Total Genesis

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:8 . .The child grew up and was weaned, and Abraham held a great feast
on the day that Isaac was weaned.

The age of weaning varied in ancient times; usually in the neighborhood of 2 to 5
years. Bible weaning implies a whole lot more than just putting a child on a bottle.
It means they can speak and understand a language, feed themselves, brush their
teeth, clothe themselves, and potty alone. In other words, you could pack them a
bag and send them off to live with your aunt. (e.g. 1Sam 1:22-2:11). Samuel was
at least three years old when his mom packed him off to live with the high priest.
(2Chr 31:16)

So Isaac was very likely around the same age as Samuel when Abraham and Sarah
threw a weaning party for him. It was a day of good celebration and they were very
proud of their little boy. He was past a major milestone and well along his way to
independent manhood.

Weaning isn't always a joyous occasion for some families. It can be a time passed
over in deep sorrow for the parents of handicapped kids. Abraham and Sarah were
very fortunate that their boy wasn't afflicted with Down's syndrome, Autism, or a
neurodegenerative disease like Tay-Sachs.

● Gen 21:9 . . Sarah saw the son whom Hagar the Egyptian had borne to Abraham
playing.

At this point, Ishmael was around 17 or 18 years old. (cf. Gen 16:16, Gen 21:5,
Gen 21:8)

It's hard to tell what kind of sport Ishmael was involved in. Some feel that he, the
firstborn son, was picking on Isaac the younger sibling; and that's probably true
because Gal 4:29 suggests that Ishmael was a bit of a bully. Others feel he was
mocking the weaning party. But actually, nobody knows for sure. Maybe he was
just swinging on an old tire in the backyard (so to speak) and while Sarah was
absently mindedly looking over there, a scheme spawned in her head.

Not only was Ishmael Abraham's son, but, by law, he was Sarah's boy too. (Gen
16:1-2). But Sarah rejected Ishmael and never was much of a mom to him. So Ms.
Hagar went through all that for nothing. On top of that, she was still a slave; and
had no husband. She was, in reality, a single mom saddled with a child that she
never really wanted in the first place.

All of this created a home life that had become intolerable for everyone involved.
Hagar gloated over Sarah's barrenness. Sarah, in turn, blamed Abraham for
Hagar's attitude, and Ishmael, according to Gal 4:29, harassed Isaac (no doubt out
of a spirit of sibling rivalry). Abraham loved Ishmael and was no doubt soft on
Hagar. Plus, to make matters even worse; there were some very serious legal
complications.

Ishmael's legal position was quite an advantage. As Abraham's firstborn son, he
had a right to a double portion of his father's estate. (cf. Gen 48:22)

NOTE: The reason Joseph inherited a double portion is because Jacob transferred
the right of the firstborn to him after Reuben was naughty with one of his father's
servant-wives. (Gen 49:3-4, 1Chr 5:1)

● Gen 21:10-11 . . Sarah said to Abraham: Cast out that slave-woman and her son,
for the son of that slave shall not share in the inheritance with my son Isaac. The
matter distressed Abraham greatly, for it concerned a son of his own.

How does a good and decent man like Abraham disown his own flesh and blood? If
Ishmael were a gang-banger, a drug addict, an Islamic terrorist, or a career
criminal it would be different. But he was really a pretty good kid and Abraham
totally loved him. Being the lad's biological father, I'm sure Abraham felt very
responsible for Ishmael's welfare. He and Ishmael had been a team together for
seventeen or eighteen years. You just don't dissolve a bond like that as if giving
away old clothes to Good Will.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:12 . . But God said to Abraham: Don't be distressed over the boy or your
slave; whatever Sarah tells you, do as she says, for it is through Isaac that
offspring shall be continued for you.

The lad would always and forever be one of Abraham's biological sons; that couldn't
be undone with any more ease than recalling the ring of a bell. However; in the
case of slave mothers; there was a way to break Ishmael's legal ties to Abraham;
and the way was actually quite to Hagar's advantage.

The common law of Abraham's day (e.g. the Code of Hammurabi and the laws of
Lipit-Ishtar) stipulated that if a slave-owner disowned his child's in-slavery
biological mother; then the mother and the child would lose any and all claims to a
paternal property settlement with the slave-owner.

The catch is: Abraham couldn't just send Hagar packing, nor sell her. In order for
the common law to take effect; Abraham had to emancipate her; which he did.

● Gen 21:13 . . As for the son of the slave-woman, I will make a nation of him, too,
for he is your seed.

Abraham certainly must have been worried what would become of Ishmael; so God
reassured him his eldest would be just fine.

I think it's significant that God didn't refer to either Hagar or to Ishmael by name,
probably because the emphasis here is upon divine purposes instead of upon
people.

● Gen 21:14a . . Early next morning Abraham took some bread and a skin of water,
and gave them to Hagar.

The Hebrew word for "bread" here includes all foods; for man or beast. So Abraham
didn't necessarily send the poor woman out on her own with a ration of bread and
water like some sort of hardened criminal, but very likely provisioned Hagar and his
son Ishmael with enough camper-grade food stuffs to keep them going for a while.

NOTE: Bread back in those days was very nutritious. It was all made from heirloom,
organic grains; even leavened bread was organic. It was made with naturally
soured dough rather than cultured yeast.

But it's puzzling why Abraham didn't provide them with an escort; at least until
they reached the safety of a village or a town. That suggests to me that Abraham
fully believed God's promise to "make a nation of him" which implies that God
Himself would look out for them from here on in.

● Gen 21:14b . . He placed them over her shoulder, and together with the child,
sent her away.

NOTE: Ishmael was at least a teen-ager by this time seeing as he underwent
circumcision at thirteen when Abraham was ninety-nine. (Gen 13:24-26) Isaac was
born one year later when Abraham was a hundred. (Gen 21:5) And Hagar wasn't
emancipated till after Isaac was weaned. (Gen 21:8-10)

I would have hated to observe that scene. Abraham didn't dispatch a servant or a
butler to equip Hagar. He did it himself. And he didn't just bring the provisions out
to her and set it down at her feet. No. He put them up on her shoulder himself. You
have to stand close to someone to do that; close enough to look them right in the
eyes.

There's no record of ever any ill will between Hagar and Abraham, nor any between
him and his boy Ishmael either. Those three were truly family in every sense of the
word-- mom, dad, and child. There couldn't have been a dry eye nor a cheerful face
at any time during this excruciating farewell. If you've ever experienced something
so upsetting as to make you nauseous, lead-bellied, and lose your appetite; then
you know what I'm talking about. Anybody who can read this story without feeling
the slightest twinge of compassion for any one of those three; has got to be the
most insensitive clod on earth.

The phrase "sent her away" is from a versatile Hebrew word that can be used of
divorce as well as for the emancipation of slaves. In other words: Hagar wasn't
banished as is commonly assumed; no, she was set free; and it's very important to
nail that down in our thinking because if Abraham had merely banished Hagar, then
her son Ishmael would have retained his legal status as Abraham's primary heir.

Ishmael retained his status as one of Abraham's biological sons (Gen 25:9) but in
legal matters pertaining to inheritances he became no son at all.

I believe it's important to emphasize that Hagar and Ishmael weren't cut loose
because they were no longer worthy to live in Abraham's camp any more. No. It
was only as a measure to expedite God's future plans for Isaac. Even if Sarah
hadn't proposed the idea of emancipating Hagar, I suspect that God would have
eventually required it so anyway.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:14d . . And she wandered about in the wilderness of Beer-sheba.

The wilderness of Beer-sheba is about 50 miles south of Hebron.

The Hebrew word for "wandered about" basically means to vacillate; defined by
Webster's as: to waver in mind, will, or feeling; viz: to hesitate in choice of opinions
or courses. (cf. Jas 1:8)

As often as Hagar traveled up and down the land of Palestine with Abraham over
the years, she no doubt knew her way around; so she's not blundering through the
woods like a lost hiker.

At this point, Hagar is thoroughly rattled and doesn't really know what to do next or
even how she and Ishmael are going to survive in a land where no State and/or
Federal programs for unemployed single mothers existed. And to top it off; she's a
freed slave who now has to make all her own decisions and fend for her child and
for herself on her own rather than simply comply with the demands of a master
who provided for all her daily necessities.

Slavery has its pluses and minuses; and it's not always to a slave's benefit to give
them their walking papers. There's a provision in the covenant that Moses' people
agreed upon with God allowing for slaves to remain so permanently if they wish.
(Ex 21:2-6, Lev 24:22)

Many of the slaves that were liberated after the American Civil War found
themselves in the throes of instant poverty: unable to either read or to write, with
no place to live, and zero prospects for gainful employment. I'm not saying slavery
is a good thing. I'm only saying that, all things considered, it might be the better
option for some people.

I met guys in the Army who re-enlisted for the security of a steady paycheck, free
meals, free health care, paid vacations, and rent-free/mortgage-free
accommodations. They had to relinquish a degree of their freedom for those
benefits, but in their minds, it was a sensible trade-off.

NOTE: The Bible neither condemns nor condones slavery. Its focus is primarily
upon the treatment of slaves rather than their predicament. The Bible also has
things to say about a slave's work ethic.

Activists and politicians decry slavery as immoral and/or evil. Well; they didn't get
that from the Bible; it's their own personal feelings about it; which reminds us that
men have been making up their own rules about right and wrong almost from the
very beginning. (Gen 3:22)

● Gen 21:15-16 . .When the water was gone from the skin, she left the child under
one of the bushes, and went and sat down at a distance, a bowshot away; for she
thought: Let me not look on as the child dies. And sitting thus afar, she burst into
tears.

The Hebrew word for "child" basically means a male person of any age between
early boyhood and maturity; viz: boys and/or youths.

Ishmael was hardly what modern Americans might call a child. He was near to
eighteen years old at this time; if he was circumcised at fourteen and Isaac was
weaned at three. (cf. Gen 16:16, Gen 21:5, Gen 21:8)

One can only guess at the grief in Hagar's heart. Her life had come down to this: a
lonely, impoverished, homeless death out in the middle of nowhere. In her distress
Hagar had forgotten about her friend 'Ataah 'Eel R'iy the deity who sees people and
knows their troubles. And she had forgotten all the predictions He made back in
Gen 16:10-12 concerning Ishmael's future. There is just no way her son can be
allowed to die at this time.

When God's people lose confidence in His statements, they usually always get
themselves into trouble. If only Hagar had leaned on God a little more, she wouldn't
have despaired regarding Ishmael's life. He was perfectly safe. Don't you see? He
had to live so God could keep His promise to multiply him; and so he could become
a wild burro of a man, and so he could live near the people of Israel like God
predicted. So even if Hagar had perished all alone in the wilderness, Ishmael would
have gone on to survive without his mother because his divine guardian would have
seen to it.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:17a . . God heard the cry of the boy,

I don't think Ishmael, at near eighteen, was bawling his eyes out like a little girl.
The Hebrew word basically means a voice, a noise, or a sound. It's very first use in
the Bible is at Gen 3:8 where The Lord was heard moving about in the garden of
Eden.

Ishmael's "cry" was likely a plea for help; i.e. prayer; which wouldn't be surprising
seeing as how Abraham was highly recommended as his own family's rabbi. (Gen
18:21)

NOTE: God had promised Hagar and Abraham that He would multiply Ishmael
(Gen 16:10, Gen 17:20). So, prayer or no prayer, God cannot allow Ishmael to die
before generating a posterity.

● Gen 21:17b-18 . . and an angel of God called to Hagar from heaven and said to
her: What troubles you, Hagar? Fear not, for God has heeded the cry of the boy
where he is. Come, lift up the boy and hold him by the hand, for I will make a great
nation of him.

** An angel of God-- a.k.a. the angel of The Lord -- isn't always a celestial creature.
Any manifestation of God counts as His angel, e.g. fires, earthquakes, winds voices,
smoke, trumpets, and human forms; which helps explain this rather curious
encounter wherein the angel of God not only spoke for God, but also as God.

Now we're back on personal terms; and the angel speaks to Hagar by name rather
than by her previous status as a slave; which would be inappropriate at this point
because she's been emancipated.

● Gen 21:19 . .Then God opened her eyes and she saw a well of water. She went
and filled the skin with water, and let the boy drink.

I bet the water was right there all the time but Hagar was so exhausted and
distraught that she hadn't seen it. Everybody gets that way once in a while.
Sometimes the answer to our problem is right under our noses but oftentimes can't
see it because we're just too upset and/or distracted at the time.

● Gen 21:20a . . God was with the boy and he grew up;

I don't know why so many Christians and Jews have such a low opinion of Ishmael.
How many of his detractors are able to boast that God was with any of them as
they grew up?

● Gen 21:20b . . he dwelt in the wilderness and became a bowman.

Archery must have become a traditional skill in Ishmael's family. One of his male
progeny, Kedar, produced a clan of bowmen who used their skills not only in
hunting, but also in warfare. (Isa 21:16-17)

● Gen 21:21a . . He lived in the wilderness of Paran;

The Wilderness of Paran encompassed a pretty big area. It was south of the Negev,
on the Sinai peninsula, roughly between Elat on the east and the Suez canal on the
west.

To look at that region today you'd wonder what appealed to Mr. Ishmael; but
apparently it was a whole lot more pleasant in his day 3,900 years ago; which
wouldn't surprise me since the Sahara itself was at one time verdant, pluvial, and
inhabited.

● Gen 21:21b . . and his mother got a wife for him from the land of Egypt.

A girl from Egypt was apparently a better choice than the girls of Canaan; from
among whom Abraham would later not want a wife for his son Isaac (Gen 24:3-4).
But Egypt was Hagar's homeland (Gen 16:1) so she would likely relate to an
Egyptian daughter-in-law much better than most any other.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:22a . . At that time

While Hagar and Ishmael were busy re-inventing their lives; a seemingly trivial
event occurred in Abraham's life. These kinds of events may seem superfluous, but
they're actually pretty handy for giving us some insight into Abraham the man; i.e.
his personality.

● Gen 21:22b . . Abimelech

It is very possible that Abimelech is a royal title rather than a personal name, sort
of like Pharaoh or Caesar, since in the title of Psalm 34 the name Abimelech is
applied to the king of Gath, who is elsewhere known by his personal name Achish.
(1Sam 27:2-3)

● Gen 21:22c . . and Phicol, chief of his troops,

Phicol's name sounds funny in Hebrew. It's piykol (pee-kole') which means: mouth
of all. His name, like Abimelech's, could also have been a title; especially since it
implies that he was a spokesman. I'm sure you've heard people say: "And I think I
speak for all when I say this; yada, yada, yada; etc, etc, etc." Maybe that's what
his name "mouth of all" implies. At any rate, he was Abimelech's chief of staff and
apparently his right hand man-- a military man, and trusted.

● Gen 21:22d . . said to Abraham: The gods are with you in everything that you do.

Abimelech knew first hand that Abraham could do no wrong. And even when he did,
his deity was right there to bail him out. That is an extremely envious position.
What if you knew that God would protect you no matter how dumb, stupid, and
clumsy you were in life-- that in spite of your bad investments, accidents, poor
judgment, bad decisions, worthless friends, failed romances, and overspending, you
still came out on top? Well . . that is just how it went for Abraham. He was bullet
proof; so to speak.

● Gen 21:23a . .Therefore swear

(chuckle) Ol' Abimelech is nobody's fool. He was burned once by Abraham and
wasn't about to be suckered again. From now on he will accept Abraham's word
only if he gives his oath on it first. You know; trust is an easy thing to lose, and
very difficult to regain.

● Gen 21:23b . . to me here by the gods

The Hebrew word for "gods" is a nondescript label for any number of celestial
beings; both real and imagined. But I kind of suspect the one Abimelech referred to
was the deity who appeared to him in the dream; in other words; Abraham's deity:
Yahweh.

● Gen 21:23c . . that you will not deal falsely with me or with my kith and kin, but
will deal with me and with the land in which you have sojourned as loyally as I have
dealt with you.

It's a non aggression pact. But why would Abimelech go to all the trouble? And why
would he, a king, travel to Abraham's camp rather than summon him to appear?
Did he fear that Abraham, a man befriended by a supreme being, might become so
powerful that he would attempt to conquer Abimelech's kingdom? I think so.
Abraham's medicine was strong. He had a connection in the spirit world to a deity
with the power to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, and to strike people with serious
maladies. It would be perfectly human for Abraham to take advantage of his
supernatural affiliation and use it to advantage.

With a man like Abraham, Abimelech probably figured a preemptive strike would be
out of the question. It is better to strike a treaty while conditions permit. After all,
Abraham owed Abimelech one for letting him off after lying to him about Sarah.
Good time to call that in.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 21:24 . . And Abraham said: I swear it.

NOTE: There are Christians who would soundly condemn Abraham for swearing
based upon their understanding of Matt 5:33-37.

I can almost hear Abimelech and Phicol start breathing again. I think both of those
men were more than just a little worried about their safety on Abraham's turf.

That settled, Abraham has a matter of his own to discuss; and now's a good time
for it, seeing as those men were being very humble; at least for the moment.

NOTE: There are well-meaning folk who feel it's always wrong for God's people to
be confrontational; and base their reasoning on Matt 5:3, Matt 5:5, Matt 5:9, and
Matt 5:39. But other than Isaac, I don't think you could find a more gracious man
in the Old Testament than Abraham. He didn't have a hair-trigger temper, a spirit
of vengeance, nor did he declare war over every little disagreement.

Abraham picked his battles with care, and conducted them intelligently-- same with
Moses, of whom the Old Testament says: was very meek, above all the men which
were upon the face of the earth (Num 12:3). Jesus was meek too (Matt 11:29 and
Matt 21:5) but could be very confrontational when the circumstances called for a
heavy hand. (Matt 23:13 36)

● Gen 21:25-26 . .Then Abraham reproached Abimelech for the well of water which
the servants of Abimelech had seized. But Abimelech said: I do not know who did
this; you did not tell me, nor have I heard of it until today.

Abraham may have previously reported the incident to a bureaucrat, who then
tossed the complaint in a file cabinet somewhere and soon forgot about it because
this is the very first time Mr. Abimelech has been made aware of the problem.
Sometimes you just have to cut through the red tape and go straight to the top.

● Gen 21:27-29 . . Abraham took sheep and oxen and gave them to Abimelech,
and the two of them made a pact. Abraham then set seven ewes of the flock by
themselves, and Abimelech said to Abraham: What mean these seven ewes which
you have set apart? He replied: You are to accept these seven ewes from me as
proof that I dug this well.

A reasonable assumption is that Abraham-- thoroughly disgusted with Gerar's
bureaucracy, and having no confidence in Abimelech's oath --shrewdly purchased a
water right so the government's thugs would have to step off and leave him be.

● Gen 21:31-32 . . Hence that place was called Beer-sheba [well of seven], for
there the two of them swore an oath. When they had concluded the pact at Beer
sheba, Abimelech and Phicol, chief of his troops, departed and returned to the land
of the Philistines.

Abraham swore to live peaceably with Abimelech. And he in turn swore to let
Abraham keep the well that he dug. Did Abimelech swear by a god or just give his
word? Genesis doesn't say. But only Abraham's god is named in this pact. Possibly
they both swore by that one.

● Gen 21:33 . . Abraham planted a tamarisk at Beer-sheba, and invoked there the
name of The Lord, the Everlasting God.

Actually, that verse is supposed to read like this: "and invoked there the name of
Yhvh, the everlasting god."

The Hebrew word for "tamarisk" can mean one tree; and it can also mean a grove
of trees; of any kind. The grove was probably somewhat like a private garden
where Abraham could have some solitude in prayer. Groves were popular as places
of religious devotion and worship and for public meetings in both Canaan and
Israel.

● Gen 21:34 . . And Abraham resided in the land of the Philistines a long time.

It wasn't yet the Philistines' land in Abraham's day; but was theirs during the times
when one of the authors of Genesis edited this chapter.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:1a . . Some time afterward, God put Abraham to the test.

This particular section of scripture deals with an incident known in sacred Jewish
literature as The Akedah (the binding of Isaac). The Akedah portrays the very first
human sacrifice ever performed in the Bible by someone who is extremely
important to Jacob's posterity.

The test coming up wasn't meant to measure Abraham's loyalty; rather, to
establish the quality of his trust in the promise that God made to him concerning
Isaac's future; to wit:

"Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac:
and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, and with his
seed after him." (Gen 17:19)

● Gen 22:1b-2a . . He said to him: Abraham. And he answered: Here I am. And He
said: Take your son, your favored one, Isaac, whom you love,

The Hebrew word for "favored one" basically means sole, i.e. lone. So then, Isaac
wasn't just Abraham's favored son; he was also Abraham's only son because when
the old gentleman emancipated Ishmael's mom Hagar, he relinquished legal ties to
any children she and Abraham had together. Consequently: relative to nature;
Ishmael is Abraham's son, but relative to the covenant mentioned above; he's no
son at all.

"Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac; and he who had received the
promises was offering up his only begotten son" (Heb 11:17)

The Greek word translated "only begotten" never refers to a special child, rather,
always to an only child: specifically a biological child rather than a step child and/or
adopted. Examples are located at Luke 7:12, Luke 8:42, Luke 9:38, John 1:14,
John 1:18, John 3:16, John 3:18, and 1John 4:9.

Isaac was about three to five years old when Hagar and Ishmael moved out. Some
time has gone by; and in this chapter, Isaac is now old enough, and strong enough,
to shoulder a load of wood; and mature enough to understand the particulars of the
ritual that he and his dad were on their way to perform; so Isaac wasn't a little kid
in this incident.

Why did God say; whom you love? I think it's so we'd know how Abraham felt
about Isaac. There can be no doubt that he would sorely miss this boy if ever
something should happen to him.

When people truly love their kids, they will die protecting them. They'll quite
literally run into a burning building if need be and/or step in front of a bus. Normal
parents are very protective like that. People who love their kids don't drown them
to please a lover, nor leave them unattended in the car and go inside a bar for a
drink; nor let them go off with strangers, nor let them go to the mall or to the
playground all by themselves when they're small.

● Gen 22:2b . . and go to the land of Moriah,

There are only two places in the entire Old Testament where the word Moriah
appears. One is here in Genesis and the other in 2Chrn 3:1.

According to tradition, Genesis' land of Moriah is the same as the mount Moriah in
2nd Chronicles-- the site of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Some justification for
the tradition is found in verse 14, where Abraham named the location Jehovah
Jireh, from which came the expression "On the mount of the Lord there is vision".

However, in reality, the precise geographic location of the land of Moriah remains to
this day undiscovered.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:2c . . and offer him there as a burnt offering

The Hebrew word for "burnt offering" is 'olah (o-law') which is a very different kind
of offering than those of Cain and Abel. Theirs were minchah (min-khaw') which are
usually gifts and/or tributes rather than atonements.

Some say that Abraham's offering shouldn't be translated "burnt" and others say it
should.

No doubt the best translator of 'olah within the context of the Akedah is the prophet
Abraham himself. The very fact that he hewed wood, took a source of fire with him
up the mountain, constructed an altar, put the wood on the altar, and then bound
and positioned Isaac upon the wood and the altar; tells me that Abraham fully
understood what his divine master expected of him.

The evidence that Isaac also fully understood that 'olah implied incineration is when
he asked his dad: Father; here are the wood and the fire: but where is the sheep?

There are some who insist that Abraham misunderstood God. They say he was only
supposed to take Isaac along with him up on the mountain and they together were
to offer a burnt offering. What's the appropriate response to that?

Well; as I stated: Abraham was a prophet (Gen 20:7). Also; Abraham had three
days to think about what he was asked to do. Had Abraham the prophet any
misgivings about human sacrifice-- any at all --he surely would have objected
and/or at the very least requested a clarification. I'm confident that's true because
of the example of his rather impudent behavior recorded in the latter part of the
18th chapter of Genesis.

God ordered Abraham to offer his son as a burnt offering. That means he will have
to slit Isaac's throat; and then cremate his remains. Why isn't Abraham recoiling
and getting in God's face about this with a vehement protest? The inference is quite
obvious. Abraham didn't believe human sacrifice wrong. In other words: for
Abraham, human sacrifice was a non-issue or he would have surely objected to it.

NOTE: A technical point often overlooked in the "human sacrifice" debated is that in
every instance banning the practice in the Old Testament, it is underage children
that are condemned as offerings-- innocent children; viz: babes; and in particular,
one's own. (e.g. Lev 18:21, Lev 20:2-5, Deut 12:31, Deut 18:10, cf. 2Kgs 16:3,
2Kgs 17:31, 2Kgs 23:10, 2Kgs 21:6, Ps 106:34, Ezek 20:31, Ezek 23:37, Jer 7:31,
Jer 19:4, and Jer 32:35). I have yet to encounter an instance where God expressed
abhorrence at sacrificing a consenting adult.

FAQ: Human sacrifices are not allowed in the covenant that Moses' people agreed
upon with God per Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. Since Jesus was
a Jew whose religion was governed by that covenant, then how was it legal for him
to die for the sins of the world?

REPLY: The Bible's codified laws are not retroactive (Deut 5:2-4, Rom 4:15, Rom
5:13 and Gal 3:17) This is extremely important because Jesus was designated, and
scheduled, to die for the sins of the world prior to God creating even a single atom
for the current cosmos. (1Pet 1:18-21 & Rev 13:8)

● Gen 22:2d . . on one of the heights that I will point out to you.

Precisely where the land of Moriah was, and the specific height God chose, is
impossible to tell for sure. Abraham knew where the land was but he wouldn't know
the exact spot until he got there.

It's just as well to keep it a secret or otherwise somebody would turn it into a
shrine; sort of like the so-called Garden Tomb, where people come from all over the
world and make fools of themselves kissing the ground. Some would even take
home souvenir jars of dirt too; so that by now, likely so much dirt would be gone
that the site of Moriah would look more like a quarry than a high place.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:3a . . So early next morning, Abraham saddled his burro and took with
him two of his servants and his son Isaac.

The Hebrew word for "saddled" is ambiguous. It doesn't necessarily indicate a
device meant for transporting personnel; more likely tackling for cargo.

Whether or not the servants were armed, Genesis doesn't say. And why only two I
don't know either. But that was enough to look after the burro while Abraham and
Isaac were gone. And it's not wise to leave one man all alone in the outdoors;
especially in the wild country of early day Palestine what with no phone service nor
radios, nor cars to flag down for help in that day.

● Gen 22:3b . . He split the wood for the burnt offering,

It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that the servants did the actual wood
cutting with Abraham supervising.

● Gen 22:3c-4 . . and he set out for the place of which God had told him. On the
third day Abraham looked up and saw the place from afar.

Apparently everyone hiked on foot. The burro was just used as a pack animal to
haul food, water, tents, supplies, and the wood.

Though it's stated Abraham "looked up" it doesn't necessarily mean the site was
elevated above him. When Lot surveyed the Jordan valley, he was said to have
"lifted up" his eyes. But the valley was about three thousand feet down below his
vantage at the time. Lifting up one's eyes just simply means to look around, and
survey the scene.

Those three days gave Abraham plenty of time to think about what God expected
him to do. Abraham must surely have been giving Isaac's future some serious
thought. And he no doubt pondered the promises God made concerning the great
nation that was to issue from his boy. It was very likely at this time that Abraham's
faith in God's promises sustained his determination to obey and take Isaac's life.

"By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received
the promises offered up his only begotten son, of whom it was said "In Isaac your
seed shall be called" concluding that God was able to raise him up, even from the
dead," (Heb 11:17-19)

In other words: Abraham was so confident that God was going to somehow make of
his son's posterity a great nation that he assumed, quite correctly, that though he
slay Isaac and cremate his remains, the lad wouldn't stay dead and gone for very
long.

● Gen 22:5 . .Then Abraham said to his servants: You stay here with the burro. The
lad and I will go up there. We will worship and we will return to you.

Worship can be defined as respect paid to a better-- like when Abraham ran and
bowed to the three men who came to his tent in chapter 18, and up ahead when he
will bow to the sons of Heth in chapter 23.

When we let a senior citizen go through a door ahead of us, we are saying we
regard that person as better than we are. And when we move aside for a
presidential motorcade, we say the same thing. That's a kind of worship. It's not an
attitude of equality nor one of parity. True worship is an attitude of humility,
inferiority, subordination, submission, and admiration.

** The God of the Bible is so superior, so dignified, and so holy that the seraphs in
His throne room cover their faces and dare not gaze upon God. True worship
recognizes God's supremacy and respects the sanctity of His person. Sinners are
never allowed to barge in like drunken sailors, to gape and swagger, unwashed and
uninvited. No, they crawl in, recognizing the depravity of Man and the extreme
dignity of God. The burnt offering shows that Man not only risks death and
incineration in God's presence: he fully deserves it.

There exists adequate proof that Abraham was capable of dishonesty, so it's
difficult to tell at this point if he was actually predicting their return, or misleading
everyone with a fib so nobody would become alarmed and throw a monkey wrench
into the works. It was Abraham's full intention to slay Isaac but I'm sure you can
understand why he wouldn't want anyone to know that.

However, Abraham was confident that Isaac wouldn't stay dead; that much is
known for certain so I vote to give Abraham the benefit of the doubt and say he
really did believe that he and Isaac would come back together.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:6a . . Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and put it on his son
Isaac.

Were Isaac not quite a bit grown up at this time I don't think Abraham would have
made him carry the wood.

But why not let the burro haul the wood to the site? Well; if you have never heard a
burro bray up close and personal, I guarantee you would not want one to do it
during a solemn church service. They are LOUD!

● Gen 22:6b-7 . . He himself took the firestone and the knife; and the two walked
off together. Then Isaac said to his father Abraham: Father! And he answered: Yes,
my son. And he said: Here are the firestone and the wood; but where is the sheep
for the burnt offering?

The Hebrew word translated "firestone" just simply means fire, with no stone
implied.

A convenient way to transport fire in those days was with a portable oven; viz: a
fire pot (cf. Gen 15:17). So rather than a stone, which implies striking sparks, they
most likely just brought along the camp stove, which held a receptacle for live
coals. Fire pots in those days were the equivalent of modern propane-fueled
camping equipment.

Since Abraham was the patriarch, it was his prerogative, and his responsibility, to
actually kill the burnt offering and cremate it; so he quite naturally took custody of
the weapon and the coals; as Isaac no doubt fully expected him to.

The word for "sheep" is basically means a member of a flock, which can be either a
sheep or a goat. Neither the age nor the gender mattered in this instance because
Scripture up to this point in time had not yet specified which critters are, and are
not, acceptable for a burnt offering. The only apparent requirement thus far was
that they be "clean" (Gen 8:20)

● Gen 22:8a . . And Abraham said: God will see to the sheep for His burnt offering,
my son.

That turned out to be true. However, before God provided a sheep of His own,
Abraham had to sacrifice Isaac first.

● Gen 22:8b . . And the two of them walked on together.

This is now the second time Genesis says they walked together. Neither one led,
nor brought up the rear, as in the case of so many husbands who leave their wives
dragging along behind at the malls. Incidentally, the dialogue that took place
between Isaac and his dad in verses 7 and 8 are the only recorded words they ever
spoke to each other in the whole Bible.

● Gen 22:9a . .They arrived at the place of which God had told him.

When did that happen . . God telling him? Genesis doesn't say. Jewish tradition
says the site had an aural glow which Abraham and Isaac were enabled to see from
a distance.

Anyway it was now time to tell Isaac the real purpose of their pilgrimage.

I can almost hear Isaac ask: Dad, if I'm dead, then how will God make of me a
great nation whose numbers exceed the stars of heaven? You told me He promised
you that. Yes; God did promise Abraham that in Gen 15:4-5, and Gen 17:18-21.

It is here where Isaac's great faith is revealed; but not so much his faith in God:
rather, faith in his dad. Abraham's influence upon Isaac was astonishing; so much
so that no doubt the lad believed right along with his dad that his death would only
be temporary. Isaac was convinced that God would surely raise him from the dead
in order to make good on His promises to Abraham. This entire episode was meant
to test Abraham but it simultaneously tested his son too.

● Gen 22:9b . . Abraham built an altar there; he laid out the wood;

This was a place where, apparently, Abraham had never worshipped before because
he had to build an altar.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:9c . . he bound his son Isaac;

If Isaac was old enough, and strong enough, to shoulder a load of firewood (Gen
22:6) then he was old enough, and strong enough, to get away from Abraham,
who, at the time, was past 100 years old.

NOTE: If perchance Gen 23:1 took place immediately following the Akedah, then
Abraham would have been 137 at this point in the narrative seeing as how he and
Sarah were ten years apart in age. (Gen 17:17)

Had Isaac not consented to the ritual, then he could have easily escaped because
Abraham was alone; he had no one to assist him to restrain Isaac: the servants
having remained behind with the burro. Besides, Isaac had to agree or the whole
affair would disintegrate into a ritual murder.

Binding was for Isaac's own good. No doubt he was willing enough to die; but
nobody is comfortable with injury. When the knife would begin to make an incision
in Isaac's neck to sever his carotid artery, he might reach up and grab his father's
hand, the meanwhile twisting and thrashing in a natural response to pain and fear--
similar to what most anybody would do in a dentist's chair without Novocain.

The binding would help keep him still and avoid collateral damage; otherwise,
Abraham might accidentally cut off Isaac's nose or poke him in the eye and quite
possibly disfigure him horribly instead of succeeding in killing the lad in a humane
fashion.

● Gen 22:9d . . he laid him on the altar, on top of the wood.

That may seem impossible for a man of Abraham's age, but no specifications for
altars existed at that time. They could be two feet high, ten, or just a rudimentary
hearth of stones laid right on the ground like a campfire or in a shallow excavation
like a wood pit barbecue.

At that moment, even before Isaac was dead, and even before the tiniest spark of a
fire was kindled: Abraham's offering of his son was complete. In other words: had
God not wanted Abraham to sacrifice his son, He would've stopped the proceedings
before Abraham laid his son on the wood because once that happens the offerer
relinquishes ownership of his offering. The altar is a sacred transfer of property
rights. (I have yet to discover a passage in the Bible allowing dedicated items to be
taken back, i.e. reneged.)

From that point on; the offering belongs to God; and it becomes His prerogative to
do with it as He pleases-- to kill Isaac or not to kill him was God's executive right
and privilege. Bottom line is: it wasn't necessary for Isaac to be dead in order to
count as a sacrifice: he only had to be laid on the wood of the altar to count.

"By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received
the promises offered up his only begotten son (Heb 11:17-18)

"Was not our ancestor Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he
offered his son Isaac on the altar?" (Jas 2:21)

It's easily seen from those passages in James and Hebrews that not all human
sacrifice is evil. In point of fact, in certain cases; it's the right thing to do. But the
point is: James and Hebrews makes it clear that Isaac counted as an offering even
though he was not slain.

I just don't know why it is that people think that the 22nd chapter of Genesis
teaches God's supposed abhorrence for all manner of human sacrifice when it is so
obviously meant to convey the quality of Abraham's confidence in God's promise
made at Gen 15:2-6.

In other words: if Abraham was to go on to generate a posterity through his son
whose numbers would be too many to count; then God would have to restore Isaac
to life in order to make good on the promise; and according to Heb 11:17-19
Abraham was counting on that very thing. In other words: according to Jas 2:21
23, Abraham's willingness to kill his son validates Gen 15:2-6 where it's stated that
Abraham believed God.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:10a . . And Abraham picked up the knife

Abraham didn't just pick the knife up and hold it in his hand in some sort of
symbolic gesture; no, he picked it up with premeditated deadly intent.

● Gen 22:10b . . to slay his son.

● Gen 22:12a . .Then an angel of God called to him from heaven: Abraham!
Abraham! And he answered: Here I am. And he said: Do not raise your hand
against the lad, or do anything to him.

There are some who feel that the angel stopped Abraham at this point because he
misunderstood the instructions God gave to him back in the second verse. But an
interpretation of that nature impugns the quality of Abraham's spiritual acumen as
a man whom God said in Gen 20:7 was a prophet. Abraham no doubt understood
his instructions perfectly and knew just what he was expected to do, plus; he had
three days to pray about it and request confirmation.

Abraham was supposed to kill Isaac, and that is exactly what he tried to do, and
would have done, had not the angel stopped him in the nick of time. And the angel
stopped him not because it was wrong. No. The angel stopped Abraham from killing
Isaac because He had seen enough.

● Gen 22:12b . . For now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld
your son, your favored one, from me.

Although the instructions originated with God, they didn't come to Abraham directly
from God, rather, via an angel of God; which are not always celestial beings, viz:
angels of God are sometimes apparitions, e.g. smoke, fire, earthquakes, voices,
horns, wind, and humans. (It is required that people respect those kinds of divine
appearances as if they are God himself in person.)

FAQ: Isn't God omniscient, and doesn't He have an ability to scan the future? Then
why did the voice say: "now" I know. Doesn't God always know everything there is
to know from first to last?

REPLY: Knowing things as a spectator is quite a bit different than knowing things by
omniscience. God sometimes favors seeing things for Himself in real time, as an
eyewitness.

Of course God knew in advance that Abraham would go thru with offering his son,
but that kind of knowing doesn't always satisfy God. No, sometimes He prefers to
be on-site and observe things unfold as current events.

So although God knew by His intellect that Abraham would comply with the angel's
instructions, now He also has a first-hand knowledge of Abraham's compliance by
personal experience, i.e. God, via the angel, was there in the bleachers, so to
speak, watching all the action from first to last.

NOTE: A parallel example is depicted by Rev 20:11-15 wherein John viewed the
scene as a future event but he didn't witness it as a current event. There's quite a
difference between those two kinds of observations.

● Gen 22:13 . .When Abraham looked up, his eye fell upon a ram, caught in the
thicket by its horns. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a
burnt offering in place of his son.

This act of redemption became a requirement in the covenant that Moses' people
entered into with God per Ex 13:13, Ex 34:20, and Num 18:15.

● Gen 22:14 . . And Abraham named that site Jehovah-Jireh, whence the present
saying: On the mount of God there is vision.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 22:15-18 . .The angel of God called to Abraham a second time from heaven,
and said: By Myself I swear, God declares; because you have done this and have
not withheld your son, your favored one, I will bestow My blessing upon you and
make your descendants as numerous as the stars of heaven and the sands on the
seashore; and your descendants shall seize the gates of their foes. All the nations
of the earth shall bless themselves by your seed, because you have obeyed My
command.

Abraham obtained God's oath because "you have obeyed My command". What
command was that? The command back at the beginning of the chapter to offer his
only son as a burnt offering. See? Abraham didn't make a mistake. He understood
God perfectly; and would have slit Isaac's throat and burned him to ashes had not
God pushed the stop button in the final moments.

Far from being scolded for offering a human sacrifice, Abraham is highly
commended for complying; and the promises God made in previous chapters are
now reaffirmed. He lost nothing; but the rather, gained a spiffy bonus: the
Almighty's oath.

Concerning those promises: the first time around, God merely gave His word
(which is normally good enough, and in and of itself quite immutable). Another time
He passed between the pieces; thus notarizing the promises (double whammy). But
this time, God anchored the promises with an oath (grand slam). That is extremely
notable.

Would Abraham have failed to obtain the promises had he refused to offer his only
son? No. He would still have obtained them because the original promises-- made
prior to the oath --are unconditional and guaranteed by the immutability of God's
integrity. What Abraham would have failed to obtain was the oath.

So then, God has gone to every possible length to assure Abraham's seed of the
certainty of those original promises with: 1) His testimony, 2) His passing between
the pieces, and 3) His oath. We don't find God taking oaths very often in the Bible.

● Gen 22:19 . . Abraham then returned to his servants, and they departed together
for Beer-sheba; and Abraham stayed in Beer-sheba.

Isaac isn't specifically named in either the return or the departure, except that the
words "departed together" are highly suggestive of the very same togetherness of
verses 6 and 8. And back in verse 5, Abraham told the servants that he and Isaac
would both return. If Isaac had not been with Abraham on the return trip, the
servants would have surely asked where he was.

The Targums have a pretty interesting postscript at this point.

T. And the angels on high took Izhak and brought him into the school (medresha)
of Shem the Great; and he was there three years. And in the same day Abraham
returned to his young men; and they arose and went together to the Well of the
Seven, and Abraham dwelt at Beira-desheva. And it was after these things, after
Abraham had bound Izhak, that Satana came and told unto Sarah that Abraham
had killed Izhak. And Sarah arose, and cried out, and was strangled, and died from
agony. (Targum Jonathan)

● Gen 22:20 . . Some time later, Abraham was informed: Milcah too has borne
children to your brother Nahor:

Just exactly how much time had passed after The Akedah until this announcement
is uncertain but it was likely at least three days because that's how long it took
Abraham's party to get back home. (Gen 22:4)

Nahor was one of Abraham's brothers and Milcah was Abraham's niece through
Haran, another brother: who was also Lot's dad. Milcah was Nahor's real wife. He
also had a concubine named Reumah.

● Gen 22:21-24 . . Uz the first-born, and Buz his brother, and Kemuel the father of
Aram; and Chesed, Hazo, Pildash, Jidlaph, and Bethuel”-- Bethuel being the father
of Rebecca. These eight Milcah bore to Nahor, Abraham's brother. And his
concubine, whose name was Reumah, also bore children: Tebah, Gaham, Tahash,
and Maacah.

Bethuel and Rebecca are the only two who really stand out in that list. However,
Genesis records everybody because God, apparently for reasons of His own, thinks
they're all important in some way; at least to Himself if not us.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 23:1-2a . . Sarah's lifetime-- the span of Sarah's life --came to one hundred
and twenty-seven years. Sarah died in Kiriath-arba-- now Hebron --in the land of
Canaan;

This is the only woman in the entire Old Testament for whom an age is given at the
time of her death. Isaac was 37 at this point, having been born when Sarah was 90
(Gen 17:17) and Abraham was 137 since he and Sarah were ten years difference in
age (Gen 17:17). She lived in Canaan with her husband for 62 years and they
never once owned their own home. They moved there when he was 75 and she 65
--and Abraham at this point has 38 years on the clock yet to go.

NOTE: If we can safely assume Sarah's death immediately followed the Akedah,
then Isaac would have been 37 when he and Abraham went to the mountain seeing
as how his mom was ninety when he was born.

● Gen 23:2b . . and Abraham proceeded to mourn for Sarah and to bewail her.

Some people think it's weak and unspiritual to mourn for the dead. However; it is
the very best way to let them go. People shouldn't stifle their heartbreak, nor steel
themselves against it. I would rather see people get angry and withdrawn at the
loss of their loved ones than to blow it off as just another passing phase of life.

Sarah had quite a life you know. She was a strong pioneer woman-- taken into the
palaces of a Pharaoh and a King. And she was selected by Almighty God to be the
mother of the people of Israel, and of Messiah: Israel's ultimate monarch. Sarah
was also a genetic path to the seed promised Eve back in Gen 3:15. We can't just
put her in the ground as if she was a commoner no different than anybody else; not
when she's easily one of the most important women who ever lived.

● Gen 23:3a . .Then Abraham rose from beside his dead, and spoke to the Hittites,

Who is the most famous Hittite in the Old Testament? Give up? It's Uriah,
Bathsheba's first husband; whose unwarranted death David instigated. (2Sam
11:1-27)

● Gen 23:3b-4 . . saying: I am a resident alien among you; sell me a burial site
among you, that I may remove my dead for burial.

Abraham had no ancestral claim upon the land. So he had to appeal to the Hittites'
sensibilities; and beg for some property. They, on the other hand, were in a
straight because the land was their heritage and selling off some of their holdings
would diminish the inheritances to be received by their heirs, and plus, the land
would be lost forever; and to an alien yet.

● Gen 23:5b . . And the Hittites replied to Abraham, saying to him: Hear us, my
lord; you are the elect of God among us.

The word for "God"-- 'elohiym --is not really in that verse; an editor took the
liberty to insert it. And the Hebrew word for "elect" doesn't mean elect at all but
means an exalted one; viz: a king or sheik. The Hittites had great respect for
Abraham; and in their estimation he earned the right to a potentate's reception.

● Gen 23:5b . . Bury your dead in the choicest of our burial places; none of us will
withhold his burial place from you for burying your dead.

By donating a sepulcher, instead of selling the land, the Hittites would retain
ownership of the real estate and thus none would be lost to their posterity. In the
future, they could pave over it for a mall, or dig up the whole thing with earth
moving machinery for a residential sub division.

● Gen 23:7 . .Thereupon Abraham bowed low to the people of the land, the Hittites,

How many Jews today would bow to a Hittite, or to any other Gentile for that
matter? Abraham was indeed a very humble man who never let his connection to
God go to his head nor give him a superiority complex. Pride and Prejudice are two
of the Jews' most widely known attributes in modern times; but they didn't get it
from their ancestor; that's for sure.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 23:8 . . and he said to them: If it is your wish that I remove my dead for
burial, you must agree to intercede for me with Ephron, son of Zohar.

The sons of Heth (who were Hittites themselves) would act as the mediator
between Ephron (a fellow Hittite) and Abraham (an Eberite: thus an outsider). It
was only a formality, but nonetheless, an important cultural protocol in those days.

● Gen 23:9 . . Let him sell me the cave of Machpelah that he owns, which is at the
edge of his land. Let him sell it to me, at the full price, for a burial site in your
midst.

The location is favorable for Ephron because it's at the edge of his property line, so
Abraham won't need an easement to access the site, nor will it be an eyesore stuck
out in the middle.

● Gen 23:10a . . Ephron was present among the Hittites; so Ephron the Hittite
answered Abraham in the hearing of the Hittites, all who entered the gate of his
town,

Ephron didn't have to answer personally; but chose to of his own volition.

People who actually lived in a town's proper, were the upper crust-- the merchants,
bankers, judges, city managers, the mayor, and like that. It was important that
those "who entered the gate of his town" be involved in a decision regarding
property sales because of the potential impact upon their own interests.

In those days, land owned by a clan like the Hittites defined the boundaries of their
territory; and each family within a clan owned parcels of it. So when one of the
families, like Ephron's for example, sold some of their parcel to a foreigner, the
whole community suffered a permanent loss of territory.

● Gen 23:10b-11 . . saying: No, my lord, hear me: I give you the field and I give
you the cave that is in it; I give it to you in the presence of my people. Bury your
dead.

Ephron's generosity was no doubt sincere, but merely one more formality towards
closing a deal on the property. Not wanting to appear a greedy beast profiteering
on the loss of a man's wife, he first offered it to Abraham for free.

That was actually a very kind show of respect for Abraham's grief. Abraham will pay
for the property, and I have no doubt both men fully expected a monetary
settlement; but not before Ephron first has an opportunity to make certain
everyone in town sees him pay his respects for the dead of one of the most, if not
the most, highly respected men in all of Canaan.

● Gen 23:12-15 . .Then Abraham bowed low before the people of the land, and
spoke to Ephron in the hearing of the people of the land, saying; If only you would
hear me out. Let me pay the price of the land; accept it from me, that I may bury
my dead there. And Ephron replied to Abraham, saying to him; My lord, do hear
me. A piece of land worth four hundred shekels of silver-- what is that between you
and me? Go and bury your dead.

The shekel of Abraham's day wasn't coinage; but rather, a unit of weight equal to
20 gerahs (Ezek 45:12) which is equivalent to 10 English pennyweights or 1/2
ounce troy. So it would take two of Abraham's shekels to equal one troy ounce of
silver.

The average value of a troy ounce of silver as of Jan 18, 2024 was around 22.82
US dollars. So 400 full shekels would be worth about 4,564 of today's US dollars
(4,498 Euro)

No doubt Ephron had mixed feelings about the property. On the one hand, he, as
well as his countrymen, would prefer it not be sold to a non Hittite. Yet they all
admired Abraham and didn't want to disappoint him, especially during a time of
bereavement.

Ephron didn't actually ask for four hundred shekels. He merely told Abraham what
the property was worth, but that its value meant nothing between friends; as if
Abraham could have it for free. But it was really a subtle way of naming a price
without actually coming right out and naming it; know what I mean?
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
●Gen 23:16 . . Abraham accepted Ephron's terms. Abraham paid out to Ephron the
money that he had named in the hearing of the Hittites-- four hundred shekels of
silver at the going merchants' rate.

In those days they used a balance scale to weigh out precious metals for trading
purposes. Merchant rates are typically less than consumer rates. So Abraham's 400
shekels would have been weighed out with a lighter set of counterweights than
normal in order for him to buy the land at wholesale.

●Gen 23:17-18 . . So Ephron's land in Machpelah, near Mamre-- the field with its
cave and all the trees anywhere within the confines of that field --passed to
Abraham as his possession, in the presence of the Hittites, of all who entered the
gate of his town.

Abraham's purchase of Hittite territory was done in the presence of a goodly
number of blue-blooded Hittite witnesses so there would be no basis for anyone to
contest his rightful ownership. Abraham didn't purchase just the cave, but also the
wooded grounds around it so that Sarah's gravesite was originally a very nice
cemetery.

But if you want to visit her burial site today, be forewarned. The region in and
around Hebron is a political strife zone these days. The monumental shrine erected
over the cave in which Abraham was buried makes this one of the great sights for
visitors with an interest in scriptural history; but since there are frequently violent
clashes between Arabs and Israelis in Hebron it is essential before visiting the town
to check up on the current situation with the tourist information office in Jerusalem.

Sarah's gravesite today (if indeed anybody knows where it really is) is covered by
an Islamic structure called Al-lbrahimi Mosque; in honor of Abraham, Ishmael's
dad. It should be pointed out that the Mosque isn't intended to promote Judaism's
Yahweh, but rather, Islam's Allah.

●Gen 23:19-20 . . And then Abraham buried his wife Sarah in the cave of the field
of Machpelah, facing Mamre-- now Hebron --in the land of Canaan. Thus the field
with its cave passed from the Hittites to Abraham, as a burial site.

Not only a burial site, but also as a permanent real estate holding-- the people of
Israel's very first piece of their very own country; which gives them legitimate roots
there even prior to the Exodus; and way ahead of the Palestinians.\
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 24:1a . . Abraham was now old, advanced in years,

Abraham was 100 when Isaac was born (Gen 21:25). The lad was 40 when he
married Rebecca (Gen 25:20). So that makes Abraham 140 at this point in the
record. But although Abraham was worn; he wasn't worn out. Abraham still had
plenty of vigor left in him and would go on to live another 35 years and even father
more children. As far as the Scriptural record goes, Abraham enjoyed excellent
health at this point in his life and still had his wits about him too.

But Abraham is getting up in years and it's high time he got Isaac on the road to
producing that nation to be numbered as the sand of the sea shore and the stars in
the sky rather than waiting till the last minute to do so.

● Gen 24:1b . . and the Lord had blessed Abraham in all things.

The "all things" at this point in the narrative would pertain to Abraham's economic
prosperity because that's how his steward will represent him at verse 35.

● Gen 24:2a . . And Abraham said to the steward of his household, who had charge
of all that he owned,

It is impossible to identify the steward because his name isn't disclosed anywhere
throughout chapter 24. It could be the Eliezer of Gen 15; however, many years
have gone by since then. Abraham was eighty-six when Ishmael was born in
chapter 16, and he is 140 in this chapter; so it has been more than 54 years since
the last mention of Eliezer. The steward at this point in Abraham's home may even
be Eliezer's son by now, but nobody really knows for sure.

Abraham's steward is going to act as an ambassador-- not for Abraham, but for
Isaac. Abraham, for reasons undisclosed, can't leave Canaan to do this himself. So
the steward is dispatched as a proxy for Abraham to act in his son Isaac's best
interests.

● Gen 24:2b-3a . . Put your hand under my thigh and I will make you swear

The Hebrew word translated "thigh" has a couple of meanings. It can be the leg's
big muscle (e.g. Gen 32:26, Song 7:1) and it can be a man's privates. (e.g. Gen
46:26, Num 5:21)

In those days, men didn't always raise their right hands to take an oath with each
other-- sometimes they held sacred objects in their hand like we do today when a
swearer puts their hand upon a Bible or a Torah Scroll. In this particular case in
Genesis, the object held in the hand was a holy patriarch. Only twice in the entire
Old Testament is an oath recorded taken in this manner. The first is here, and the
other is Gen 47:29. At the very least, the event goes to show that patriarchs back
in those days were highly regarded as if divine beings.

Some Bible students construe Jesus' words at Matt 5:33-37 to mean that taking an
oath is intrinsically a sin. But that's not the tenor of his words at all. What he really
said in that passage is that taking an oath sets you up for a fall because for one
thing; people are too quick to swear, and for another human beings cannot
guarantee that unforeseen circumstances won't prevent them from making good on
their oath.

In other words: the nature of promises is that they are immune to changing
circumstances. So unless you can see the future, then if at all possible, make your
promises without sealing them with an oath because if you drag God into your
promise; He's going to expect you to make good on it come hell or high water or
risk getting called on the carpet to explain why you think so little of His name.

"If a man vow a vow unto the Lord, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond;
he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceeds out of his
mouth." (Num 30:2)

Anyway: if taking an oath were intrinsically a sin, then God himself would be a
sinner (e.g. Gen 22:15-18, Ps 89:3-4, Ps 89:35-37, Ps 110:4, Isa 14:24, Isa
45:23, Isa 54:9, Heb 4:3, et al). Jesus too would be in contradiction of his own
teachings because he testified under oath that he was the Messiah; God's son.
(Matt 23:63-65)

● Gen 24:3b . . by The Lord, the God of heaven and the God of the earth

"The Lord" is translated from the Hebrew word YHVH a.k.a. Jehovah and/or YHWH
a.k.a. Yahweh.

Exodus 6:3 gives the impression that Abraham wasn't aware of that name. But here
in Gen 24, Abraham instructed his steward to swear by it.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 24:3c-4 . . that you will not take a wife for my son from the daughters of the
Canaanites among whom I dwell, but will go to the land of my birth and get a wife
for my son Isaac.

The words "land of my birth" can also mean "to my country and to my relatives."
That is exactly how the steward understood them because that is how he will
narrate Abraham's instructions in Gen 24:38.

I just bet Abraham was fully aware of the fate of the men of God who married the
daughters of men back in the early parts of Genesis. Those men of God all died in
the Flood right along with their impious wives.

The influence of a non God-fearing spouse could prove fatal to Isaac's future. If he's
going to serve and worship his dad's god, then he is going to have to marry a girl
who fully appreciates and supports the prophecies regarding Abraham's progeny.

Spouse hunting demands a level head and cold steel discernment or there is real
risk in ending up like Solomon, one of the greatest of God's men, who was ruined
by his marriages to women who didn't share his religious beliefs. (1Kgs 11:1-10)

● Gen 24:5-6 . . And the servant said to him: What if the woman does not consent
to follow me to this land, shall I then take your son back to the land from which you
came? Abraham answered him: You must not, for any reason, take my son back
there!

I think Abraham knew only too well just how much like sheep men are. When they
fall in love, they'll literally sacrifice their lives to keep a woman; which is exactly
what Jacob did. Rachel was a good girl; but she cost Jacob fourteen years of his life
away from home in a foreign land with a bad influence: uncle Laban.

Suppose Isaac went up north and feasted his glims on Rebecca? Well, up ahead
we're going to find out that she was young, cute, and filled out in all the right
places. I've seen what that does to men. I worked with a married man once who
kept a young love on the side. He often used his wages to buy that girl jewelry
while his wife and two little kids were housed in a ramshackle rental unit.

It was too risky to let Isaac go up there. He might be tempted to remain with
Rebecca if she refused to live so far off from her family. Isaac's future was in the
land deeded to Abraham on oath; not up there in Mesopotamia; and his bride's
place was with him and The Lord; not with her family and Laban's idols.

● Gen 24:7 . .The Lord, the God of heaven, who took me from my father's house
and from my native land, who promised me on oath, saying; "I will assign this land
to your offspring" He will send His angel before you, and you will get a wife for my
son from there.

The identity of "His angel" is interesting. It's not referred to as one of His angels;
just His angel. Jacob knew His angel as Jehovah; the divine benefactor he
encountered on the way north during his flight from Esau. (Gen 28:12-15, Gen
48:17)

NOTE: I sincerely believe that God Himself has never even once been to the Earth
in person. He stays put, secluded in a sort of forbidden city somewhere apart from
the cosmos and His business down here is conducted by a supreme celestial being
who has the authority to speak for God, to speak as God, and to be respected as
God. This supreme celestial being is curious in that it is capable of appearing in a
fully functioning human body, viz: a living avatar. (eg. Gen 18:1-33, Ex 24:9-11,
John 1:18)

● Gen 24:8-10a . . And if the woman does not consent to follow you, you shall then
be clear of this oath to me; but do not take my son back there. So the servant put
his hand under the thigh of his master Abraham and swore to him as bidden. Then
the servant took ten of his master's camels

Nobody is quite sure exactly when camels were domesticated. The earliest depiction
of them in relief and cuneiform text as beasts of burden and transportation is
sometime around 1100 BC.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 24:10b . . and set out, taking with him all the bounty of his master;

The servant will need to demonstrate to the bride, and to the bride's family, that
she'll be well taken care of. The servant of course didn't take along everything
Abraham owned in total, but merely an adequate representation of his abundant
wealth which, by inheritance, was Isaac's too.

Additional men accompanied the servant (Gen 24:32) who were very likely all
armed (Gen 14:14); not only for the caravan's protection, but for the bride's as
well. No doubt included among the camel's burdens were tents, victuals, provender,
water, and appropriate accommodations for the bride's comfort on the journey back
to Canaan. It was at least five hundred miles from Hebron up to Abraham's people
in Mesopotamia, so the return trip couldn't possibly be made in a single day on
camels and would necessitate overnight bivouacs in rugged country.

● Gen 24:10c . . and he made his way to Aram-naharaim, to the city of Nahor.

Aram-naharaim refers to ancient Mesopotamia; Abraham's homeland. (Acts, 7:2)

The details of the journey are passed over. It would have been fun to hear about
the caravan's adventures. How they had to dodge a flock of ostriches that ran out
in the road, and maybe how a lion came around at night and spooked everybody, or
how one of the men fell asleep at the wheel and his camel ran off the road and hit a
tree; stuff like that. But Genesis has priorities; and the journey's details were not
one of them. In a blink, the caravan arrives; a trip that took maybe two weeks or
so; and Rebecca rapidly becomes the prime focus. This chapter, after all, about the
bride; rather than the groom.

● Gen 24:11 . . He made the camels kneel down by the well outside the city, at
evening time, the time when women come out to draw water.

"evening time" is from an ambiguous word that indicates any time between high
noon and sunset as opposed to morning which can indicate any time between
sunrise and high noon.

● Gen 24:12 . . And he said: O Lord, God of my master Abraham, grant me good
fortune this day, and deal graciously with my master Abraham:

This steward was a God-fearing man, and truly faithful to the one who sent him on
this errand. His prayer is not self centered, but centered upon the best interests of
his master's son.

● Gen 24:13-14 . . Here I stand by the spring as the daughters of the townsmen
come out to draw water; let the maiden to whom I say "Please, lower your jar that
I may drink" and who replies "Drink, and I will also water your camels"-- let her be
the one whom You have decreed for Your servant Isaac. Thereby shall I know that
You have dealt graciously with my master.

This man didn't beat around the bush, nor begin reading from a siddur, nor a
missal, nor did he chant by rote, nor blather in tongues. He gets right down to
business and spells out his concerns distinctly and in plain language. Let me say
something very clearly: If you are the kind of person who has to pray in tongues
because you don't have enough command of your own native language to express
yourself in any other way, then maybe you should go back to school for a while.

Of great interest is the steward's apparent lack of concern regarding the
prospective bride's looks. Only God truly knew who would be right for Isaac, and
Abraham's steward is not going to select a bride for his master's son like as if she's
flesh on the line the way the sons of God did back in Gen 6:2. No; she must be
hand-picked by God alone because He alone knows what's in a heart. If the girl that
God chooses for Isaac is attractive; well that will be a bonus, but absolutely not the
deciding factor.

● Gen 24:15 . . He had scarcely finished speaking, when Rebecca-- born to Bethuel,
the son of Milcah the wife of Abraham's brother Nahor --came out with her jar on
her shoulder.

As fortune would have it, the very first girl to arrive is Becky. Although she's related
to Abraham, at this point Abraham's steward doesn't know who she is yet. In fact
he's probably expecting to conduct many tiresome interviews; testing one girl after
another until the right one shows up.
_

 

[Olde Tymer]

~
● Gen 24:16a . .The maiden was very beautiful,

Some chafe at that passage and refuse to believe Genesis is talking about Becky's
physical assets. However, later on, in Gen 26:6-7, Isaac will attempt his dad's old
trick and say Becky is his sister; in order to save his skin. The reason Isaac gives
for the lie is he believed the men of Gerar would be tempted to kill him because
Becky was attractive. It is highly unlikely pagan men would take Becky away from
Isaac just because she had a beautiful personality. As a rule, ancient men didn't
fight over the nice girls; they battled for the alluring ones.

● Gen 24:16b . . a virgin

The Hebrew word is bethuwlah (beth-oo-law') which is somewhat ambiguous. It can
indicate a maiden, a bride; and also a city or state. Technically, bethuwlaw doesn't
necessarily indicate a girl who's never slept with a man. The primary denotation is
chronological, and the word simply indicates a mature young woman of
marriageable age whether she is married or not; e.g. Joel 1:8, where a bethuwlah
laments the husband of her youth.

● Gen 24:16c . . whom no man had known.

Well; that settles it. This bethuwlah was a flower in full bloom, and as fresh as any
daisy could ever be.

● Gen 24:16d . . She went down to the spring, filled her jar, and came up.

The "spring" in this case was a small pool of water fed by an aquifer, which is
different than an artesian well; they gush, while aquifers seep.

Some of the shafts of ancient man-made wells in that part of the world resemble
mini open-pit mines; with steps hewn into the sides to facilitate access to the water
for dipping jars and buckets. Becky's spring was likely constructed like that.

● Gen 24:17a . .The servant ran toward her

The Hebrew word for "ran" is the same word used in Gen 18:2 and 18:7 to describe
Abraham's movement when the three men appeared in his camp. Abraham was
about 99 years old at the time and it's very doubtful he was able to move his legs
all that fast. It's far more likely he just hastened.

In any case, it was nevertheless essential that Abraham's steward not waste any
time because Becky had strong legs and would surely be gone away home in a
blink.

● Gen 24:17b . . and said: Please, let me sip a little water from your jar.

It's amazing that a gorgeous young girl like Becky would allow a total stranger to
approach her without protest or without screaming for help. Was she naïve? Was
she foolish? It would not be wise to do that in some parts of New York, Chicago, or
Los Angeles. A seemingly honest appeal for assistance could very well be a
distraction while an accomplice sneaks up behind you.

Although Becky arrived first, ahead of the other girls, by now there may have been
several others milling around the spring because that was the time of day for them
to be there. In groups, they could all watch out for each other. Genesis doesn't tell
about any of the others though because the spotlight is totally on Isaac's future
bride.

● Gen 24:18a . . Drink, my lord: she said,

The Hebrew word for "lord" is 'adown (aw-done') and was culturally appropriate for
courteously addressing a male superior; whether actual or assumed; viz: fathers,
aged men, kings, husbands, and/or God. In the USA, it's appropriate to address
men as "sir" and/or "mister".
_