, on which stands Umm Gerrar. This wadi ends in sand dunes on the seashore, a little lower than Gaza. Bathsheba was thus located 45 versts south of Hebron. The wells existing there were numbered differently by travelers, so that some found seven of them, while others found fewer. But there are two main ones, of which the larger is 12 1/2 feet in diameter, and the other, some distance to the southwest, is 5 feet in diameter. The water, distinguished by its purity and pleasantness, is found at a depth of 40 feet. The bottom of the large well is 16 feet cut out of solid rock. Around both there are numerous watering troughs for livestock, and the stone walls that line the mouth of the wells bear deep marks formed from the friction of the ropes through which water is obtained. These stone walls are probably from the 12th century AD, since an Arabic inscription was discovered on one of them, indicating approximately this period. On several hills north of the wells the remains of an ancient settlement are visible; but since the houses were built from loose materials, these remains are not of particular interest. The wells themselves undoubtedly date back to ancient times, and of the stones used for the subsequent lining of the wells, some could belong to those that were laid here during the time of the patriarch. The features of the country may have changed but little, and the appearance of the gentle hills to the north and the great plain of Arab-el-Azazime to the south, lost in the desert, was probably in all essential respects the same as it now appears to the eyes of modern travelers. Some time after the removal of Abraham from the borders of Gerar, Abimilech, in view of the power and influence of the patriarch, found it advantageous to conclude an alliance with him. The motive for this union was not merely a natural desire to be on friendly terms with a rich and powerful man, nor was the union itself a mere private agreement of public trust and esteem; it was a formal tribal alliance, concluded with the usual ceremonies and confirmed by the presence of representatives of the country. As witnesses to the agreement, Abimilech brought with him Phichol, his military commander, and, according to the Greek translation, Ahuzath, his closest friend (bride guide) (26:26). Part of the impetus for this agreement was one of those disputes regarding water that is so common among the inhabitants of the desert. The Philistines began to oppose Abraham's claim to own the well, which he had dug with great difficulty. This was at first done without the knowledge of their master; and when Abraham announced this to Abimilech, the latter immediately recognized the justice of the patriarch’s demand and confirmed his right. Then a formal alliance was concluded between them, and the king recognized the rights of Abraham, and Abraham, for his part, swore to be on friendly terms with him and his descendants. This is the first union ever recorded in history, and it is remarkable in some respects. There are no small conditions or clauses; everything is left to the good faith of the contracting parties, which is considered a completely sufficient security for the contract. The treaty is sealed with the blood of victims and the exchange of gifts. In addition, Abraham offered Abimelech seven young lambs, on which an oath was made, and the king accepted them as a sign that he recognized the patriarch’s right to the well and promised to protect him. These sheep could be considered a sign of respect for an earthly ruler, just as Jacob later offered his expensive gift to Esau when the latter and his army met him on the road to Canaan. Hence this place was called Bathsheba, “the well of the oath” or “the well of seven,” as confirmed by seven gifts or sacrifices: the connection between the oath and the number seven was so close and recognized as so common that this proper name was sometimes derived from one or the other. In memory of this transaction, Abraham planted a tamarisk tree (eshel) 153 which, being ever green and capable of living in dry places, could long remain a monument to the treaty. Here also he appears to have erected an altar or sanctuary in which he worshiped Jehovah, El-Olam (the Lord God everlasting). In subsequent times, this planting of trees around the sanctuary degenerated into an idolatrous custom, when the people were led astray from the path of true worship, and even Bathsheba herself became the center of false religion 154. But finally the time came when the great promise Abraham received from the Lord was to be fulfilled. Abraham was 100 and Sarah 90 years old when their long-desired son was born to them, apparently while staying in Bathsheba. According to the ordinance, he was circumcised on the eighth day, and given the name already assigned to him before. This name is usually pronounced Isaac, according to the Greek and Latin translations, although in other places it is pronounced Iitshak; but no matter how you pronounce it, in its etymology it is connected with the meaning of “laughter,” which is indicated three times. When this prophecy was first made to Abraham (17), he laughed with delight and joyful amazement that he and his aged wife could be the parents of a son in whom all the nations of the earth would be blessed. “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day; and he saw and rejoiced” (John 8:56). Then, when Sarah heard the Angels talking about a son who would be born from her (18), she also laughed from a mixed feeling of doubt and joy; and when at last the promise itself was fulfilled and the child was accepted into the covenant with the Lord, she, like the Blessed Virgin Mary, uttered a song of thanksgiving and, alluding to the divinely given name, exclaimed enthusiastically: “God has made me laugh; whoever hears about me will laugh. Who would say to Abraham: Sarah will breastfeed the children? For in his old age I gave birth to a son.” This name received special meaning not only due to previous circumstances, but also due to this joyful and contented mood of the parents, and most of all from its representative character, as heralding the Messiah, the joy of the whole earth, and the instrument of the promised blessing, which was supposed to illuminate the gloomy world with the joyful rejoicing of reconciliation with God. Two thousand years later, in the same district of the Jews, and in the same spirit, the Most Holy Mother of Jesus Christ solemnly sang her triumphant song: “My soul magnifies the Lord: and my spirit rejoiced in God, my Savior, because He looked upon the humility of His servant; for from now on all generations will call me blessed; He received His servant Israel, remembering mercy, as He spoke to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed forever” (Luke 1:46–55). The birth of a legitimate heir completely changed Ishmael's position. Hitherto, for thirteen years or more, he was considered the direct heir of his father. Brought up in the desert, spending his life with the harsh shepherds who tended the large flock of the patriarch, sharing their dangers and considered by them as the direct heir, he became over the years a man commanding by nature and impatient in his desires. His mother undoubtedly supported him in his ambitious hopes and did not limit his arrogant claims. It is clear from this with what displeasure he must have felt the disappointment in his hopes and the sudden relegation to a lower and dependent position. When Isaac was weaned, he expressed his wounded feelings boldly and with bitterness. On this occasion, according to custom, a great feast was held. At exactly what age the child was weaned depended on the circumstances. Mother of seven sons killed by Antiochus (2Mac. 7:27), said that she nursed them for three years; and it is very possible that Isaac was of this age when this event occurred. Seeing the special honors given to this child and contrasting them with his own disappointment, Ishmael (who is not even mentioned by name in the narrative) could not refrain from declaring his displeasure at the ridicule and mockery. Ap. Paul says (Gal. 4:29) that he was pursuing a spiritual heir. His mother not only did not try to restrain his insolence, but, on the contrary, supported him in secret, which, of course, could not go unnoticed for long by Sarah’s jealous eye. The arrogant mistress was not slow to take revenge for this gross disrespect for her son. She went to her husband, drew his attention to what had happened, and with irresistible insistence demanded the immediate expulsion of Hagar and her son. She said to Abraham: “Cast out this slave woman and her son, for the son of the slave woman will not inherit with my son as heir.” Unconsciously, she uttered a significant prophecy and made a demand that was in accordance with the divine intention. But her husband had not yet seen this side of the matter. This whole circumstance was extremely sad for him. He loved the boy who was the first to call him father. He could not bear the thought of being thus separated from his dear son and the slave who had been his wife. He was angry with Sarah for demanding such a sacrifice of her feelings; and only when divine inspiration forced him to pay attention to the words of his wife did he finally agree to obey this demand and reluctantly escorted Hagar and her son into the desert adjacent to Bathsheba. The reason for their exile obviously lies in the very promise of God: “Thy seed shall be called in Isaac.” Ishmael was not to become a joint heir with Isaac, nor was he to contend with his brother for the right of birthright. The majestic promise was to be limited to one legitimate line and could not be distributed among different rivals. Moreover, Ishmael was not a suitable companion and leader for the gentle Isaac, even if there was nothing to fear from his vindictive character and his arrogant claims. He apparently was not under the influence of that fear of God that so clearly distinguished his father. Impetuous, proud, arrogant, courageous, he, with his stronger character, could easily seduce his gentle brother from the true path and weaken in him that full-hearted faith that was required from the son of the covenant. And although separation from his firstborn son was a difficult test for the heart of Abraham and is rightly considered one of his “temptations,” it was also intended as one of the lessons in his spiritual education. It helped to prepare him for that great moment when God called him to lay down his most precious treasure in obedience to His word. The spiritual importance of this circumstance is explained by St. Paul (Gal. 4). Here the behavior of unbelieving Jews in relation to the Christian church was foreshadowed. They professed some friendship for the spiritual Isaac, while in reality they persecuted and insulted him, and therefore it was necessary to free the sons of promise from the sons of the flesh. The divine suggestion regarding the expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael, accompanied by the promise that a great nation would come from the latter, was made to Abraham at night in a dream or vision. With quick obedience, suppressing his tender fatherly feelings, Abraham rose early in the morning and sent Hagar and her son outside his camp. With a skin of water on her shoulder and a supply of bread made for her by Abraham, Hagar left the camp, leading by the hand her son, who was now about 16 years old. Their path headed south into the desert below Beersheba, on the road to Egypt. In this dry area, the water contained in the furs was soon exhausted, and yet there was neither a well nor a source. Sultry sun above, hot sand below; there was not a shady palm or any other tree in the entire exposed area, and the wanderers faced a terrible fate. The impatient, highly gifted young man felt the pangs of hunger more strongly than his hard-working mother. It is also possible that at a time when human life was longer than now, the weakness of childhood also lasted longer, and a young man at 16 years old, in his physical strength, was equal only to a modern boy of 10 or 12 years old. Exhausted from lack of water, Hagar brought her son under the shade of a bush, the only protection that the naked area offered from the sun, and in desperation she sat down within an arrow's flight, so as not to see the terrible death of her child. In agony, Ishmael groaned. The mother could not stand this test, and she herself “raised a cry and cried.” Her cry was heard, and from the hot sky the voice of the Angel of God came to Hagar. Here the Angel of God is no longer called the Angel of Jehovah, as it was before, but the Angel of Elohim. This change in name has been explained by critics on the basis of the Helogistic and Jehovistic theories in the sense that these separate stories were composed by different authors. This opinion has led many interpreters astray, but the change of name itself is entirely consistent with the change in Hagar’s position. When she belonged to the house of Abraham and occupied the position of a minor wife, she was considered a participant in the covenant, and Jehovah, the God of the covenant, was in fellowship with her; now she was separated from the sacred family and became the subject of the care of God, only as the God of the whole earth, the God of the spirits of all flesh. That is why the Angel who appeared to her is simply called the Angel of God, and not the Angel of Jehovah. He addressed her with an encouraging appeal: “What is the matter with you, Hagar? don't be afraid; God heard the voice of the boy from where he is. Get up, lift up the boy and take him by the hand; for I will make him into a great nation.” Then he directed her gaze to the well, which had hitherto been unnoticed by her, and she filled her skin with water and saved the life of her son. But they never returned to the house of the one who expelled them. They remained to live in the Paran Desert, that desert area that stretches from Araba to the Gulf of Suez to the west and from the borders of Palestine to the Sinai mountain range to the south. When the time came for Ishmael's marriage, Hagar, fulfilling her maternal duty of choosing a wife for him, chose a woman from her own country - Egypt, and thus, as far as depended on her, broke all connection with his Semitic kinship. In the next generation, however, this connection was renewed; because Abraham's grandson, Esau, a man after Ishmael's own heart, just as wild, adventurous and indomitable, married his daughter Mahalath, or, as she is called elsewhere, Bashemath (Gen. 28:9, 36:3, 26:34). From Ishmael, as predicted by God, came twelve princes, heads of tribes, and they had villages and nomadic camps known by their names (25:16), that is, they led partly an agricultural, partly a shepherd lifestyle. The name Ishmaelites was applied to all the tribes of the desert, which are now known as Bedouins; in some places St. In the Scriptures they are also called Midianites 155. Some of these descendants of Ishmael or their cities are quite famous. Under the names of Nabaioth and Kedar (precisely the first of the 12 princes), well-known places are mentioned in the inscriptions of Assurbanipal, of which the first, called Naboth (Nabatea), included Petra, where these people made themselves dwellings carved into the rocks. During the time of the Maccabees, the Naboth spread to the Syrian Desert (1Mac. 5:25). Then they conquered the country around Damascus and became so powerful and spread so far that the entire country from the Red Sea to the Euphrates, according to Josephus, was called Naboth. Moreover, they were known not only for their warlike exploits, but also with great success in peaceful trades; their trading enterprises were very extensive; they minted coins, carved inscriptions on stone, and their wonderful capital, Petra, remains to this day a monument to their art, taste and beauty. The sons of Kedar are mentioned frequently in the Old Testament; they were skilled marksmen, rich in herds of all kinds; in the Assyrian monuments they are called Kidra; Assurbanipal testifies that, as punishment for the indignation of one of these Arab princes, he imposed on them an annual tax of gold, camels and donkeys (cf. Jer. 49:32). They lived mainly in black tents (Song 1:5), like other Bedouins, but some tribes had cities and villages and led a more sedentary life. Their descendants still live in the vicinity of Mecca and Medina and invariably retain their tribal characteristics, being the true sons of the “wild man”, their ancestor, and the most warlike and powerful inhabitants of Hedja. From them came the tribe to which the false prophet Mohammed 156 belonged. From all that we know of these various tribes descended from Ishmael, we see that the prophecy concerning him was fulfilled with perfect accuracy. As their ancestor was, so are they now, and so have they always been. Their fate and character fully correspond to his fate and his character. They preserved the rite of circumcision received from him, postponing its performance until the child was thirteen years old, in accordance with the biblical account of the very circumstances of the establishment of this rite. They remained free and independent, throwing off every foreign yoke, like the wild donkey of the desert. Living by robbery and extortion, they are enemies of all the tribes around them: their hands are against everyone and the hands of everyone are against them. Representing a wild, indomitable people, they are not subject to any influence from the customs and habits of the tribes around them and have lived for almost forty centuries without any change. Chapter 17. The Supreme Test of Abraham's Faith Abraham lived in Bathsheba for many years in peace and happiness. The great promise was fulfilled; the long-awaited son grew and matured under his watchful eye; his firstborn prospered in his wild exploits in the desert; the Philistines, among whom he lived, were his friends and allies; everything, apparently, ensured long-term peace and a carefree life. There was no cloud on the horizon, no sign of any approaching storm. It might seem that the elderly patriarch was destined to go to his grave in a state of complete peace and undisturbed prosperity. But in the eyes of God his trial was not yet over. The athlete could not yet leave his exercises and consider the time of his activity over; he had yet to win a final victory and therefore had to undergo the most difficult test. Will he emerge victorious from this challenge? Will faith triumph in him over human love and cherished hope? This trial, in a sense, came unexpectedly, although Abraham's entire previous life had been a preparation for this final struggle. Self-denial and unquestioning obedience had long been familiar to him; his whole life consisted of them. He left his homeland in obedience to the voice of God; he broke all ties with his family in Harran, went to Canaan rootless and childless, endured for many years the burden of unfulfilled hopes, suffered mental anguish for the safety of his dear wife; separation from Lot tormented his tender heart; the terrible death of Sodom and Gomorrah, with all the accompanying and subsequent horrors, terribly shocked and amazed him; the violent expulsion of Hagar and Ishmael was very sad for his soul; he had already, in fact, renounced himself from his own son, whom he loved so much; but now he was called to make an even greater sacrifice. Suddenly, without any warning, in a night vision the voice of God reached him, and Abraham heard a terrible command: “Abraham! 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 of which I will tell you” (Gen. 22:2). Many perplexities arise in our souls when thinking about this strange command. Objections were often made to its moral significance: this command, some say, was unworthy of God; the patriarch was cruel and inhuman in obeying him. As for the command, it was truly one of a kind and, apparently, inexplicable. Interpreters have been at great pains to give some reasonable explanation of this circumstance, some imagining that the suggestion to which the patriarch obeyed did not come from an external source, but was simply a thought that suddenly arose in his mind from observing the practice of those among whom he lived, that he, too, like them, could best please God by sacrificing his own son. He began to fulfill this thought; but upon further reflection, he came to the conviction that his intention was erroneous and inconsistent with divine dignity, and as a result, instead of the intended human sacrifice, he slaughtered a ram. In response to this interpretation, suffice it to say that it is not at all justified by the exact biblical narrative or by the allusions in later biblical books. According to another assumption, the very suggestion to Abraham came not from the Lord, but from Satan, just as it later happened to David, when “Satan rose up against Israel, and stirred up David to number the Israelites” (2 Sam. 24:1; and Chron. 21; or just as in the Greek tragedy Orestes expressed fear that perhaps he listened to an evil demon, imagining that he heard the voice of Apollo, commanded him to kill his mother 157. But taking into account the words of the narrative itself and the moral purpose underlying this “test,” we can consider this opinion to be groundless and empty. That this command came from God, at least for him, this could be the only possible authorization of such a command, expressly legitimized by Noah’s decrees (Gen. 9: 5, 6). - pity, tenderness, love - have always been an indispensable part of human spiritual life. God's view of the wickedness of human sacrifice, although perhaps not fully appreciated by Abraham, was later expressed in strict legal regulations against such customs of Canaan 158 ; and yet here, apparently, there was a command that was in direct contradiction to these considerations. Nevertheless, Abraham could not be mistaken in supposing that it was given by God. His origin was as certain as the origin of the promise of the continuation of his seed in Isaac, which promise was apparently undermined at the root by this new command; here he was just as little mistaken as when he obeyed the divine voice, which, commanding him to leave his country, promised him the land of Canaan for eternal possession, concluded an eternal covenant with him and established the rite of circumcision. No, there could be no mistake here; the suggestion was from God, sent from heaven. But what was there in this command that overcame its internal strangeness and incongruity? The end of the test, of course, was well known to the omniscience of God. God saw that Abraham would endure this ordeal; He did not at all mean to give this command for its actual fulfillment; He intended to stop him when the purpose for which the command was given was achieved. This goal was to test the faith of the patriarch, as the writer of everyday life says: “and it came to pass, after these incidents, that God tempted (that is, tested) Abraham” (Gen. 22:1). After all that Abraham had already gone through, after the many proofs he had given regarding his perfect trust in God and his unquestioning obedience, it was necessary to make one more test of his disposition towards him before his spiritual education was completed and the final triumph was ensured. Will he want to perpetuate the blessing given to him by the determination to voluntarily renounce it? This is precisely the essence of the test, this is the striking paradox of the divine economy. Earthly blessings must be accepted as spiritual blessings and assimilated by faith. A person must ensure his rights to a certain good through the struggle and suffering of a believing soul. This test was in accordance with the understanding of Abraham and with the degree of religious experience to which he had reached. There is no need to talk about its difficulty. The command was given to Abraham in all its terrible simplicity; all the horror, all the difficulty, all the cruelty of the ordered task was clearly presented to Abraham. He was not to take oxen or lambs for sacrifice, but his son, his only son by his wife Sarah, the child so long awaited, the son of his old age, the son of promise, so dearly loved, through whom his line was to continue and all nations to be blessed - he was to take him and with his own hand offer him as a burnt offering, that is, not to leave the slightest trace in the memory, but to turn his beloved body into ashes; and he had to do it now, without any delay, without any delay. Here Abraham was tested as a father, patriarch and believer, and he emerged triumphant from this strange test. Only such a painful and severe test could fully prove that he was worthy of the extraordinary blessing that was given to him. Extraordinary advantages required extraordinary merit; the greatness of the gift required justification in the greatness of the faith. And the proof of this extraordinary faith became clear from now on to all subsequent generations. By the real test Abraham himself could know the spirit that was in him; he himself testified to the grace of God, which triumphed in his obedience; and to subsequent generations during the following centuries, this test fully demonstrated the incomparable character and pious dedication of this father of the faithful, who taught by his very deeds that nothing should be preferred to God and that a person should be ready to bring his dearest treasure to the service and according to the word of God. The moral character and wisdom of this trial on the part of God are thus made clear, and Abraham is justified in his obedience. The justification for fulfilling this command was the very conviction that it came from the mouth of God. This conviction conquered in him all those bewilderments that he might have had regarding the obscenity or cruelty of the command. No matter how painful it was for his feelings and contrary to what he could expect as a suggestion from God, recognizing him as divine, he could only bow his head in obedience. Everything that God commanded was legal and fair for him. Recognizing with all his heart the wisdom and justice of God, he considered it his duty only to obey, whether he understood or not the reason and meaning of the test. We must not, however, bring into this matter our own view of human sacrifice. It is very possible that for Abraham such a sacrifice was not as terrible as it later became and as we are accustomed to look at it. This command, for all its horror and unprecedentedness, could not seem inhuman or illegal in his eyes. It would be a mistake to assume that such sacrifices are characteristic only of people standing at the lowest level of savagery. The custom of sacrificing children in ancient times was widespread among various peoples, by no means barbaric or savage. The Semitic tribes received it from the Turanian population of Chaldea 159; it was found among the most ancient inhabitants of Palestine, passed from here to the Carthaginians, Egyptians, and later to the Moabites, Ammonites and Aryan tribes. Abraham lived in a country where such sacrifice was not unknown, and thus he was familiar with such a custom. The power of the father over the life of his son at that time was recognized as unconditional. “Kill my two sons,” Reuben swore to his elderly father, if I do not bring Benjamin to you” (Gen. 42:37). Should not the believing patriarch have shown the same true devotion to his Lord and with the same willingness to sacrifice his beloved and precious son to him, which those of the idolaters were capable of displaying who offered human sacrifices to their false gods? Then, will this be the end of the command he received? Will something else happen when he arrives at the appointed place? The obedience he performed was not blind, slavish, but rational, believing obedience; he did not offend his conscience by fulfilling this command; his moral sense was not offended, no matter how painfully this command responded to his heart. In addition, in this whole ordeal one cannot help but see another, deeper truth. The Patriarch, by supreme inspiration, was familiar with the great doctrine of atonement; he knew that one of his descendants was to be sacrificed and become a blessing to all the nations of the earth; but the person who was to carry out this appointment had not yet been indicated to him. When, therefore, the suggestion was given to him to sacrifice his own son, he could even assume that Isaac was to be the promised redeemer, and that is why he so willingly wanted to sacrifice him, foreshadowing by this great deed the divine work of the Heavenly Father, who gave His only begotten Son to suffer and die for the human race. On the other hand, this whole affair could only be a way of teaching the higher doctrine of atonement, by sign and action instead of words 160. Abraham had long and impatiently desired to see the day of Christ, i.e. that atonement that He had to make, that sacrifice that He had to undergo. And he saw it in this very visual image. Nowhere else in all of his history could he have seen with his own eyes the truth of redemption, and when Christ said that Abraham saw his day, He meant precisely the sacrifice of Isaac. In order to instruct Abraham in this great teaching and show him to what limitless limits God’s love for people can reach, God commanded him to fulfill this picture and feel for himself what it means to lose his beloved son. Some interpreters, however, try to explain this story differently. So, Gengstenberg thinks that Abraham did not understand the way in which he was commanded to make the offering. But the words of the command are too clear for any error in this regard to be possible. The command directly says: “Take your son and offer him as a burnt offering.” The school of Kühnen and similar rationalists believes that human sacrifice was “a national custom performed in the worship of Jehovah, considered as a local deity.” They base this opinion on the literal interpretation of Jephthah's vow, on such passages as Micah. 6:7: “But can the Lord be pleased with thousands of rams or countless streams of oil? Shall I give him my firstborn for my transgression, and the fruit of my womb for the sin of my soul? Here, however, the prophet or indicates the custom of the Moabites, whose king, during one great national disaster, sacrificed his son (2 Kings. 3:27), or speaks on behalf of an apostate people, who, according to his image, are ready to bring everything, even what was strictly forbidden, than what is specifically required by God, i.e. heart and will. Rationalists also cite other sayings that allegedly testify to the existence of such a custom. Thus, the Gibeonites demanded the surrender of Saul’s seven sons in order to “hang them before the Lord” (2 Sam. 21:6); Samuel “cut Agag in pieces before the Lord in Gilgal” (1 Samuel 15:33); from these and similar passages, they prove that these people were sacrificed to Jehovah, or in any case that human sacrifices were considered not alien to the idea of ​​​​Jewish worship. But such an opinion is so unfounded that it does not even need a formal refutation. The expression "before the Lord" simply denotes solemnity and openness of action; the sentence was carried out in the light of day and was carried out with the aim of propitiating the offended majesty of God. The same saying is found, for example. in Numbers 25:4, where Moses is commanded to take the leaders of the people who sinned with the daughters of Moab and “hang them up before the sun before the Lord.” Here, of course, no one will argue that this was an act of sacrifice to Jehovah; because “cursed is he that hangeth” - according to the law (Deut. 21:23). The biblical narrative always expressly states that the people resorted to these sacrificial abominations only when they abandoned the God of their fathers; that he offered his children to Baal and Molech, that he offered his sons and daughters to the idols of Canaan. As for the conclusion that when in the Mosaic legislation there is any confirmation of certain customs or institutions, then such customs certainly existed earlier and initially among the Jews and were allowed until they were replaced by the more humane customs of a subsequent civilization, then such a conclusion is based on a complete misunderstanding of the matter, exposed by St. Scripture, tradition and history. In reality, such prohibitions were decreed against the rituals and customs of the surrounding peoples, with whom the Jews could come or came into contact and whose bad example could have an infectious effect on them. Jewish tradition supplements the story of Abraham's test with many preliminary details, apparently borrowed from the story of Job 161. According to this story, Satan accused Abraham before God of serving him only out of a desire to enjoy his favors, and added to this that as soon as he receives the fulfillment of his desire, he no longer cares about making sacrifices or bringing him gifts. The Lord replied that this accusation was so unfair that even if He had demanded that Abraham sacrifice his beloved son Isaac, even then he would have obeyed the command with complete readiness. Satan began to ask God to test His servant in this way; The Lord agreed and addressed His command in the dead of dark night. Abraham immediately obeyed and got to work. Satan met him on the road under the guise of a weak old man and tried to turn him away from carrying out this task. Having failed in his intention to shake his father's resolve, he tried to arouse opposition in his son; but he was defeated in the same way here too - due to the calm determination and firmness of Isaac. And thus the matter was brought to an end, and Abraham’s faith found complete justification. But let's return to the biblical story. Realizing that the command he heard came from God, Abraham immediately began to fulfill it. Early in the morning he got up from his bed; without telling anyone about his intention, he himself made all the preparations necessary for the journey; being the master of hundreds of slaves, he himself equipped the donkey, chopped wood, woke up two of his servants and his son Isaac, and went to the place that God had indicated to him. He did not say a word to his wife Sarah. She was not to mar the pure sacrifice with tears and useless opposition; there should have been no farewell words or sad separation, so as not to weaken his intentions and not hinder his obedience. In the silence of the early morning, he secretly sets off on his journey. Isaac, now a young man no less than twenty years old, took all the things prepared for the sacrifice, but did not know the purpose of the journey itself. For three days Abraham was on the road, carrying his silent sorrow in his heart. This terrible secret weighed heavily on his soul, although he did not fight against the divine command, but human feelings could not be completely suppressed in him; the commanding power of grace could not completely overcome the secret feelings of nature. What he endured during this slow journey, only God knows. Finally, the journey was over, and on the third day he saw the appointed place from afar. It was on a mountain in the land of Moriah. What is meant by this name has been the subject of the most heated debate; but various considerations make us inclined to believe that this place was Jerusalem 162. True, Ewald and other critics see here only a tendentious hint with the aim of representing every place considered sacred from time immemorial, sanctified by the presence or action of one of the patriarchs; but even admitting that there is some truth in this assumption, if we recognize historical accuracy in the event itself, then we must also recognize the authenticity of the tradition that determines the very locality of the event. And there is nothing that would make this indication incredible. To speak of Mount Moriah “as if it were first consecrated only by David and Solomon,” and that “the fourth narrator forcibly brought it into the history of Abraham”—to say so means to reveal complete injustice in discussing the very circumstances of the case. This message appears completely naturally in the narrative and corresponds to all its details. The word Moriah is obviously Mori-ia, that is, the vision of Jehovah (in Symmachus and in the Latin Vulgate it is translated as “earth” or “mountain of vision”; in Aquila – “prominent land” and in 70 – “high land”). This name is given to the site where Solomon built the church (2 Chronicles 3:1), and it is not found anywhere else in the Old Testament. I. Josephus 163 emphatically states that this was the very place where the threshing floor of Orna the Jebusite was located, and was the site of the construction of Solomon's temple; Jewish tradition generally leads to the same conclusion 164; the book of Jubilees states as a well-known fact that this mountain means Mount Zion. The very essence of the matter already speaks for the identity of the place of this amazing act of piety with the place where the glory of God was to dwell and where satisfaction was constantly to be given for the people of God. If this connection is not indicated in the later books of St. Scripture, then they are not made on Mount Gerizim, in which some critics would like to see Moriah. Samarina tradition naturally considered Mount Gerizim to be the place of Isaac’s sacrifice; and Dean Stanley and his followers consider the top of Mount Gerizim to be the place of sacrifice, based on the expression that Abraham “saw that place from afar” (Gen. 22:4), while the church mount becomes visible only when you are already relatively close to it. But these words cannot be forcibly interpreted in such a way as to exclude the idea for which we stand. They may mean that Abraham saw the place or area to which he was heading before he reached it. He might not yet have seen the exact rock on which the sacrifice was to take place; but the surrounding area should have been visible to him from a certain distance, quite sufficient to justify the vague expression “from afar”; and in fact, on the ancient, still existing road from the south, crossing the ridge east of the Plain of Rephaim, in one place a wonderful view of Mount Moriah and the entire location of Jerusalem opens up, about three miles away 165 . In addition, Jerusalem is just a three-day journey from Beersheba, while to Mount Gerizim not a single loaded donkey could cover the entire space at the same time 166. The Melchizedek city of Salem was probably very small and on the Moriah ridge there could have been quite a few places secluded and remote enough to perform sacrifices without any outside interference. Seeing the designated place, Abraham ordered his servants to stop. He did not want to make them witnesses to the upcoming case. He wanted to do it alone with God. There was nothing vain about this matter; no thought of praise or glory was to tarnish the simplicity of his obedience. “You stay here with the donkey,” he said to the two servants accompanying him, and my son and I will go there and worship, and return to you.” Was he uttering an unconscious prophecy? Was it really a simple turn of phrase to blind the servants to the essence of the impending matter? The Apostle puts the matter in a different light when he says that Abraham “sacrificed Isaac... for he thought that God was able to raise him from the dead; wherefore he received it as a sign” (Heb. 11:17, 19). But whether he really had in mind the possibility of Isaac returning to life or not, in any case, he did not for a moment doubt the omnipotence of God regarding the fulfillment of his great promise, that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed. How this could happen, he did not know, and yet he did not waver in faith; he was completely convinced that the Lord would find a means to fulfill His intention. And so, leaving the servants in place, he laid the wood for the burnt offering on the shoulders of young Isaac, took the fire and the knife in his hand, and they went to the mountain. As they climbed the rocky path, “Isaac began to speak to Abraham his father, and said: My father, here is the fire and the wood, where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” One can imagine how this question, so innocent and simple-hearted, must have painfully responded to the father’s heart! This very simple-heartedness must have caused all the greater wound to his suffering soul. And yet Abraham has not yet revealed his secret. Almost unconsciously, but with a clear prophetic presentiment, he, with pain in his heart, answered him: “God will provide for Himself a lamb for a burnt offering, my son.” “And they both walked on together,” climbing the hill. When they reached the appointed place, Abraham built a simple altar of stones or turf, piled the wood on it, and then finally revealed the terrible secret. I. Flavius ​​puts into his mouth a speech that expresses the feelings of the patriarch at this terrible moment; but oratory, acceptable in Thucydides and Livy, is completely inappropriate and untimely in the solemn narrative of St. Scriptures. What happened between father and son is not mentioned anywhere. Undoubtedly, Isaac was already at such an age that he could have resisted his father's intentions, if only he had wanted to; therefore, it is more likely to assume that he unquestioningly agreed to the sacrifice and allowed himself to be tied hand and foot with a rope and placed on the altar. The believing son of a believing father, with full consciousness and with voluntary submission, completely betrayed his life. It is difficult to say what is most worthy of amazement here: the courageous spirit of the patriarch, or the meek self-denial of his young son. Priest or victim - which is superior in its humble obedience? With waterless eyes and a firm gaze, voluntarily, like a man determined to perform a great action, and yet firmly, like a man who could not waver in his intention, Abraham stretched out his hand and took the knife. Now the sacrificial knife has already been raised for slaughter - a knife that glistens in the sun before the calm eyes of the victim; one more moment - and the father would have killed his son. But God restrained his hand. The Angel of the Lord, the Angel of the Covenant, called to him from heaven: “Abraham, Abraham!” The test was over: enough had been done to prove the faith of the patriarch; victory was won. In man's extremity, God always appears at the right time. When the worst comes, heaven itself comes to the rescue. If God allows His servants to fall into severe trials and cruel disasters, at the same time He is always present with them, and at the very moment of extreme need His help does not keep waiting. It was the same here. Stopped by the sudden exclamation of the Angel, Abraham involuntarily lowered the knife, turned around and looked around this secluded place in amazement. There was no one in sight. But he had heard this same voice before; he recognized its familiar sounds and waited patiently for what would be said next. And the voice continued: “Do not raise your hand against the boy, and do not do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, and have not withheld your son, your only son for Me.” Tender Isaac was untied and taken from the altar on which he was ready to die. Thus Abraham received his son as if from the dead. Here, undoubtedly, is a lesson for all subsequent times, that when the laws of God or the service of God require of us any grievous sacrifice, the giving of something that we love most, we must obey willingly, with a cheerful heart, renouncing the thing most loved, trusting that He who requires this sacrifice will in due time clear up the mystery, show the purpose of the lesson, and turn all to His glory and our good. But although Isaac was freed, a sacrifice still had to be made. God showed that He did not want to accept the offering of human life, that henceforth such sacrifices were an abomination to Him. By divine direction, Abraham saw nearby a ram entangled with its horns in a thicket of bushes, and it was this animal that the patriarch sacrificed in place of his son. Wasn't this whole event a parable? Was it not intended to represent the sacrifice and death of Christ, the beloved Son of His Father, who was actually to be sacrificed and die (in the same land of Moriah) and after death to rise again to life? Truly, this test of Abraham's faith was a prototype of that supreme sacrifice and was supposed to reveal to people that the terrible event of Good Friday was predicted and depicted from ancient times. Now that the shadow has given way to the essence itself, the image has been realized, we Christians can trace this resemblance in all its details, we can see in it a prophecy and a picture of the greatest event that the earth has ever seen since the foundation of the world. This is not a simple story, not a simple mythical story of hoary antiquity, which would have no relation to us in modern times. This is a manifestation of the divine plan, which, gradually being realized, gives events such a form that they foreshadow the coming mystery. Here, on the one hand, the Father does not spare His own Son, but betrays him to the cross; there, on the other hand, a simple human father voluntarily gives up his own son to death at the command of God. Here the only begotten Son of His Father, although capable of willing otherwise (John 10:18), voluntarily agrees to obey the command of His Father; and there on the other side Isaac, in full strength and strong youth, voluntarily lies down on the altar and bows his head to the sacrificial knife. The only son of his father, the heir of all that the rich patriarch possessed, the much beloved son, whose birth, long foretold, was exactly realized at the appointed time, innocent and yet condemned to death, meek and submissive to the will of his father, carrying the wood for his own sacrifice to the hill - this Isaac was a wonderful type of Christ. Likewise, in his return to life, after being already dead for three days in his father’s intention, he prefigures the resurrection of Christ. He, however, did not die as Christ died; but here lies precisely another symbol of the great redemptive work. To complete this type, death and atonement were required, and it was completed in the sacrifice offered in the place of Isaac. According to the true explanation of the ancient writer (Theodoret), Isaac was a type of the Divinity, and the ram was a type of the humanity of Christ. Just as Isaac, who was too great and noble a sacrifice to suffer death, could not die, so the Divinity cannot die, and Christ had to be incarnate before He could taste death, although the Divinity was inseparably united with humanity. The ram, so to speak, was united to Isaac and suffered death, and thus the sacrifice was completed. But it should be noted that reality is superior to the shadow in all respects. Isaac, although he was separated from his servants, was not alone, but with his father on the mount of sacrifice. Christ was put to death by His own disciple, abandoned by all His chosen apostles, and in an hour of unknown agony was left to Himself, deprived even of the comfort of divine co-presence, when He cried out: “My God, My God! Why did you leave Me? Isaac was laid on the fire by his father's loving hands; Christ was nailed to the cross by rude, insensitive soldiers. Isaac saw his father's hand rise to slaughter him; Christ felt how “the arrows of the Almighty were in Him; His Spirit drank their poison; the terrors of God took up arms against Him” (Job 6:4). Isaac was saved from death when a heavenly voice forbade sacrifice; but Christ suffered to the end on the cross. In the great work of atonement the victim had to die, there the hand raised for slaughter was not stopped, and instead of what Isaac said; “Here is the fire and the wood, where is the lamb for the burnt offering?” Christ spoke; “Behold, I come to do Your will, O God.” The sacrifice was made, a great act was accomplished, the consequences of which were to reverberate thunderously throughout all subsequent centuries; the smoke of the sacrifice was destroyed and, with smoldering ashes, on the wild top of the mountain, father and son stood silently, amazed at what had happened, and feeling in their hearts an excess of faith, love and all kinds of tender feelings. Then from the silent sky the voice of an Angel was heard for the second time, announcing the reward for this great deed. God called Abraham by name and with great solemnity pronounced a majestic blessing on him, anticipating the one that was later expressed in relation to all who gain victory in faith: “Well done, good and faithful servant, enter into the joy of your Master.” God confirmed with an oath that his promise to Abraham would never be broken, that his blessing would always rest on him and on his descendants, that not only his own direct descendants would enjoy the light of his vision, but that from him the blessing would spread to all the nations of the earth. This spiritual promise, already given in a former revelation many years ago, was here repeated and confirmed in the most solemn manner. “God,” says the apostle, “giving a promise to Abraham, as he could not swear by anyone higher, swore by himself, saying: truly blessing I will bless you, and multiplying you. People swear by the highest, and an oath as confirmation ends every dispute between them. Therefore, God, desiring to show the heirs of the promise the immutability of His will, used an oath as a means, so that in two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have firm consolation, who have fled to take hold of the hope set before us” (Heb. 6:13-18). This primary promise, the last one made by God to Abraham, was constantly in the mouth of the Lord and his servants; it was repeated to Isaac, was the consolation of Joseph on his deathbed, with it Moses inspired his fellow tribesmen and with him interceded for them before God; it especially made black the ingratitude of the people during their apostasy; it gave special fire to the denunciations of the prophets and supported their hopes; it shone in the blessed song of Zechariah, and the entire speech of the first martyr Stephen was imbued with it. And yet this blessing has not yet received its full realization. The Israelites, God's chosen people, were the seed of Abraham, and from his lineage Christ was born. However, who can say what other victories lie ahead for the kingdom of Christ? Who can say what unspeakable blessings He, the Savior, the Messiah, the God-Man, has vouchsafed and will vouchsafe for His body, the church, and through it all creation? No mortal can know the full meaning of this angelic word: it is beyond our understanding, we cannot grasp the full depth of its immense meaning. “And Abraham called the name of the place Jehovah-Jireh; God will provide.” In response to his son’s simple-minded question about the sacrifice, he told him: “God will provide for Himself a lamb for a burnt offering”; and now, seeing how miraculously his words were justified, how God showed Himself as a merciful deliverer, Abraham named the place of this wonderful event “Jehovah-Jireh.” In view of the importance of this whole event, a tributary expression could easily have been formed subsequently, containing more than one great truth. “Therefore, even now it is said: on the mountain of Jehovah it will be provided,” that is, that just as help was provided to Abraham in his greatest need, so we can always expect help and relief when we turn to God. The Mount of the Lord in other places (eg Isa. 30:29; Zech. 8:3) is called the church hill; and hence the saying this means that Jehovah will dwell there. On Mount Moriah the Lord had His special co-presence in His church when He displayed His divine glory and received the worship of His people; The Lord came to this house of God in the person of Christ, as the prophet predicted. Malachi (3:1), and on the neighboring Mount Golgotha ​​a cross was erected, on which that majestic sacrifice was offered, which took upon itself the sins of the people - the Lamb, slain from the beginning of the world, was offered. Thus ends this great story. When the glorious promise was fulfilled, a voice from heaven sealed its truth, Isaac was delivered from death, and the existence of the beloved seed was secured forever, then nothing better could follow. Reflecting on all this, grateful, filled with awe and hope, the father and son returned to their servants, whom they had left below, and, heading the same way they had come here, they went to their home at Beersheba. Chapter 18. The death of Sarah and her burial But it was necessary to take care of an eternal resting place for her body. Abraham wanted to bury his late wife with honor, but in all the promised land he did not have a foot of his own land; he did not have a permanent home here, did not have a single place that would have become dear to him from his long life and memories of the past. But now he decided to acquire a burial place, a place where he could safely lay the mortal remains of the one he loved, and thus, as it were, at least partially enter into possession of the promised land and transfer this possession to his heirs and descendants. The sight of his dead wife reminded him of his own mortality, as well as the lack of a secure burial place. As a result, he decided to buy a plot of land from his Hittite neighbors. For this purpose, he turned to them with a request: “I am a stranger and a settler among you: give me the property of a place for a coffin between you, so that I can bury my dead from my eyes.” Desire is the most natural and understandable, common to people of all times and all places. An educated pagan, an ordinary Christian, an illiterate savage - all equally show respect to the burial place of their dead, venerate the tombs of their ancestors, although not in the same way. In Christianity, of course, the belief in the resurrection of the body contributed to a special reverence for the dead, since Christians look at the mortal remains of their friends as vessels of the grace of God that lived in them. The expensive and careful embalming of bodies in Egypt arose from the belief that the soul of the deceased would one day again need its earthly church. In other countries, the preservation of bodies resulted from natural reverence, from respect for the dead and from the desire to protect the beloved body from destruction. Burning of bodies does not seem to have been a custom in Palestine at that time, although in subsequent centuries it was sometimes used, both as an honor and as a punishment. In Canaan and other countries, tombs were usually carved into rocks for the burial of the dead. In Ur, where there are no natural rocks, tombs were usually made artificially in the form of vaulted rooms. In Urfa or Edessa, in the neighborhood of Harran, the patriarch must have often seen tombs carved into the rocks. You can see them there even now, and they represent a room, sometimes up to four fathoms in length and three in width, and the entrance to them is usually closed with a stone, and behind this entrance there is another opening leading to an inner room, around which lie the dead in recesses carved into the walls. In Canaan, where the mountains are usually made of limestone, such tombs were not difficult to make. Sometimes they were dug out in soft layers of rocks and covered with slabs level with the surface, and sometimes they were made above it in the form of a sarcophagus. There are also tombs, which are simple oval-shaped pits; but for the most part natural caves served for burial, which were only quickly adapted for burial, for which special recesses were carved in their walls. It was precisely this natural cave that Abraham chose when choosing a burial place for his beloved Sarah. During his long stay in Hebron, he apparently often saw and examined various caves, and now he remembered one of them and found it extremely suitable for the general burial of his family. It was a “double cave,” that is, either having two entrances, or consisting of two rooms, and it was called Machpelah, which name was also attached to the district where it was located. Its location is quite known. Continuous tradition always pointed to the same place. Various inhabitants of the Holy Land vied with each other in showing respect to this tomb. Jews, Christians and Mohammedans all treat her with reverence. The building that now includes this place stands on a small plain, in front of the Mamri oak grove, opposite the place where the patriarch’s tent stood when he lived under the Mamri oak tree. He wanted to use this cave for himself forever, so that the ashes of his family would not mix with the ashes of pagans alien to his blood. To prevent any future possibility of any dispute, Abraham decided to buy it, as well as the land in the surrounding area, and have the purchase formally certified by the owners of the land. He made a statement of this desire to the leaders of the Hittite tribe. They answered him with oriental courtesy, so common even today, inviting him to choose any place for burial. “Listen to us, our lord,” they said to him; you are the prince of God among us; bury your dead in the best of our burial places; none of us will refuse you a burial place for the burial (on it) of your deceased.” Abraham called himself a stranger and a stranger, and they looked at him as a powerful prince who had once rendered good services on the battlefield, had a strong caravan, owned great wealth and was highly revered by everyone; they expressed a desire to accept such a person into communication with them and bind him to themselves with the bonds of common burial rights. But this was far from meeting the wishes of the father of the believers. He could not mar his pure worship with the idolatrous sacrificial ceremonies of the Canaanites; if he broke all ties with his former family and sought a new residence far from Harran and the house of his fathers, then he had to have a tomb for himself, regardless of the inhabitants alien to him, secured from pagan invasion. The place he chose belonged to Ephron or Ephraim, as I. Flavius ​​calls him, the son of Tzakharov, and Abraham, politely bowing to the inhabitants of the land, asked for their good services in persuading the owner of the cave to sell it for a decent sum. Ephron, having heard this request, immediately, with the usual Eastern courtesy, which nevertheless presupposed the possibility of bargaining, offered to make a gift from the cave to Abraham. “And Ephron the Hittite answered Abraham in the hearing of the children of Heth, all who entered into the gates of his city, and said: 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 my people I give it to you, bury your dead.” But Abraham did not want to accept the caves as a gift. All this land was promised to him by God; he did not want to receive an inch of it from human hands, and therefore insisted on purchasing it. No one was to say that he was enriched by gifts received from the pagans. As a result, bargaining began; the desired place was sold for 400 shekels of silver, “which is what merchants buy.” “Such is the price of land,” says Ephron; but what is this for me and for you? Bury your dead." Such an insignificant amount, as he would say, means nothing to us, as rich people. In every Oriental bazaar one can daily hear similar transactions concluded in similar words and accompanied by similar signs of mutual respect and courtesy. This entire story is highly consistent with reality and serves as new proof of the immutability of Eastern customs. One cannot help but be amazed at the care with which the agreement was concluded in this case. The entire narrative of the cave purchase reads like an extract from a legal document. One can of course doubt whether these terms were actually written down; but these conditions, in any case, were stated before witnesses, and thus the contract became valid. And nowadays, such transactions between local fellahim are not always made in writing, but the statement before witnesses is considered as binding as if the contracting parties had sealed the document with their signatures and seals. The purchase of the cave of Machpelah is defined in this ancient document: “And the field of Ephron, which is by Machpelah, opposite Mamre, the field and the cave that is in it, and all the trees that are in the field, throughout all the borders around it, became the possession of Abraham, in the sight of the children of Heth, all who entered into the gates of his city” (Gen. 23:17, 18). The amount paid for the cave is about 320 rubles in our money, although it is not known what kind of shekels are meant here. There is no mention of minted coin in the Bible until the Babylonian captivity, and the earliest existing Jewish coins were minted by Simon Maccabee in 140 BC. The Egyptians in the most ancient times had coins in the form of rings, but these rings were not of uniform value and, as a means of exchange, were always weighed. The Babylonians and Assyrians, as the monuments show, weighed their uncoined money for any private payment. The inhabitants of Canaan, especially the coastal areas, were distinguished by commercial enterprise and were accustomed to trade transactions in which goods were given in exchange for a certain amount of one of the precious metals. The current trade coin mentioned here could be simple bars of silver with a weight marked on them, or simple pieces of any volume or shape, which were weighed to determine the required amount. Having made this purchase and secured eternal possession of the cave and the surrounding field, Abraham, who was now 137 years old, buried the body of his beloved Sarah in the cave of Machpelah. This tomb is now within the enclosure of the great mosque called Gareth el-Garam, which also contains the tombs of the great patriarch himself, Isaac and Rebecca, Jacob and Leah. The outer walls of this enclosure are a quadrangle measuring 197 feet in length and 111 feet in width, with buttresses at the four corners and in the intervening spaces. Some of the stones composing this wall are up to 24 feet 8 inches long and up to 3 feet 8 inches high, and show traces of the same century and the same construction as the Haram in Jerusalem. The wall itself is over 7 feet thick and about 40 feet high. The only entrance to the fence is the steps and door in the eastern wall. The mosque, which contains large remains from a Christian church, occupies the southern part of the enclosure, and three of its outer walls are formed by ancient ramparts. In terms of volume, it is about 70 feet long and 93 feet wide. Since the occupation of Palestine by the worshipers of Mohammed, its interior was closed to Christians until relatively recently, and information regarding its contents was at first very scarce and insufficient. Very little was known about it except what could be borrowed from the writings of the ancient authors Arculf and Benjamin of Tudela, as well as from the description of the journey of a Spaniard who, having converted to Islam and the name Ali Beg, inspected and described this building in 1807. But lately a new era has opened, and three times the long-guarded secrets of the Haram have been revealed to royal eyes. In 1862, the Prince of Wales with his retinue, which, among others, included the famous Dean Stanley, in 1869, the Crown Princess of Prussia, and then five years ago, the two sons of the Prince of Wales received permission, according to the Sultan's firman, to inspect this mosque, and the results of this inspection have now become the property of the world. From these descriptions we now know many things that in the past we only guessed about or had only a vague idea of. The interior of the building is divided into three aisles of unequal size, the southern one, furthest from the entrance, being the narrowest, being only about 15 feet, while the others are from 25 to 30 feet. On the floor of the mosque and adjacent buildings there are six large tombs, which do not represent the tombs of the persons whose names they bear, but apparently stand vertically above their graves. Each of them is located inside a separate chapel, closed with bronze doors, and all of them are richly decorated with silk curtains, and expensive fabric canopies hang over them. The tombs of Abraham and Sarah stand in octagonal chapels in a double porch in front of the doors; the tombs of Isaac and Rebekah are located inside the building itself, and the tombs of Jacob and Leah are located in special rooms near the northern end of the Haram. But these tombs are of relatively little interest. The most important attraction is the great cave under the floor of the fence, and it is in it that the tombs of the patriarchs and their wives are contained. This cave, which is in reality the Cave of Machpelah, has never been penetrated by the Christian eye, at least in modern times, and no Christian foot has ever entered it. No Sultan’s firman can allow the invasion of “infidels” into this place, which is sacred to Muslims. All that has been discovered and known so far is this: the tomb itself, located under the floor of the mosque, consists of two rooms. There are only three entrances to it, which now never open and one cannot penetrate through them except by tearing apart special floorings, which would be considered a great sacrilege on the part of the Muslim guards. One entrance is sealed with stone slabs held together with iron, and ends with a small dome supported by four thin columns. This entrance probably led to the western cave, where, or in the inner cave, according to assumptions, the remains of the patriarchs lie. The entrance to the eastern cave is slightly northeast of that just mentioned and is also closed by the materials that make up the floor of the church. The third hole is located near the western wall of the building and differs from the others in that it is like a pillar rising above the floor and enclosed by a stone, like a native well. The hole in this rock cover is about a foot in diameter at the beginning, but becomes wider at the bottom and is probably of sufficient size to lower a man there by rope. When the English princes last visited this mosque, a lamp was lowered there, thanks to which it was partly possible to see the lower part of this room. It is about 12 feet square, and its floor is 15 feet below the ceiling; but whether its walls consisted of solid rock, it was not possible to verify this, since they were covered with lime. On the southeast side there is a square door, which, apparently, served as the only visible access to this room, and it, apparently, originally led to the cave itself, for which this room served as a hallway. According to the newest researcher, this cave probably resembles many of the rock-cut caves of Palestine, has a carefully carved square entrance hall and two internal burial chambers, access to which in later times was made through the roof. It is possible, however, that the hallway is a later addition and partly represents stone work. According to another researcher (Wilson), the original entrance was opposite the door to this room and now it is closed by the wall of the building known as Joseph’s tomb, which was erected at the end of the 14th century AD. 168 The only visitor to this cave who left a more or less reliable story about his exploration is the above-mentioned Benjamin of Tudela, who, during the occupation of the Holy Land by Christians in 1163 AD. I looked around this entire building. He writes that the pagans erected six tombs there, which, as Christian pilgrims are usually told, are the tombs of three patriarchs and their wives. But the Jews, for paying additional money, are allowed to undergo further inspection. Equipped with a lighted candle, they pass through the iron door into the first cave, which is empty; they pass the second, also empty, and finally reach the third, which contains six tombs, namely the tombs of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and then Sarah, Rebecca and Leah, one opposite the other. On all of them there are inscriptions in Hebrew letters like this: “this is the tomb of Abraham our father”; “Peace be upon him” (these inscriptions are probably not of great antiquity). In the inner cave a lamp is constantly burning day and night, and there are many special chests filled with the bones of the Israelites, brought by their pious friends for burial in this sacred place. All this information may be conveyed by the author only by hearsay, but, in the absence of other information, it is not without some interest. For six or seven centuries, no Christians entered this cave. When the latest curiosity is satisfied, it is not at all incredible that, even if the remains of the five other bodies buried there are not found, the embalmed mummy of Jacob may still exist in a state of the same perfect integrity as the mummy of any pharaoh in Egypt of the same or even greater antiquity. Was not this concern for the preservation of the earthly remains of the dead prompted by faith in the resurrection of the body? There can be no doubt that Abraham believed in an afterlife. The apostle testifies that no temporal promises satisfied the aspirations of the ancient patriarchs; they were looking for a city whose foundations had been laid by God; they strived for the best, i.e. to the heavenly fatherland; they expected a heavenly reward for themselves. The legend about the taking of Enoch to heaven was successively passed from Shem to his descendants. The story of Abel's death should have served as an important lesson in this regard. God would never allow a man who acts and lives according to His will to suffer a cruel death, and a murderer to enjoy life and prosperity, if body and soul did not find special rewards in the hereafter. No reflective person could think that such an unusual relationship with God, which was the great advantage of Abraham, could be limited to this short earthly life. Frequently repeated expressions about “going to one’s fathers”, about “being added to one’s people” show faith in the eternal existence of the soul, and do not only mean that the mortal body was intended for the common grave of the ancestors; because Abraham, about whom the last phrase was used (Gen. 25:8), was buried far from his homeland in the cave of Machpelah, where there was no one except his wife Sarah. And although this very expression can be attributed to Moses, we have no reason to think that he had any special revelation regarding the future life, which was not given to his great ancestor. In Egypt, Abraham found a people immersed in idolatry and yet believing in an afterlife where souls were judged and received reward or punishment. There he saw that respect for the dead body, which led to its careful embalming and to the care to forever preserve the appearance of a person, arising from the opinion that this dead form would one day again receive a vital spark. Abraham could not be lower than the Egyptians in his concept of the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body. That teaching which the Jews in later times held without any further revelation was also held by the patriarchs. When the Savior, as proof of the immortality of the soul and the resurrection of the body, pointed to the fact that God calls Himself the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, He gave an argument that was completely in agreement with the Jewish view; He pointed to the truth that St. Scripture, namely, that the souls of the faithful continued to live with God after death and that He would thus restore them in due time to their former personality. Man is not only one soul or one body; he is body and soul united into one person; if God is the God of Abraham and the long-dead patriarchs, then He is the God of their entire being, which must await restoration to its full state. Abraham completely trusted in the omnipotence of God, and when he laid his son on the altar, he thereby showed that the Lord, in whom he trusted, could raise from the dead. In a word, by placing the body of his beloved wife in the cave of Machpelah, Abraham entrusted her soul to God and hoped for a joyful resurrection. Chapter 19. The last days of Abraham's life The loss in Abraham's family caused by Sarah's death was not soon made up for. Her son's loving and tender heart deeply felt the loss of his necessary mother, and for three years Isaac mourned her deeply, remembering her maternal virtues. Seeing this, Abraham found it timely to arouse new feelings in his son. Isaac at this time was already forty years old, but he had not yet thought about marriage and did not reflect on how the great promise given to his father’s seed would be fulfilled. Abraham, however, did not forget about this, and he began to worry about how and where to find him a suitable wife for his beloved heir. In his opinion, the choice was very limited. His son could not enter into an alliance with any of the idolatrous tribes around him; religious reasons prohibited any such contact, but at the same time the memory of his homeland and his tribe disposed him to look for a bride for his son in some branch of his own kinship. Kinship ties are still maintained among desert nomads by mutual marriages of blood relatives. Abraham had some information about the relatives he left in Harran; his brother Nahor had twelve sons, and one of these sons, Bethuel, had a daughter named Rebekah. Remembering this family, still living in their homeland, Abraham decided to look for a wife for his son in this particular country. For this purpose, he sent his faithful servant Eliezer there, and the result of this was Isaac’s marriage to Rebekah, with whom he “was comforted in his sorrow for Sarah his mother.” But now the time approached, as it approaches everyone, saints or sinners, kings or villagers, when the great patriarch had to be recalled to that invisible world, where his beloved wife had already gone and in the existence of which he believed unshakably. But during this time, another event took place that has long confused interpreters and presents significant difficulties. After the story of Isaac’s marriage, the sacred writer of everyday life says: “And Abraham took another wife, named Keturah” (Gen. 25:1). The word used here to designate wife (isha) is in other places applied to concubine (as for example in Genesis 30:4, in relation to Bilhah, Jacob's concubine); and, indeed, Keturah is elsewhere expressly called Abraham's concubine (1 Chron. 1:32). As for the time of this event, it obviously took place after the death of Sarah. Otherwise, it is difficult to imagine that, on the one hand, Abraham could have acted this way despite his obvious aversion to such connections, just as he forgot the bitter experience of their sad results, and that, on the other hand, Sarah’s jealousy would not prevent him from entering into such an excessive relationship during her lifetime. The main argument against the opinion that Keturah became his secondary wife after the death of Sarah is drawn from his age at this time. At this time he was already 137 years old, and in view of this, they prove that it would be extremely incredible that a man whose body was almost dead when Isaac was born to him could, forty years after that, become the father of six sons (from Keturah) and live until the time when they grew up and acquired independent tents. But to this we can answer that Abraham’s youthful strength, miraculously restored to him before the birth of Isaac, remained in him until old age. AND. Josephus apparently believes that Abraham's second marriage took place before Isaac's marriage; Jewish tradition claims that it was after this event, from which came the rule that a widower should not remarry until he had settled his sons in life 169 . But in general, chronologically the question should be left unresolved. Likewise, the question regarding the nation to which Keturah belonged cannot be resolved with certainty. That she came from one of the neighboring Canaanite tribes seems highly improbable in view of the firm insistence which Abraham showed against such connections in the matter of his son's marriage. Most likely, she was the daughter of one of his household, as the Book of Jubilees states 170. From this union six sons were born, half less than the sons of Israel, and they became the ancestors of many Arab tribes living in the area between the Red Sea and the Persian Gulf, or, as one Jewish legend testifies, from Pharmon (Paran) to the gates of Babylon. To these sons of Keturah and Hagar, the sons of his concubines, as they were called (25:6), Abraham made gifts; but, taught by previous experience and wishing to eliminate any possibility of disputes with his actual heir, he, during his lifetime, sent them from his place of residence to the east, to a country where they became known as the “sons of the East” (Judges 6:3) and in later times received the name “Saracens,” which has the same meaning. The latest research has made it clear that the Midianite tribes and settlements of northern Arabia belonged to the Aramaic branch of the Semitic family. Perhaps in them one cannot see those tribes that descended from Keturah and her six sons, but the latest discoveries have proven that tribes of Aramaic origin occupied this country between Petra and Mecca even until the 3rd or 4th century of the Christian era. I. Flavius ​​says that, at the direction of Abraham, these six sons went and settled in the country of the troglodytes and in happy Arabia, settling to the shores of the Red Sea. Zimran, the eldest of the sons, perhaps gave his name to Zavran, the main city, according to Ptolemy, of the Cynedocolpitians, who lived west of Mecca on the shores of the Red Sea. According to Ewald, this name is reproduced under the form of Zimvria in Jerem. 25:25. Iokshan, the second son, if his name, as some believe, changed into Kashan, may have been the ancestor of the Kasanites, who lived below the mentioned people. The Medanites and Midianites were the tribe best known among the descendants of Keturah (from her third and fourth sons Medan and Midian). They inhabited part of the Sinai Peninsula, as well as the area east of the Jordan in the vicinity of the Moabites. They at one time became a very powerful people and stood at the head of the shepherd tribes of Arabia. In St. There are many tales in Scripture about their clashes with the Israelites. Conducting extensive trade with Syria and Egypt, they were sometimes called Ishmaelites, a general name for the merchants of the desert, as they are called in the story of the sale of Joseph (Gen. 37:25, 28). From their family Moses took a wife when, after fleeing Egypt, he sought refuge in the Sinai Peninsula, and he thus entered into contact with the descendants of his great ancestor, although this did not thereby secure their friendship, as subsequent sad events proved. Researchers find traces of the possessions of Ishbak, the fifth son of Keturah, in the castle of Shobeki, famous in the Middle Ages, which stands on a hill, the so-called “Royal Mountain”, 18 versts north of Petra. According to others, his name finds an echo in the name of the Sabak Valley in the northeastern part of Najd, an Arabian upland on the border of the great desert. The name of the youngest son of Shuah was found in the country known in the inscriptions as Suhu, lying on the right bank of the Euphrates between the mouths of Valik and Chebar. One of Job's friends, Bildad, is called a Sabean and probably came from this area (Job 2:11; 8:1). The mention here of Sheba and Dedan as the sons of Jokshan, while in 10:7 they are mentioned among the descendants of Cush and the sons of Raamah, apparently indicates some local or marital connection between the Semitic and Hamitic tribes, which led to the adoption of the names of those with whom they entered into marriage or generally close relationships. But then the last hour of Abraham’s life came. He lived 175 years, and 100 of them were spent entirely in the land of Canaan, with the exception of a short stay in Egypt. He arranged all his everyday affairs; having richly endowed his other sons, he transferred all his possessions to Isaac. Freed from worldly worries and being at peace with God, he was ready to leave this vale to be with his Lord forever. One tale tells 171 how his son Isaac sacrificed on the family altar in community with Ishmael, who was called to his father's deathbed, and sent the best of the sacrifices and the firstfruits to the patriarch to eat and bless him before his death. At this time, Abraham already had two grandsons: Esau and Jacob, and he, calling Jacob to him, kissed him, heartily blessed this dear grandson of his, taught him several great lessons of piety and took him into his arms, where the boy fell deeply asleep. Waking up, Jacob found his grandfather lying next to him, already lifeless. Thus ended this sacred life; So this great saint gave up his spirit and died, “died in a good old age, aged and full of life, and was gathered to his people,” - he joined the society of those believing departed brethren for whom God had prepared a heavenly dwelling (Heb. 11:6). Reconciled by this great sorrow, Isaac and Ishmael paid tribute to their deceased father and reverently laid his body next to the remains of their mother in the cave of Machpelah. One can get some idea of ​​the burial rite itself from how burials are still performed in the east. Describing the funeral ceremonies of one noble sheikh, the latest researcher 172 says that at this burial there was a large gathering of people, constantly increasing from the arrival of delegates from the surrounding areas. Weeping men and women occupied separate places in the cemetery. The women formed three concentric circles. The outer circle consisted of older women who sat on the ground and took little part in the rituals. The next circle consisted of younger women, dressed in long blue robes, with striped scarves on their heads, and each of them had in her hand a white or green scarf, which they waved in the air, walking around and singing a monotonous hymn in praise of the deceased chief, or at times screaming and screaming in feigned frenzy. The inner circle consisted of young girls who, clasping their hands, spun in a circle. All these women from time to time began to sing a lamentable song, and some, in apparent excitement, broke out of their circle and rushed to the grave of the sheikh with wild and frantic screams. The men sat at a distance and were less vocal about their grief, and their grief was mostly limited to bursts of screaming as each new crowd of friends approached the cemetery. At the sight of any such crowd, they all got up and went to meet them, joining their screams with the screams of the newcomers, until they, in turn, sat down calmly with them. Similar cries may have accompanied the burial of the great, according to the general opinion of the Canaanites, prince Abraham. Isaac invited all his father's old servants to the burial; Ishmael brought with him his wild companions and allies. Entire crowds of friends from the Canaanite and Hittite tribes hurried to pay their last tribute to the wanderer who had lived among them for so long, and thus, amid strong, partly real, and at the same time feigned grief, the body of the patriarch Abraham was placed in a cave, where it rests to this day, protected by the reverence and awe of the population. The memory of Abraham is still preserved among the Arabs, who call him El-Khalil, that is, “friend of God.” Around Hebron and the places closest to it, this name completely supplanted even his own name. So his well is called the well of El-Khalil; the large enclosure erected around the site of Abraham's tent is known as Haram Rumet Khalil. And what name could best define the character of the patriarch and indicate his rights to our deepest respect? Friend of God! This title was not given to him by the blind idolization of people, but originates from divinely inspired lips and is confirmed by the testimony of the apostle 173. To be a “friend of God,” a person had to receive special gifts of grace and had to be especially suited to the divine calling. And that’s exactly what Abraham was. God did not force his will. There must be something in the recipient of the divine calling that corresponds to it; a place must be prepared in advance for the calling, an ear for hearing, a heart for perceiving it; otherwise all the merciful intentions of God would be in vain. God saw in the Blessed Virgin something that would make her fit to become the mother of the incarnate Word. He saw how capable the soul of Abraham was of accepting the divine calling; He saw how open his heart was to receive the love and goodness of God. He knew how well Abraham would use the light and knowledge that had become his property. Hence He found it opportune to reveal His will to this faithful servant, and to make him the agent of a blessing which was to extend to the ends of the earth and to all eternity. We have seen how Abraham responded to this call. His trembling imperfect faith was strengthened by him; a new light shone in his soul; each new revelation clarified to him more and more the essence of the Divine; every test of him, increasing his knowledge, at the same time ignited love and hope in him. What was the peculiarity of his personal character? One of his main features was undoubtedly piety, constant awareness of the co-presence of the invisible God, love and respect for the Almighty and active dedication in serving Him. Wherever he traveled, wherever he stopped, his first concern was to erect an altar, to designate a special place for worship. Shechem, Hebron, Bathsheba - all these main places of his wanderings became at the same time monuments of his reverence and love. Wherever he erected his temporary dwelling, there he also erected a sanctuary, and the God whom he worshiped was not for him an unapproachable God, distant from him, alien to human affairs, He was for him a personal, tender father who entered into a close covenant with his family, was a leader and adviser, a merciful guardian of all who do His will and a righteous Judge for the disobedient. In every circumstance of his life, Abraham turned to God as a father and friend, and found in Him help for himself in every need. In this sacred relationship he felt not slavish fear, but rather reverent joy. He approached the throne of grace as a Christian approaches who knows that he will be heard, being "accepted in the Beloved." With what zeal he interceded for the criminal Sodom, relying on the unconditional impartiality of God and on His condescension towards him! With what boundless trust in the Provider he sent his steward to find a bride for Isaac! His whole life passed before the eyes of God; he walked with the Lord and strived for perfection. And then, how unproud he was, and how caring about others! He waived his personal rights in favor of his disgruntled nephew; retreated from his own habits and peaceful mood, just to deliver the same nephew from the hands of Chedorlaomer, and then did not want to enrich himself even by accepting that part of the booty that was rightfully his. Self-denial was the dominant rule of his life. He didn't have the slightest petty pride; he was always humble and meek in heart. He immediately recognized the supremacy of the High Priest of the Most High God over himself, gave him a tithe and humbly accepted his blessing; he humbly bowed before the people of the country promised to him when he bought a burial place from them. Upright and strict in his ideas of honesty and justice, he paid the high price demanded for the possession of the Cave of Machpelah, without any dispute or regret. The inner nobility of his character manifested itself on every occasion. No low passions influenced his actions and no low motives directed the course of his life. If in two cases he apparently committed deeds that did not fit the general level of his high character, then nevertheless, in these cases he did not fall in his own eyes, did not sin against his conscience and did not do anything contrary to the better consciousness within himself. Perhaps the very excess of his trust in providence forced him to twice expose his wife to danger in order to preserve his life and rely on God’s help for her deliverance. His whole being was imbued with love. What fatherly love is imbued with his fiery exclamation: “even if Ishmael were alive before You”! What depth of sorrow, but at the same time of hope, lies in his expression: “God will provide for Himself a lamb for a burnt offering, my son!” How much delight and tenderness he showed when, in response to the assurance of the birth of a son and heir, he fell on his face and laughed! Throughout his life he was a sincere, zealous, pure man and acted from the fullness of his heart. But he appears before us mainly as an example of faith, an example of a man who believed the word of God and acted entirely on the basis of this faith. Faith embodied in action is the main key to his life. By a simple word from God, he left everything and followed His leading. Fertile and abundant lands, a luxurious, civilized and rich city, an influential position, wealth, honor, friends, the tombs of their fathers, a homeland - all this was left to them when he heard the calling of God; all tender ties were severed by him as soon as he heard a voice commanding him to leave here. When all hope seemed impossible, he still believed in the promise of his son; Ishmael, who first made him know what parental love meant, who first called him father, was humbly sent by him into the wilderness in obedience to the divine command, so that his own heir might grow up without a rival and away from all harmful influences; the son of his love, in whom all his hopes were concentrated, on whom all his great and glorious future depended, was abandoned by him without the slightest contradiction. Not a single inch of land had yet belonged to him in all Canaan, and yet he fully believed in the promise that all this land would be an inheritance to his descendants; and in this hope, he decisively and forever left his native country and even forced his faithful servant Eliezer to swear that he would never take his son Isaac there. Such was his faith, not accidental, temporary, uncertain, but revealing complete self-denial and obedience. Truly he was the father of believers. He never had any doubts about the words and promises of God, even if their fulfillment seemed completely impossible to the human mind. “By faith,” says the apostle, “Abraham, being tempted, sacrificed Isaac, his only son, from whom all the descendants promised to him were to come. For he thought that God was able even to raise from the dead” (Heb. 11:17–19). The expression that he “believed in the Lord”, i.e., has never been applied to anyone with such force. I completely trusted in Him, calming my spirit in this faith, like a child resting in the arms of its mother. And it is not surprising that such faith was imputed to him as righteousness, because it constituted the main source from which righteousness can arise. “Abraham obeyed the voice of the Lord, kept His commandments, statutes and laws” (Gen. 26:5). Hence, he will forever remain the highest example of a believer. From his example people of all nations and centuries can draw inspiration from the holy feelings of faith, hope and love. It is not for nothing that his memory is sacredly revered by the peoples of the three greatest religions of the world: Judaism, Christianity and Islam. – But despite all the greatness of his faith and hope, one can say about him the same thing that has been said about many other righteous people like him: “all these died in faith, not receiving the promises; but only they saw them from afar, and rejoiced, and said about themselves that they were strangers and strangers on earth” (Heb. 11:13). Chapter 20. Isaac and his sons All the great wealth of spiritual and material goods that Abraham possessed passed from him to his only true heir, Isaac. And he, as the direct successor of the great patriarch, concentrates in his personality the entire further course of Old Testament history, distinguished in its course by the same providential actions on the part of God that distinguished the life of Abraham. As the bearer and heir of the best promises, Isaac had to be as alienated from the surrounding pagan world as Abraham was. Abraham himself was fully aware of this, and therefore, during his lifetime, he took all measures to preserve this spiritual identity of Isaac. In the soul of Abraham there had long been a firmly established conviction in two respects: namely, that Isaac should in no case take a wife from among the surrounding Canaanites, should not enter into relations with those who were subsequently to be dispossessed of the land they occupied, and on the other hand, that Jehovah, who had so often shown Himself to be a faithful God, out of obedience to whom he now refused what might have seemed a highly profitable relationship, would Himself find a suitable life partner for Isaac. These two convictions decided Abraham's further course of action, and he, as is already known, three years after the death of Sarah began to fulfill the first of his desires, namely regarding the decent marriage of Isaac. Some time before (Gen. 22:20), Abraham received news that his brother Nahor, whom he left in Haran, was blessed with numerous offspring. This is where the patriarch directed his gaze, entrusting the execution of this task to the eldest slave in the house, the manager of all his possessions, the invisible Eliezer of Damascus, who at one time was considered even the involuntary heir of Abraham and only with the birth of a real son-heir took the position of manager in the house. Having called him to himself and taken two promises from him, firstly, that he would take a wife for Isaac from the patriarch’s own kinship, and not from the Canaanites, and secondly, that he would not take his son back to the land from where God had called Abraham himself, the patriarch entrusted him with the important task of arranging this marriage. Abraham's first desire was caused by the need to protect the holy seed free from desecration by foreign blood and connection with idolatrous tribes, as well as by the desire of his father that Isaac should have for his wife a person who fears God; the second condition was made in due accordance with his faith in the promise of God to give Canaan to him as an inheritance, as well as with the obedience that prompted him to leave his own country forever and seek a home in his future possessions. It is not for nothing that the apostle, speaking about the patriarchs, declares: “and if they had in their thoughts the fatherland from which they came, they would have time to return. But they sought what was better, that is, what was heavenly” (Heb. 11:15–16). How much Abraham was aware of the peculiarity of his position is difficult to decide; but it may be reasonably thought that his faith carried his thought far beyond the limits of material possessions into the invisible world, causing him to believe that the great promise could not find its complete consummation in an earthly state or temporal blessings, and therefore he looked forward to a heavenly kingdom and eternal bliss. The cautious steward, before accepting the task of fulfilling his master's desire, asked what he should do if the woman he chose as Isaac's wife refused to accompany him on his long journey. Abraham answered him to this that he demanded that he act as soon as it was better, and that if the girl did not agree to the proposal, then he could return and consider his work completed; but whatever happens, he must never take Isaac back to the land of his fathers. On these terms Eliezer made his solemn promise. In this important matter, Abraham did not consider himself entitled to be satisfied with the simple promise of his steward, but sealed his promise with an oath. The ritual used in this case is extremely unique and is found only once more, at the time when Jacob took an oath from Joseph to bury him in the land of Canaan in the same tomb with his fathers (Gen. 47:29). The steward had to put his hand under Abraham’s shoulder and swear by the Lord, the God of heaven and the God of earth, and the patriarch called Jehovah this way in order to make Him more accessible to the steward’s mind than the usual covenant name. What the action that accompanied this oath actually meant is unknown with certainty. Some believe that it was a type of oath, taken only by inferiors, and expressing a kind of respect and subordination; but according to a more likely explanation, this ritual means that since the stegno was considered a symbol of posterity, the person who took such an oath swore by the offspring, attracted him as a witness to the concluded condition and as an avenger for perjury if the obligation assumed was violated. Thus, Eliezer swore by the descendants of his master and by those generations that were to arise from him, swore to be a faithful executor of the obligation he had assumed and to fulfill the assignment given to him with all diligence. Great preparations were made to carry out the embassy. Abraham, as a strong ruling prince, had all the means at his disposal and felt confident that his desire would be fulfilled. He told Eliezer that the Lord would “send his angel before him,” and gave him full permission to take with him everything that was needed for such an enterprise, so that it could be carried out without any obstacles. As a result, a large caravan was equipped, consisting of ten camels, loaded with expensive gifts for the bride and provisions for the journey. And so, the steward set off on a journey - either along the same road that Abraham himself arrived in Canaan sixty-five years ago, or through a shorter and more direct route through the heights of Gilead, through Abran, past Tadmor. This path led directly to the city of Nahor, to the two-river Aram, called Mesopotamia in Greek and Latin translations, but did not include the entire country that was called that in subsequent times, but only that which was located between the Euphrates and Khobar. In this area lay the city of Haran, where Nahor lived with his family. Arriving at the outskirts of the city, Eliezer stopped in the evening at one of the wells and, forcing his camels to kneel, began to unload them and remove all the weights from them. This was the time when the women of the city usually came to the well for fresh water. As a man who had learned the example of piety in the house of his great master, Eliezer turned to the Lord, the God of his master, with prayer for the success of the work. “Lord, God of my master Abraham,” he prayed: “send her today to meet me, and show mercy to my master Abraham”; and then he asked that the woman whom he was destined to choose would come to the well to draw water, and be indicated to him by some special sign of his own choice. The sign by which he would like to judge the bride destined for Isaac was supposed to show the girl’s spiritual disposition. “Behold,” he said, “I stand at the source of water, and the daughters of the inhabitants of the city come out to draw water; and the girl to whom I will say: tilt your pitcher, I will drink; and whoever says to me, Drink, I will also give your camels drink until they drink, this is the one you appointed for your servant Isaac; and therefore I know that You show kindness to my lord Abraham.” If this test was suggested to him by a simple consideration of common sense, then it should have served as an indication of the attentiveness and courtesy of a girl who would fit this sign. But it is possible that it was inspired from above by that Angel, in whose presence Abraham assured him during the journey. God gave such signs at various times as confirmation of His presence and providence 174 . The test was justified in the present case. Among the women who came to the well to draw water was Rebekah, the daughter of Bethuel the son of Nahor. She came here with a pitcher on her shoulder, just as Hagar once went with a pitcher or a skin on her shoulder when she was exiled into the desert. She was “a beautiful looking maiden, a maiden whom her husband did not know.” Eliezer involuntarily drew attention to her and asked her for water to drink, and when she turned out to be so helpful that she not only gave him something to drink, but also tried to draw water for his camels, then after that he could no longer lose sight of her: her physical beauty and spiritual kindness riveted him to her. Seeing in this a complete correspondence to the sign he had assumed, Elgezer immediately saw that this was the destined bride for Isaac. He immediately gave Rebekah a gold earring weighing half a shekel, and two bracelets for her hands worth ten shekels of gold. When asked whose daughter she was and whether they had a place to stay for the night, Eliezer received an answer from the kind girl, surprised and delighted with the gift, that they “had a lot of straw and feed, and a place to sleep.” Since the gifts she received were those that were usually given during marriage proposals, Rebekah immediately guessed about the upcoming proposal, ran to her mother and told her about everything that had happened. Her brother Laban, a selfish and greedy man, seeing the jewels given to his sister by a stranger, and hoping to obtain some special benefits for his family, immediately hurried to Eliezer at the well and persistently offered hospitality. The latter immediately agreed and went to the Nakhor house, where he was immediately offered a treat. But Eliezer, caring most of all about the fulfillment of the obligation he had assumed, immediately declared the purpose of his arrival, told who he was, namely, that he was the servant of Abraham, the brother of Nahor, and his master sent him here with the goal of finding a bride for his son and heir among his own relatives. He also spoke about how he asked for special instructions from God and how the sign he chose for this purpose turned out to be completely consistent with the actions of Rebekah. To remove the possibility of any supposition that the son of Abraham might be too old to be a suitor for his brother's granddaughter, Eliezer explained how he was born already in his mother's advanced years, and then, forgetting his own weariness and with some suspicion of Laban, he expanded on the fact that Isaac was the only heir to all the great dominions of his father, and demanded an immediate answer to his question whether they would agree to let Rebekah go as a bride. for Isaac. The girl’s parents and her brother Laban, who took a special part in her, seeing the seriousness of the slave’s assignment, as well as the wealth of his master, who spared nothing for his favorite son, agreed to the proposal. “This work has come from the Lord,” they said; “we cannot tell you in spite of either bad or good.” “Behold Rebekah is before you,” they added, “take her and go; let her be the wife of your master’s son, as the Lord has said.” All this presents an eminently true picture of ancient Eastern customs. The father has the duty and right to choose a wife for his son and to make the necessary proposals to the parents of the girl, and when the proposal is accepted, the consent of the bride is considered decided, since her opinion is not always considered necessary. Isaac himself apparently took no part in the present matter. Strict instructions to the steward regarding his behavior in the event of Abraham's death show that Isaac, with his compliant, humble character, needed a firm leader. He, of course, should have known about the purpose of Eliezer’s journey, but he willingly left all the execution of this task to his father. When the consent of the father and brother was obtained, then according to custom it was necessary that the bride's parents be given some reward and gifts offered to her relatives. These gifts were, as it were, a payment to the parents to compensate them for the loss of their daughter’s services and to reimburse them for the cost of her upbringing. Not only did the bride not bring any dowry with her when entering her husband's house, but the latter had to pay a certain price for her and, in fact, buy her from her rightful owners. In accordance with this custom, Eliezer took out his treasures and, in the name of Isaac, presented Rebekah with various jewelry made of gold and silver, expensive clothes, and also presented her mother and brother. Having thus sealed the alliance and considering the gifts made as good payment for such a beautiful bride, he was pleased with everything that had happened, because, in the words of the Wise One, “who can find a virtuous wife? Its price is above pearls” (Proverbs 31:10). Having happily concluded the condition, the steward finally allowed himself to satisfy the needs of his body and began to eat and drink in the hospitable house of his master's relatives. But he could not hesitate for long and hurried back. He knew how Abraham counted the days of his absence and expected news of the success of the fulfillment of the assignment given to him. The very success of his business forced him to hurry back with the good news. The next morning he turned to Rebekah’s parents with a request: “Let me go, (and I will go) to my lord.” In vain her parents asked him to stay with them for at least ten days; he was in an impatient hurry, and in order to finally settle the matter, they asked Rebekah if she intended to set off now. Rebekah gave her consent, expressing her readiness to leave her father, mother, home and native country in order to follow the instructions of the hand of Providence, which directed her to Isaac. As a result, parents and relatives no longer opposed the immediate departure; They sent her away along with her nurse Deborah and several maids, giving her a parental blessing. “Our sister,” they said, “may thousands of thousands be born of you, and may your descendants possess the dwellings of your enemies.” In this whole matter, it is very remarkable that Rebekah’s father, Bethuel, stood in the background all the time, and her brother, Laban, took the main part in the matter. Bethuel played an equally insignificant role in the marriage of Jacob, in the narrative of which Laban is even called the son of Nahor (29:5). The prominent position occupied by the brother in the matter of disposing of his sister's hand was partly the result of polygamy, which usually weakened the father's love for the children of various wives and entrusted the care of daughters to their half-brothers. Thus, from subsequent history it is known that Simeon and Levi considered themselves obliged to avenge the honor of their half-sister Dinah by beating the inhabitants of Shechem (Gen. 34:25, 26); the same thing is shown by the story of Absalom, who killed Amnon for dishonoring his sister Tamar (2 Sam. 13:28); the brothers of the women of Shiloh came out with a complaint about the capture of the latter by the Benjamites, when the latter were in danger of extinction due to the lack of wives (Judges 21:22). All this may partly explain why it was Laban who occupied a prominent position in the matter of marrying off his sister. But the absence of the name Bethuel in the main points of this case is explained in another way. According to the testimony of I. Flavius, Rebekah declared to Eliezer that her father was no longer alive, which testimony, however, clearly contradicts the biblical text (24:50). Jewish tradition 175 states that he died the morning after the betrothal, having eaten some poisonous food at a feast the previous evening. According to another opinion, Bethuel suffered from some kind of weakness or mental inability, and therefore was not able to conduct such an important business or take part in family circumstances. Whatever the reason for his father’s secondary position, Laban was the main manager in the whole matter, and his character, as he especially became clear later in his relationship with Jacob, revealed even here some traits of extreme selfishness and greed. In complete contrast to the selfish and half-unbeliever Laban stands the straightforward and faithful Eliezer. It was not for nothing that he lived with Abraham for a long time, and apparently learned from him true religion and trust in God. All members of the patriarch's household were kept in good morality and learned the fear of God. In all his behavior the steward reflects the piety, courtesy and faith of his master. He prayed to God about everything, asking for higher guidance, and relied entirely on the guiding Providence of God. The constant consciousness of the divine presence is the outstanding feature in the whole affair. And Eliezer's faith was completely justified. Almighty God took part in this human affair, deigned to answer the prayer of Abraham's faithful servant, and turned all that to the worldly mind into mere chance into a clear sign of His supreme direction. And so, the Eliezer caravan set off on its way back, carrying with it a jewel that was supposed to please both Abraham and Isaac more than all their material treasures. Meanwhile, when this caravan was quietly moving from distant Harran, Isaac calmly awaited the result of the embassy in the vicinity of Beersheba. He and his father now lived at the well of Lahai Roi, the same one where Hagar had once received instructions from above. One evening he went out onto the plain to pray and meditate - perhaps to meditate on all the acts of God in relation to his parents, so wonderful, comforting and foreshadowing a great future - to pray for the success of the assignment given to the slave, so important for him and for his family. While he was thinking about this, he noticed in the distance a caravan approaching from the north, and recognized his camels, on which Eliezer had gone to Haran a few weeks before. For her part, Rebekah, seeing him and recognizing who it was, was embarrassed and “took the veil and covered herself.” Since Eastern etiquette forbade women to ride in the presence of high, respected personalities 176 and obliged them to receive leaders and nobles standing on their feet, Rebekah jumped off her camel to the ground. History presents many examples of this. Naaman the Syrian descended from his chariot to meet the messenger from the prophet Elisha (2 Kings 5:21), and Abigail descended from her donkey to bow to David (1 Samuel 25:23). From classical history it is known how the father of the consul Fabius, wanting to test whether his son was sufficiently aware of the height of his dignity, rode out on horseback to meet him and was pleased when the lictor ordered him to dismount, since from this he made sure that filial love did not outweigh in his son the consciousness of his official position 177. The veil Rebecca made for herself is also in full agreement with Eastern customs. The bride should not appear uncovered before the groom in the first stage of the marriage ceremony. Laban later took advantage of this custom to deceive Jacob, substituting Leah for him instead of Rachel, since etiquette did not allow a husband to see his wife’s face until the marriage ceremony was completed (29:25). Isaac listened from Eliezer to a detailed account of everything that happened; heard about the higher leadership that led specifically to the election of Rebekah, learned about her kindness and modesty, faith and determination; he could see the beauty of her form, could imagine the beauty of her soul, and with tender love “he 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 in his sorrow for his mother Sarah.” The first years of Isaac's family life passed during the life of his elderly father, the patriarch. He was the sole heir of all the promises of Abraham, but he, like his father, had to be tested in his faith. His wife Rebekah had been childless for twenty years, and apparently the great line of Abraham was in danger of ending. Abraham's sincere desire to embrace the heir of his beloved son in his aged arms, before he himself went to rest in peace with his fathers, remained unfulfilled for a long time. Like his deceased wife Sarah, Rebekah was barren. Many other godly women learned from their long wait what a precious gift God is to children. So, Rachel waited for them for a long time and impatiently; Pious Anna also tearfully begged for children. Gentle Isaac showed no impatience at the failure of his hopes, and Rebecca, in his company, learned to expect every good thing from God and came to the conviction that the promised seed should be the fruit not of flesh and blood, but of grace. This was true in her own life as well. The experience that Sarah once resorted to in order to obtain at least a natural son, apparently never occurred to Isaac and his wife; in any case, they never actually resorted to it. They wanted to have a legitimate child and patiently waited for the time of his granting. When Isaac reached the age of sixty, he could no longer endure the sad picture, seeing how Rebekah silently mourned the absence of children, and he prayed to God to give them. He pleaded with the Lord for his wife's sake. As the head of the family and the priest of his house, he made a sacrifice, accompanying it with a prayer for the blessing of his marriage. And his prayer was answered. “And Rebekah his wife conceived.” Just before the birth, something unusual happened that alarmed Rebekah, but she was reassured by the revelation that she would give birth to two twin sons, “and two different nations would come out of her womb,” “one nation would become stronger than the other, and the older would serve the younger,” that is, that, contrary to the usual order, the firstborn would not have the right of birthright, with which all the great promises given to the offspring of Abraham were connected. This revelation sank deeply into Rebekah’s soul and served as a guide for her in her later life. Rebekah actually gave birth to two twins: “the first one came out, all red, like skin, shaggy, and they called his name Esau (shaggy). Then his brother came out, holding Esau’s heel with his hand, and his name was called Jacob” (i.e., holding the heel). The character of the twin brothers was consistent with this. When they grew up, “Esau became a man skilled in hunting, a man of the fields, but Jacob became a meek man, living in tents.” As often happens, parents were somewhat partial to their chosen favorites, and it is remarkable that the calm, meek Isaac loved the brave, courageous trapper more, while Rebekah especially loved the modest and gentle Jacob. The latter probably soon learned from his mother about the revelation she had received regarding the future fate of the brothers, and began to wait for an opportunity to claim his rights to the birthright. The opportunity soon presented itself. One day, Esau came home from scratch, tired, and, seeing that Jacob had cooked a dish from lentils, which are now a favorite dish in Syria and Egypt, 178 he began to persistently ask him to give him this “red” to eat. His hunger was so strong that when Jacob told him to sell him his birthright for this food, Esau did not even pay attention to Jacob’s offer and impatiently remarked: “Now I’m dying, what’s in this birthright?” Esau knew that with the birthright he was selling all his spiritual advantages and all rights to possess the promised land. But due to his wild and rude nature, he apparently did not attach any importance to the former, and as for the latter, perhaps he hoped to regain them with the help of his father’s favor and even direct violence against his meek brother, and thus, to satisfy his hunger, he sold his birthright for “red” lentils, which is why “he was given the name: Edom” (red). Already this event, which had a decisive significance in the lives of the brothers, clearly depicts their opposing characters. Esau appears to be straightforward and open, while Jacob is seen as cunning and base. But upon closer examination the matter appears differently. In Jacob there appears a man who, being endowed by nature with a more material character, struggles against his natural inclinations and ends in the complete triumph of the nobler sides of his character. Esau, on the other hand, as he grows older, more and more suppresses the good sides in himself and completely submits to bad inclinations. At first everything seems to be against Jacob. He outsmarts his brother, subsequently deceives his father, and displays cunning and underweight throughout his life. And yet, with all the visible shortcomings, his life, taken as a whole, stands much higher than the life of his brother. If Esau bribes in his favor first with his carefree straightforwardness, with his courage as a fearless hunter, with the willingness with which he, to please his father, went, armed with a bow and arrow, into the steppe after a wild antelope to bring his father fresh, beloved game; then, on the other hand, there is nothing in him that would show a deep moral nature capable of arousing spiritual sympathy. This was not a man of deep nature - a man who lived casually, did not care about higher interests, had no other goals than satisfying his pleasures or bodily needs, and even if he was capable of noble impulses, he was also capable of hot-tempered and malicious vindictiveness. Open, courageous and even generous at times, possessing in one word qualities from which a magnificent character could be developed, Esau, in the absence of depth in nature, gradually turns into a simple steppe dweller living by war and robbery. The tribe of Edomites descended from him, distinguished by rebellion, treachery and unbridledness, completely embodied all the worst qualities of their ancestor. Their dwellings in the strong gorges of Seir, a convenient place for unexpected raids on their neighbors or for protection from their vengeance, were themselves, compared with the tents of Jacob's caravan in the open country, a striking reflection of the characters of these two twin brothers. Jacob displays all the best and worst qualities of his people. If in the first half of his life there is a lot of low and unworthy things, then through it already passes that spiritual insight and that perseverance in achieving the goal, which alone can ensure lasting and noble results. In his sin against his brother and father in regard to the birthright, he achieved a high end by low means; he did bad things to achieve good things. The birthright, as containing the inheritance of divine promise, was apparently of little value to Esau. “He ate and drank, got up and walked; and Esau despised the birthright” (Gen. 25:34). With some patience, he certainly could have gotten food in his father's tent, without any such sacrifice; but the satisfaction of occasional hunger meant more to him than even the highest good in the future. For Jacob, on the other hand, the right that made it possible to pass on the great promise to his offspring, as a chosen race, was most precious. Despising the everyday work of life, Esau chose a restless and at the same time idle life in the desert; Jacob worked quietly at home, steadily striving towards his once-set goal. It is clear which side had more advantages and who rightfully belonged to the future. In their childhood, both sons of Isaac had the great advantage that their great grandfather Abraham, who died when they were no less than fifteen years old, also lived with them. But not one of them reproduced in himself the fullness of his great nature. In the first forty years of their lives, they had already developed into people of completely different characters. Esau was clearly turning into a wild nomad, into a Bedouin race, and Jacob gradually moved from a shepherd's life to an agricultural one, in this regard obviously following the example of his father Isaac. Vast fields and bountiful harvests became a common sight in the vicinity of Gerar and Beersheba, and strengthened in Jacob that love for the land, which he later proved by purchasing a plot of land for himself, which he handed over as an inheritance to his beloved son Joseph. Meanwhile, one of those hungry years began in the country, which had previously forced the patriarchs to move to neighboring, more fertile countries for food. Isaac decided to follow the example of his patriarch father and wanted to move to Egypt, but he was forbidden, and he spent a hungry year within the boundaries of the Philistine king Abimelech, where the same story that happened with Abraham was repeated with him and with Rebekah. Namely, he passed off Rebekah as his sister, but when the truth was revealed, Abimelech (probably the son of Abraham’s contemporary of the same name) showed him special patronage and respect. Thanks to this, Isaac was able to begin a settled life there and began farming. “And Isaac sowed in that land, and that year he received barley a hundredfold: so the Lord blessed him. And the man became great, and increased more and more until he became very great. He had herds of flocks and herds of cattle, and many arable fields.” But the Philistines soon became jealous of his wealth, began to oppress him, buried the wells dug by Abraham, and generally started quarrels, which finally forced Isaac to move from here to Bathsheba. There the Lord appeared to strengthen him, confirming His blessing and promise to him, and Isaac built an altar there and called on the name of the Lord. Seeing the rightness of Isaac and repenting of the unjust oppression against him, the Philistine king Abimelech came to him with an apology, and between them, at a feast made by Isaac, a sworn alliance was concluded, near the same well, near which their fathers (Bathsheba) once concluded their alliance. Isaac's quiet family life was soon outraged by the disobedience of his favorite son Esau, who, without the blessing of his parents, at the age of forty, married two Canaanite women, thus entering into kinship with idolaters. “And they were a burden to Isaac and Rebekah.” But soon he faced an even more difficult family test. As his old age approached, his eyesight weakened, and he found it opportune to perform a solemn blessing for the transmission of the promises associated with it to his posterity. According to established custom, he of course intended to transfer the birthright to Esau, as the eldest son, and told him to prepare, for this occasion, a meal from his own game. Esau hardly told him about the sale of his birthright, and Jacob, in turn, did not dare to openly express his claims to this right. It is not known whether Rebekah also knew about this, but only she, having heard about Isaac’s intention, decided to use cunning in order to use it to deliver the blessing of the birthright to her favorite Jacob. According to her advice, he had to put on his brother’s clothes, saturated with the smell of aromatic herbs and bushes, among which the trapper had to spend his life, and cover his body with a shaggy skin in order to be like his brother to the touch; Rebekah herself promised to prepare such a dish from domestic young animals that Isaac could hardly distinguish from the dish he expected from the game of Esau. Jacob hesitated, fearing a curse from his father if the deception was discovered; but Rebekah convinced him that she would even accept the curse. Jacob got down to business, but what trepidation did he feel when the elder father, surprised by Esau’s too quick return and the preparation of the food, called the one who had come for a blessing to him in order to verify by touch whether it was really Esau. The elder felt the shaggy cover on Jacob’s hands and remarked in bewilderment: “the voice, the voice of Jacob; and the hands, the hands of Esau.” But the smell of hunting clothes finally dispelled the doubts of the elderly patriarch; he ate the food, drank wine, ordered himself to be kissed, and then blessed Jacob with the blessing of the birthright: “May God give you from the dew of heaven and from the fatness of the earth and plenty of bread and wine. Let the nations serve you, and let the nations worship you; be lord over your brothers, and let your mother’s sons worship you; those who curse you are cursed; those who bless you are blessed!” But it is remarkable that in this blessing there is only a faint hint of the great promise to Abraham, namely, that in him and his seed all the nations of the earth would be blessed. Isaac, imagining that he was blessing Esau, apparently did not consider him fully worthy to inherit the fullness of the blessing, and thus Jacob and Rebekah did not quite achieve what they sought. As soon as the imaginary Esau, having received the blessing of the birthright, left, the real Esau appeared to receive it. If Jacob’s act was unseemly, then Esau’s actions are no less subject to censure, since he did not want to admit that he had long ago sold his birthright to his brother Jacob. When Isaac learned of the deception, he “trembled with great trembling,” but refused to take away this blessing. “I blessed him, he will be blessed,” said the alarmed patriarch. Esau raised a “loud and very bitter cry” and asked Isaac to bless him too. “Is it really, my father, that you have only one blessing? bless me too!” Esau begged with tears, and Isaac blessed him and said: “Behold, your livelihood will be from the fatness of the earth, and from the dew of heaven from above; and thou shalt live by thy sword, and shalt serve thy brother; The time will come when you will resist and cast off his yoke from your neck.” This blessing predicted the entire future fate of the descendants of Esau - the Edomites, who for a long time were subordinate to the descendants of Jacob - the Jews, but later even a king emerged from them who subjugated the latter (Herod the Great, an Edomite by origin). Having lost his birthright, Esau hated his brother Jacob and even planned to kill him as soon as his father died. Rebekah learned about this danger and, knowing Esau’s violent and indomitable temper, decided to send Jacob for some time to Mesopotamia to his brother Laban in Harran, until Esau’s rage subsided. But in order not to disturb her elderly husband, she did not speak about Esau’s bloodthirsty intention, but presented to him another reason for Jacob’s temporary departure from home, namely, so that he could marry someone from her family, which undoubtedly was at the same time the true desire of her heart. “I am not happy with life from the daughters of the Hittites (wives of Esau), she said; If Jacob takes a wife from the daughters of this land, then why should I live?” Isaac heeded her complaint and sent Jacob to Laban to find a wife for himself, but at the same time he deliberately repeated to him the blessing that he had previously given out of ignorance, and, moreover, aggravating it with the fullness of the promises given to Abraham. “God Almighty, he said, bless you, and may he make you fruitful, and may he multiply you, and may there be many nations from you, and may he give you the blessing of Abraham (my father), to you, and to your descendants with you, so that you may inherit the land of your wandering, which God gave to Abraham!” Thus, Isaac received his sight from spiritual blindness and gave his blessing to the most worthy, and Esau indulged more and more in sensuality and took himself a third wife, Mahalath, the daughter of Ishmael, concluding a family alliance with the one whom Abraham had expelled. Thus, Esau’s spiritual inability to bear the birthright was revealed in its entirety. After this event, Isaac lived for another forty-three years, but he no longer declared himself in history. And in general, he was one of those rare people whose whole life is boundless meekness, embodied humility and serene contentment. Being the patriarch of a large family, he nevertheless avoided everything that could make his position particularly visible, and thereby proved that with humility and meekness one can please God just as much as with a life filled with great deeds and difficult trials. Unquestioning obedience to the father, even to the sacrifice of life itself; tender affection for his mother, for whose loss he was consoled only by his marriage to Rebekah; unconditional devotion and fidelity to one's wife in an age when polygamy was common; patiently enduring domestic trials inflicted on him by his wife and sons; the inactivity of life itself, during which he never moved more than forty miles from the place of his homeland (Bathsheba) - all this together paints before us the image of a patriarch who was great not in his external loud exploits, but in that inner spiritual world that is invisible to people, but which shines all the brighter before the Heavenly Father, by that invincible faith in the Providence of God, which all his life made him the embodiment of hope, humility and love. After the events described, the fate of the further history of the patriarchal era is concentrated in the hands of Jacob, to whom all the hereditary blessing and promise of the family of Abraham passed. Having set out on a long journey, Jacob on the first day, apparently driven by the fear of his fierce brother, walked more than sixty miles, and having reached the town of Luz, he stopped there to spend the night, since the sun had already set and night had fallen. This was the very place where Abraham once erected an altar to God. Seeing some stones, perhaps the remains of this particular altar, Jacob put one of them under his head instead of a pillow and, out of extreme fatigue, fell into a deep sleep. And then, under the influence of the events he had just experienced, he sees a wonderful dream: he sees a ladder that stands on the earth, and its top touches the sky, and the angels of God ascend and descend along it. This wonderful symbol of divine providence for the earth concluded with the appearance of the Lord to him, who repeated to him the promise of Abraham: “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father, and the God of Isaac, (do not be afraid). The land on which you lie I will give to you and to your descendants. And your descendants will be like the sand of the earth, and will spread to the sea, and to the east, and to the north, and to the noonday, and in you and in your seed all the families of the earth will be blessed. And here I am with you; and I will keep you wherever you go; and I will return you to this land; for I will not leave you until I have done what I have spoken to you.” Such a wondrous vision awakened Jacob and he was afraid of the presence of the Divine in this holy place, erected a monument here from the stone on which he slept, made a libation of oil on it and called this place Bethel, i.e. “house of God,” which name replaced forever the former name Luz. Encouraged and strengthened by the promise of God, Jacob went on to his destination, and after a few days of travel he arrived at rich pastures with numerous herds of large and small livestock. There he found a well, near which, contrary to custom, there were three herds, driven by shepherds to water much earlier than the evening time for this. Professor Rawlinson explains this phenomenon from personal observation. “On most reservoirs there is usually a wide and thick slab-like stone, with a round hole in the middle, which makes up the mouth of the reservoir. This hole, in turn, is usually covered with a heavy stone, which only two or three people can roll away.” This arrangement and condition of the wells can also serve as an explanation for this circumstance, in the precise sense that the shepherds of the herds brought early to watering, being unable to roll away the stones themselves, waited for the arrival of other herds, whose shepherds could open the reservoir for watering. Jacob, according to the usual sociability of the inhabitants of the east, began to talk with the shepherds, among whom was one beautiful girl named Rachel. Having learned that she was the daughter of his uncle Laban, he rolled away the stone from the well for her, watered her flock of sheep and, having kissed Rachel, “lifted up his voice and wept,” declaring to her that he was a relative of her father and that he was the son of Rebekah, her aunt. Rachel immediately ran home to tell about what had happened, and her father Laban, with kindred cordiality and greetings, received his nephew into his house from his beloved sister Rebekah. Having received a kindred welcome, Jacob began to serve Laban, and the latter, noticing his zeal, even suggested that he set his own wages for his work. But Jacob already had in mind the price of his heart. Laban had two daughters, of whom the eldest “Leah was weak-eyed, and the other Rachel was beautiful in figure and beautiful in face.” Jacob fell in love with Rachel and invited Laban to work for her for seven years, so that only he would marry her to him. Laban agreed, and those seven years seemed like a few days to Jacob, because he loved her. When the time came for the wedding, Laban, taking advantage of the Eastern custom, according to which the bride is tightly wrapped in a veil during marriage, deceived Jacob and substituted Leah instead of Rachel, later justifying himself by the fact that according to local custom, “they don’t do this in order to give the youngest before the eldest.” But he proposed to Jacob and Rachel on the condition that he work for another seven years, to which Jacob agreed. In this deception on the part of Laban, for Jacob it was like retribution for his own deception in receiving the blessing of the birthright. Having received Leah and Rachel after a week of marriage, Jacob worked for her for another seven years for his father-in-law Laban. But this bigamy took place without the permission of God, and therefore in his family life Jacob was destined to experience many sorrows both from the rivalry of his wives and from the actions and fate of his children. Taking revenge on Leah for her involuntary deception, Jacob treated her with disdain and became completely attached to Rachel; but God saw Leah’s innocence and uncomplaining meekness and therefore blessed her with childbearing, while proud Rachel remained barren. Leah already had four sons - Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah, but Rachel did not yet have one. Tormented by jealousy and envy, she almost frantically turned to Jacob with a soul-tearing cry: “Give me children, and if not, I’m dying”! Jacob meekly reproached her for such impatience, pointing out that children are a gift from God and it is not in his power to give them to her. Then, still adamant and proud, Rebekah, in extreme envy, wanted to have children, even through her maidservant Bilha, from whom two lateral sons, Dan and Nephealim, were actually born to her. Leah, in turn, gave Jacob her maidservant Zilpah and from her received two bastard sons - Gad and Asher, and then she herself also gave birth to Issachar and Zebulun and a daughter, Dinah. Thus, when Leah, unloved by her husband, already had six sons and a daughter of her own, in addition to two side sons, Rachel, beloved by Jacob, still bore the shame of childlessness, so heavy in the east. This forced her to finally come to terms and turn to God in prayer. “And God heard her and opened her womb. She conceived and bore (Jacob) a son, and said: God has taken away my shame. And she called his name Joseph, saying, “The Lord will give me another son.” Having become the father of the family. Jacob felt the need to gain independence and become the master of his own home and household. Therefore, he began to ask Laban to let him and his family go back to their homeland. Laban, realizing his merits for increasing his wealth, began to ask him to stay a little longer, offering to give him a reward in the form of cattle marked with black wool, spots and specks. Jacob agreed, and under his direction and supervision such livestock multiplied wonderfully, so that when he had to receive his reward, he “became very, very rich, and had an abundance of flocks (and herds), and maidservants, and menservants, and camels, and donkeys.” Such wealth even aroused envy in Laban and he began to look at Jacob with a gloomy and dissatisfied face, even more frowned by the slander of his sons, who said: “Jacob took possession of everything that our father had, and from our father’s estate he made up all this wealth.” As a result of a vision that Jacob had, commanding him to return to his homeland, having received the consent of their wives, who also wanted to move away from their selfish father, who sold them for work to himself (Gen. 31:14 and 15), Jacob made all the necessary preparations for the journey, and when Laban left to shear his cattle, he secretly set off on the road, and Rachel took with her even “the idols that her father had.” her." Having crossed the Euphrates River, Jacob moved into the desert and headed towards Mount Gilead. Laban only learned about Jacob’s departure three days later, and finding that even his idols, the “teraphim,” had been stolen from him, he rushed along with his sons and relatives in pursuit of the fugitive. On the seventh day, Laban overtook him at Mount Gilead, and the consequences of this would undoubtedly have been terrible if Laban had not received a warning from God in a dream the day before - not to harm Jacob. Thanks to the cunning of his daughter Rachel, he also failed in finding his teraphim. Despite his supposedly kindred reproach to Jacob, accompanied by a hypocritical statement about with what triumph and honor he would have seen Jacob out of his house if he had told him on his departure, Laban felt that he was wrong before Jacob when the latter expressed to him all his indignation on the occasion of his greed and injustice. Then Laban humbled himself in spirit and entered into an alliance with Jacob, who in turn swore not to offend his wives and not to take others except Laban’s daughters. “And Jacob slaughtered a sacrifice on the mountain, and called his relatives to eat bread; and they ate bread (and drank) and spent the night on the mountain. And Laban rose early in the morning and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters, and blessed them, and Laban returned to his place, and Jacob went his way.” One terrible danger had passed, and God averted the vengeance of Laban's father-in-law from Jacob. But another meeting lay ahead, an even more dangerous meeting with Esau, from whom he could fear revenge for depriving him of his birthright. Although Jacob was encouraged by the vision of the heavenly army, as if taking up arms in his defense, from this place (which he called in memory of this vision: Mahanaim, i.e., the army), he took his own measures to prevent the danger of revenge on the part of Esau and for this purpose sent messengers to him in the land of Seir, in the region of Edom, asking for favor on his part to his brother returning to his homeland. But the messengers returned only with the answer that Esau himself would come to meet his brother and at the same time was walking at the head of four hundred armed soldiers. This news was by no means reassuring, even apart from the fact that these four hundred armed warriors gathered under his banner, apparently for the purpose of robbery and bloodshed, like those wild tribes of Bedouins who even now cause terror wherever they appear. As a result, upon hearing this news, “Jacob was very afraid and embarrassed.” He was completely helpless and defenseless before the rage of his vengeful brother, and the only thing he could come up with in case of real danger was to divide his caravan into two camps in the calculation that “if Esau attacks one camp and beats it, then the rest of the camp can escape.” The calculation was obviously dubious and, in any case, sad. Then he turned to the only defense - a prayer to God. His prayer was sincere and ardent and represents the first prayer that has been preserved verbatim to us from primitive patriarchal times. Jacob prayed like this: “O God of my father Abraham, and God of my father Isaac, Lord God, who said to me: Return to your land, to your homeland, and I will do good to you. I am unworthy of all the mercies and all the good deeds that You have done for Your servant; For I crossed over this Jordan with my staff; and now I have two camps. Deliver me from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau; for I am afraid of him, lest he come and kill me and the mother and children. You said: I will do good to you, and I will make your descendants like the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude” (Gen. 32:9–12). Recognizing his complete powerlessness, Jacob places his entire trust in the God of Abraham and the God of Isaac and in His promise not to deprive him of protection. And this cry of despair did not go unheard. Meanwhile, in order to appease his brother, Jacob allocated a significant part of the flocks from his caravan and sent them as a gift to Esau, and he himself with his family and the rest of the caravan moved behind and, having ferried them through the ford of the Jabbok stream, flowing between Lake Galilee and the Dead Sea into the Jordan River, he himself was left alone, and here one of the most mysterious and great events in the life of Jacob took place. This place amazes with its desert beauty. The stream itself runs in a deep hollow, completely covered with a thicket of oleanders and other aromatic bushes. The night of solitude arrived for Jacob, who was trembling for his fate. Countless stars shone overhead, and a dead silence reigned all around, broken only by the murmur of the stream and the distant echoes of sounds from the caravan. And on this night “someone fought with him until dawn appeared; and when he saw that it did not prevail against him, he touched the joint of his thigh, and damaged the joint of Jacob’s thigh, when he wrestled with him.” The mysterious adversary, having entered into a struggle with Jacob, wanted to test the courage of his faith and the persistence of his prayer. And Jacob proved this by the fact that even when wounded, he overpowered his opponent and did not let him out of his hands until he blessed him, saying: “From now on your name will not be Jacob, but Israel; for you have fought with God, and you will overcome men.” Jacob called the name of that place: “Penuel,” as a sign that he “saw God face to face, and his soul was preserved.” The sun rose and Jacob, limping on his hip, hurried to his caravan. But what did this whole event mean? The “one” who wrestled with Jacob “until the morning broke” was Jehovah. Jacob, it is true, was a believing heir to the promises of his fathers, but his whole life was in some way a struggle with God, since he tried to achieve success by his own strength and his own cunning. Thinking that he was fighting with man, in reality he was fighting with God, and therefore God was fighting with him. And finally, further struggle now became impossible for him, because God “touched the joint of his thigh” and made him lame and powerless. Jacob was helpless as Esau approached. But before he could come face to face with his terrible earthly adversary, Jacob had first to meet with God, with whom he had long been wrestling, although unknowingly to himself. The fight with Esau was nothing, but the fight with God was everything. The Lord could not be on Jacob's side while he relied on his own strength; but now, being lame and aware of his complete helplessness, Jacob realized that there was another weapon, much more effective than any sword, namely prayer. And when he realized this, then, having received a blessing from God who fought with him, he became invincible, no longer Jacob, but Israel, a prince before God, a conqueror of men. As Jacob crossed the ford of the Jabbok stream early in the morning, the flash of spears in the sun among the dark green pine forest alerted him to the approach of Esau with his armed force. But Jacob no longer had anything to fear from people after he overcame his nightly struggle with God. And if in the struggle with God he overcame by the power of faith and the persistence of prayer, then when he met Esau he won by the power of his humility, bowing to the ground seven times and offering him gifts. Esau may have had the intention of taking revenge on Jacob or proving his superiority over him with his armed force. But now, upon meeting his long-unseen brother, surrounded by a whole generation of young nephews, Esau’s harsh heart softened, he ran to meet Jacob, “and embraced him, and fell on his neck, and kissed him, and they both wept.” After such a cordial meeting, Jacob wisely rejected Esau's offer to go with him, or at least to give him part of the armed force for protection, and Esau returned to Mount Seir, which he had conquered, after which he completely disappears from the field of history, appearing only for the burial of Isaac. Jacob, meanwhile, continued his journey to the west, crossed the Jordan, entered the land of Canaan and arrived in Shechem, which since the time of Abraham had already grown into a strong city and was named after Shechem, the son of Emmor, prince of the Amorites. Here he bought himself “for a hundred coins” a field, which became the first possession of the chosen family in the land of Canaan, set up his tent on it, built an altar and “called on the name of the Lord God of Israel.” Here he apparently dug a well so as not to have any reason to clash with the natives, as was the case near Bathsheba, and to have a constant supply of water for his herds 179 . This place can still be seen today near the “well of Jacob”, where his divine Descendant taught the Samaritan woman to pray to God in spirit and truth. But Jacob's stay here brought him new grief. His daughter Dinah, who took part in one of the local folk festivals, was dishonored by the son of the local prince, Shechem, to whom she recovered so much that he, through his father, petitioned Jacob and her brothers to give her to him in marriage. The brothers agreed, but on the condition that all the inhabitants of Shechem be circumcised according to the law. When they were actually circumcised, Simeon and Levi, taking advantage of the time of their illness from circumcision, attacked the city, killed the entire male sex along with the princely family and plundered the entire city, and so cruelly avenged the dishonor of their sister Dina. But this violent cruelty outraged Jacob, and he made a severe rebuke to his violent sons, expressing fear for the possibility of the same cruel retribution from the Canaanites. As a result of this, he was forced to retire from here to Bethel for a while, especially since, under the influence of the Canaanites, idolatry began to penetrate into the family of Jacob, so that when leaving here, he ordered all his family to “throw away foreign gods.” These are the so-called teraphim - “household gods”, which were small figures, mostly of extremely ugly shape, so that they could frighten evil spirits with them and drive them out of the house where the teraphim were kept. In the Louvre Museum there is a figure believed to be one of the teraphim. It represents an extremely ugly demon in the upper part with the body of a dog, the legs of an eagle, arms equipped with lion paws, and the tail of a scorpion; the head is half exposed to the bones, goat horns are visible on it; four outstretched wings complement the ugly figure of this teraphim. These figures were usually placed on the threshold or near the windows to prevent the intrusion of evil spirits. Such figures were especially popular in Mesopotamia, and it was from there that they were taken out by Laban’s daughters. To cleanse his house of such superstition, Jacob took them from his wives and buried them under an oak tree near Shechem. In Bethel he erected an altar to God, and there the Lord again appeared to him, who confirmed to him all the previous promises. In memory of this, Jacob erected a stone monument here and poured a libation of oil on it. Near Bethel, by the way, Rebekah's elderly nurse, Deborah, died and was buried under an oak tree; The touching mention of her proves how patriarchal everything was in the family of Jacob, who until the end of his life laid to rest the old nurse of his long-dead mother. Jacob then moved further south towards Ephrath, i.e. Bethlehem. Not reaching the city a little, Rachel gave birth to her second son; This was great happiness for Jacob, who acquired a second son from his beloved wife. But this happiness soon gave way to inconsolable sorrow, since the birth was fatal. Dying, Rachel named her newborn son Benoni (son of my sorrow), but Jacob named him, as a form of consolation for the loss of his beloved wife, Benjamin (son of the right hand). Jacob buried Rachel on the road to Bethlehem, and erected a monument over her coffin, which still stands today. Jacob's grief was soon aggravated by the dishonor that his eldest son Reuben inflicted on his father's bed, through which he lost his birthright. Finally, Jacob reached the camp of his father Isaac, who was still alive and was in the oak grove of Mamri, beloved by Abraham, near Hebron. There, in this area, dear to him from the sweet memories of his childhood and youth, Jacob stopped for a while in order to reassure his father in his advanced years with his presence and his filial love. Isaac lived alone all this time, since the ferocious Esau had long left Canaan and preferred the wild exploits of robbery and military enterprises in the mountains of Seir to cattle breeding. It was under Jacob that the elderly patriarch, one hundred and eighty years old, died: “he was gathered to his people, being old and full of life; and Esau and Jacob his sons buried him.” This, however, was already after the sale of Joseph to Egypt and only ten years before Jacob and his sons moved there. But from now on, the historical fate of the house of Abraham is concentrated precisely in the life of Joseph, Rachel’s eldest son. See W. Deane, Abraham, his life and l'unes. London. 1887. Schrader, Keilinschriften und A. T, pp. 129 et seq. Dist. of the Bible, v. Vr. – Schrader, 130. Kamarina means “city of the moon” in Arabic. Herodotus makes a mistake when he claims that no grapes were grown there. Wine was floated down the Euphrates in large quantities. See Rawlinson on Herodotus, vol. 194. Recent scholars suggest that Babylonia was first inhabited by Turanian tribes (allied to the Turks and Tartars of the present day), who invented a cuneiform system of writing, and that they were defeated and dispossessed by the Semites. Whether this proposition is true or not, it is certain, says Professor Sayce, that these early settlers spoke in an agglutinative language, i.e. a language in which grammatical relations are formed not through changes in inflections, but through the addition of independent words, such as pronouns to verbs in conjugation, and prepositions to nouns in decline. Their language was akin to the dialect used in Elam, and probably the Akkadian language, as it is called, was a means of communication between the various tribes of the entire vast region on the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. St. Archdeacon Stephen, in his famous speech before the Sanhedrin, saw here the first calling to Abraham (Acts 7:2, 3). But the writer of everyday life says nothing about this special calling, simply stating the resettlement of Terah, as if out of personal motivation (Gen. 11:31). Malah, Philosophy of Truth, p. 93 et ​​seq. Porter, Handbook for Syria, p. 542. In any case, this stay could not be long, so it left little time for the events invented by later legends. He appears to have arrived in Egypt in the same year in which he left Haran, for he was then 75 years old, and 86 years old when Ishmael was born; and we are told that he had already lived in Canaan for 10 years when he took Hagar as his wife, whom he brought with him from Egypt and whom Sarah kept as a servant for 10 years (Gen. 16:3). McClintock and Strong, “Cyclop.” Under the word Shechem. Wed. Abimelech, Melchizedek, Shechem, Kiriath-Sepher. This question is also discussed by Gesenius in his Gesch. D.Htb. Spr. Page 16, 223 et seq. See 2 Sam. 5:22; 23:13 et seq.; 1 Par. 11:15 et seq.; 14:9 et seq. Conder, Tent Work, p. 252. Whether Luz was a royal city in the time of Abram is unknown. In one place it is mentioned (Joshua 13:16) as the residence of the Canaanite king, but very little is generally known about its history before it came under the rule of the Israelites. 1 Kings XVII-XVIII; 2 Kings VII:1–6. Bell. Jud. V, 9 and 4; Antiq. I, 8, 1. Sayce, Fresh Light from the Monuments, p. 50 et seq.; Birch, Ancient Egypt, p. 75. Ebers, Egypten und die Bucher Moses, p. 262. When explaining the fact in question, it is not without some significance that the assumption that Sarah could have been blond, which represented an advantageous contrast with the dark beauties of Egypt. It is known that the Italians of the present day attach great importance to the blue eyes and rosy cheeks of the women of the north, and Virgil, presenting his hero Aeneas as a model of beauty, notes that his face was like ivory or Parian marble, framed by strands of yellow hair (Aeneid, I, 592; cf. IV, 143, etc.). Monuments, however, show that the Egyptians could not find anything particularly new in such a complexion, since among them there were women who were not always dark in color. Les Papyrus Hieratiques de Berlin, F. Chabas, pp. 14, 15. See part of a similar picture in the figure before the beginning of the chapter. This painting can be seen in its entirety in the publications of Brugsch, Ebers, Lenormand and others. The painting on the wall of the tomb is eight feet long and one and a half feet high. Ebers, Egurten, pp. 257, 258. Speakers Commentary, vol. I, pp. 445–446. According to Lepsius, this picture depicts the resettlement of a Gik family, which asked to be admitted and accepted into the blessed land, and whose descendants perhaps opened the entrance to the country to the Semitic conquerors associated with them by tribal kinship. See Bohlen, Die genesis, 1857, p. 163. Lepsius, Denkmaler, III, 97. At this point a new scene opens in Abram's life. The Father of the Believers, being the head of a strong tribe, enters into a struggle with the great monarchy. This event receives all the more interest because its details reported in the Bible (Gen. chapter 14), which until recently were doubted and denied by skeptical criticism, have now found almost miraculous confirmation in newly discovered monuments. The coincidence between the Bible and these monuments is so complete that it is as if Moses wrote Chapter XIV based on some ancient Canaanite or Babylonian documents. Schrader, Keilinschriften pp. 135 et seq.; Rawlison, Egypt and Babylon, pp. 14–16. 2 Kings 18:18; I. Flavius, Antiqq. VII, 10, 3. Actually in Hebrew the letter h, For a photograph of it, see Ebers, Aegypten, p. 280. Sarah is the Assyrian word Sarrat, “queen.” Sayce, Gresh Light from the Monuments, p, 46. I. Flavius, Bell. Jud. IV, 8.4. The possibility of such a transformation of a transparent lake into a muddy-salty one was recently proven by a phenomenon observed in Italy over one lake, in which, due to the action of underground volcanic forces, the mirror-clear water suddenly became cloudy to the point that all the fish in it died. This was during the famous Iski earthquake. See Num. 27; 1 Sam. 14:47 ; 2 Par. 20:1, Ps. 82, Sof. 2:8. See Acts. 13:1; Cor. 12:28ff; 14:29. Dr. Oswald Dykes, Abraham. P. 224. In Russian translation, this word is translated “grove”. This word is found in 1 Samuel. 22:6; 31:13. See Amos. V, 5; VIII, 14. Life 37:25, 28; 39:1; Court. 8:22, 24. Less is known about Ishmael's other descendants. Adbeel, in the Greek translation Navdeil, is identified with Idibi-Il, mentioned in the inscription of Tiglath-Pilassar II; Mivsam (Greek Massam) and Mishma (Greek Masma) are completely unknown; these names are found in 1 Chron. 4:25, as belonging to the members of the tribe of Simeon. Dezich suggests that Mishma is a copyist's mistake instead of Ishma, since the wedge-shaped monuments mention a certain Isammi along with Idibi-Il and Kidra. Duma occurs as the name of a locality in the Syrian desert between Damascus and Medina, 13 days' journey north of the latter. To the square east of Duma stands Massa, the main city of the tribe called by Ptolemy Massam, identified with Masa in the chronicles of Assurbanipal and Mesha Genesis. 10:30. Hadat, called Haddat in Greek, is completely unknown. Thema is a trading city or district mentioned in Jerem. 25:23, lying on the shores of the Gulf of Aqaba, and, as some recently discovered inscriptions testify, was the seat of a civilized people. Jetur and Naphish were neighbors of the Trans-Jordanian Israeli tribes and, apparently, during the time of Saul they were defeated, and countless herds of cattle, camels and donkeys were taken from them (1 Chron. 5:19 et seq.). The name Jetur was retained in the name of Iturea, a country that extended from Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon to the desert and south of Damascus. The newest Druze are probably direct descendants of the Ishmaelites. Kedma is not yet mentioned anywhere except in the genealogy in 1 Chron. I. Euripides, Orestes, 1668, f., Electra, 979. Leo 18:21; 20:2, 3; Deut. 12:21 . Sayce, Babylonian Literature, p. 46.Trans. Soc. Bibl. Arch. IV, 25–31. See the evidence in Knobei and Dillmann on Gen. 22. This is precisely what Bishop Warburton explains in his Div. Legat. VI, sec. 5. Beer, Leben Abraham's, Sec. 10. Ewsld, History of Israel, I, 305, 332. Antiq. I, 13.2; XII, 13, 4. Beer, Leben Abraham's, pp. 69, 64 et seq. Porter, Hadbook for Syria, p. 339. Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 152. Leo 20:14; 21:9; 1 Sam. 31:12; Amos, 6 Wilson, Survey Memoirs III. 346. Beer, Leben Abraham's, pp. 193, 198. Chapter XIV; Rünsch, page 24. Book of Jubilees, XXII, XXIII, Ronsch. Thomson, The Land and the Book, p. 245. 2 Par. 20:7; Is. 41:8; Jacob 2:23. So He fulfilled Gideon's request regarding the famous sign on the rune; (Judges 6:37ff.); He gave a sign to Jonah in his bold attack on the Philistine garrison (1 Sam. 14:9 et seq.); He even turned around the test made by the idolaters when they sent back the Ark of the Covenant to the Israelites (1 Samuel 6:7ff). Beer, Leben Abraham's, pp. 81, 196. Thomson, The Land and the Book, p. 583. Lentils are a type of bean or pea. Red lentils are considered the best. It is still used to prepare stew or soup. Tristram, Nat. Of Bible, page 462. This work is by no means easy in Palestine, and Jacob's well is, in any case, a remarkable structure. It is first dug through a layer of sediment that is held back by rock walls, and then further carved into solid rock to an unknown depth. It is still 75 feet deep; in 1838 it was 30 feet deeper, but every year it collapses more and more, due to the established custom of all its visitors - both natives and especially travelers - to throw stones at it in order to hear the peculiar echo of their fall. One can imagine that over thousands of years of the well’s existence, it is already half filled with stones, and from this one can see how deep it was in ancient times, and how much labor was required to dig it in that ancient time, when improved engineering tools were not yet in use.