Reading: "Creation" by James Lindsay ISBE

Result 1- CREATION
kre-a'-shun (bara' "to create"; ktisis, "that which is created," "creature"):

1. Creation as Abiding:
A lot of ideas that tend to create a negative basis for the discussion of creation have now been
addressed. Creation can no longer be thought of only as the beginning act in which God made
all that is. It must also be thought of as including everything that exists in creation to this day.
This is because God did not create substance that can exist without Him. Rather, God
continually sustains all that is and continues to be. For this reason we cannot think of God's
creation as a sort of machine that, once built, will continue to function without further support
from its creator.

2. Mistaken Ideas About Creation

We also cannot think of God’s involvement in creation as only that of a “First Cause,” or an
initial interaction from outside the universe that set the universe in motion. The earth, the sun,
the moon, and all things in the universe are indeed today as much His creation as the first
Creative act recorded in Genesis. We must agree that God is present everywhere. He is still All
and in All, but we must be careful to distinguish this from pantheism. The universe is not God,
nor is God the universe. Rather, He created the universe of His own free will, which contradicts
the Gnostic theories that the universe was created through natural and necessary “emanation.”
This rules out the “carpenter” and the “gardener” theories, as well as the “architect” theory of
Plato. In addition, changes in creation are shown to be in harmony with creation in that God’s
continual involvement in creation can be seen through what He has created. Everything that
exists, whether here on this earth or anywhere in the universe, large or small, depends
completely upon God for its existence.
3. Biblical Conception of Creation
The doctrine of creation – that is to say, of the origin and continuing existence of everything
that exists finitely – as the work of God is a necessary assumption of any Biblical awareness.
Biblical awareness or Biblical world and life view is our system of belief, our ability to perceive
things beyond the natural or material world as Isaiah 55:9 says, "For as the heavens are higher
than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your
thoughts."(ESV)
Biblical awareness is capable of much deeper insight than science is capable of. The truth of
creation is not one that can exist without the presence of God. Rather, the energy and wisdom
by which the universe – which once did not exist – came into being were not natural fragments
of an already existing universe. Science is only able to record the patterns and history of
nature, but in creation something greater than the patterns of nature must have occurred. This
greater occurrence must be thought of as the work of a Divine intelligence, present everywhere
in the changing and developing universe. God is the Sovereign Creator, always existing
everywhere within the universe He created. Other than the story of the origin of all things at the
beginning of Genesis, which are written for the purpose of our benefit, the Old Testament
doesn’t contain any theoretical account of either the method or the order that God used to
create the universe.
4. The Genesis Cosmogony:
The creation account in Genesis was not written to reveal the physical science of the universe.
They were written to reveal the order, law and continuing work of creation. The origin account
in Genesis teaches a process of continuing to change as well as a creation. . The Old
Testament teaches the origin of time-worlds – of successive ages in a linear progression of
time – but the emphasis is not on these. The emphasis is on the Divine Word speaking into
existence things that formerly did not exist.
5. Created Matter not Eternal:
There is no account in the Old or the New Testament that would lead us to believe that any
kind of eternal matter existed before creation. It would be wrong to say that the origin of
physical matter was left out of the account of creation found in Genesis. This is even
considering Genesis as a poetical and religious account of the way creation was accomplished.
However, it is not wise to build our philosophy of the existence of matter and the method of
creation on passages in Genesis that do not create a firm foundation for this doctrine to be
discussed. Yet, the New Testament also contains the message that matter came into being
and was not pre-existing – by this it is meant that matter and time were due to the outflowing
Divine Word and the originative Will of God rather than to being built out of the invisible
essence of God. This is the best interpretation of Hebrews 11:3: "By faith we understand that
the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things
that are visible."(ESV)
6. "Wisdom" in Creation:
In the books of the Old Testament, for example Psalms, Proverbs, and Jeremiah, God’s work
of creation is declared to be the work of Wisdom. This Wisdom is not separate from Goodness,
and this can be fully brought out in the Book of Job. The heavens declare the glory of God, an
intuitive knowledge of God is revealed through the experience of creation. As Romans 1:19-20
says, "For what can be known about God is plain to them. For his invisible attributes, namely,
his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the
world, in things that have been made. So they are without excuse."(ESV) A fuller knowledge of
the purposes of creation are revealed in the Bible and are taken by faith as Hebrews 11:3 says,
"By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen
was not made out of things that are visible."(ESV) In this creation the thought of His absolute
Wisdom is made a reality by the actions of His perfect Love. We must maintain the philosophy
that God is the purpose for which all was created and toward which creation strives. If the
purpose of creation were other than and independent of God, then the purpose of creation
would restrain and contain Him within its bounds which is impossible.
7. Creation Is A Free, Personal Act:
Our Biblical awareness must maintain that the creation of the universe was a free act by God,
not compulsory in any way, and that He is so much greater than the universe that everything
that exists does so only because He has given it existence. The scriptures are saturated with
this truth from the beginning to the end. Neither Immanuel Kant nor Herbert Spencer have
been able to attain the conception of creation through data of what we can perceive with our
senses, for they both fail to acknowledge Divine Personality. Spencer has pushed forward the
idea that creation is absurd and that a self-existent Creator, by whom and through whom
everything that is has been made is not even worthy of consideration. In making this statement,
Spencer ignores his own scientific methodology and creates a purposefully deceptive
argument that the idea of a Creator holds no merit in philosophy or science because he cannot
fathom the existence of such a Creator. He speaks as though a true and sufficient cause were
not enough to believe in and seek such a Creator, and as though a Divine act of will were not
sufficient to bring into being all that exists. Yet, anything that exists that is dependent for its
existence will always, without fail, lead logical thought to the necessary existence of a Being
that is not dependent.
8. Creation and Evolution:
Evolution does not by any means disprove creation because it cannot explain where matter
came from. Furthermore, evolution is unable to say why motion within matter began in the first
place. It is obvious that science, which is concerned only with the matter of processes and
patterns, cannot speak to the origins of matter or the Creation of the universe, since these
matters are beyond its scope and beyond even mortal knowledge or understanding. We can
say that creation did not occur in time, since time itself did not exist prior to the existence of the
world. The problems encountered in supposing an ordinary creation in time can never be
overcome as long as we continue to view eternity as an indefinitely long time. Augustine was
correct in saying that from the human standpoint the world was not made in time, but rather
with time. Time is itself something that was created at the same time with, and is even
conditioned by, the creation of the world and the movements of the heavenly beings. To say,
as many might say, that God performed His work of creation in time would make time
independent of God, or it would make God dependent on time. However, because the idea of
time is so ingrained in all our psychological experience, the idea of a concrete beginning of
time is incomprehensible to us.
9. Creation ex nihilo:
This brings us to the frequent objection that creation could not have come out of nothing, since
“nothing comes out of nothing.” This would mean that matter must be eternal. But if matter is
eternal and separate from God, it is also independent of God and as a result has the power to
limit or condition to him. We don’t have any direct knowledge of the origin of matter, and the
idea that it must be self-existent is plagued with so many objections that it becomes absurd,
ludicrous, and even hopeless. The axiom that “nothing comes out of nothing” does not
contradict creation. The universe comes from God, and God is not nothing. Even so, the axiom
cannot be said to apply to creation. It only really applies to the events following its creation.
Something does not come from nothing. But there is another truth that is opposite to this, and
that is that something exists before something, or in the case of creation, some One.
10. Creation From God's Will:
It is enough to know that God has without anyone or anything else the power and resources
sufficient to create the world. We do not need to define the methods He used in creating. If our
faith is to be rational, or our spiritual knowledge to be based in reason, we must believe that
the entity on which the world is dependent is neither matter nor elements, but a personal Spirit
or a creative Will. We have no right to think that the world was made out of nothing, and
determine that this nothing is actually God, as Johannes Eriugena did. What we can say with
surety is that everything that God creates owes its existence to His will and nothing else. Divine
Personality that existed outside of and prior to the world is the foundation and the condition of
the beginning of the world.
11. Error of Pantheism:
In a sense, the beginning of the universe can be said to be relative rather than fixed. God is
always before the universe – coming before it, the sole Cause of it, and its Creator. It continues
to exist only because of Him. If we say, as Victor Cousin did, that God creates eternally from
necessity, we risk becoming Spinozistic* pantheists. For we would be identifying God with the
impersonal matter of the universe that is without awareness by saying that He does not
possess absolute freedom. Similarly, if we take Schelling’s view that God is not truly God but a
dark background without rationality which was the original foundation of the Divine Being, we
may try to find a basis for the matter in the universe, but this leaves us in danger of becoming
aligned with – through ideas tainted with a physical substance or form of god – the form of
pantheism that identifies God as nothing but the soul of the universe.
We are certain that the universe has been caused – that is to say, that it must have some
reason for existence. Even if our philosophy was so idealistic as to portray all the universe as
one grand illusion, an illusion so enormous would still have to be caused by Someone. Even if
we do not accept the idea of a First Cause acting on the world from outside the world and
before the world in time, this does not take away the need to establish a Cause. Even in this
case, an underlying and determining Cause of the universe would still be required to be
thought of as its Source..
12. The End--the Divine Glory:
Creation is rife with a purpose that reflects the glory of the eternal and personal God, who is its
creator in a full and real sense. And yet we still have more questions about creation, for of His
continued work we can say with Isaiah, “Truly You are a God who hides Himself” (Isaiah 45:15,
ESV). As we continue to learn more about Creation, its glory, because it reveals God, should
always stir up within us a deeper sense of the feeling expressed in Psalm 8:1,9 (ESV), “O Lord,
our Lord, how majestic is your name in all the earth!”
LITERATURE.
James Orr, Christian View of God and the World, 1st edition, 1893; J. Iverach, Christianity and
Evolution, 1894; S. Harris, God the Creator and Lord of All, 1897; A. L. Moore, Science and the
Faith, 1889; B. P. Bowne, Studies in Theism, new edition, 1902; G. P. Fisher, Grounds of
Theistic and Christian Belief, new edition, 1902; J. Lindsay, Recent Advances in Theistic
Philosophy of Religion, 1897; A. Dorner, Religionsphilosophie, 1903; J. Lindsay, Studies in
European Philosophy, 1909; O. Dykes, The Divine Worker in Creation and Providence, 1909;
J. Lindsay, The Fundamental Problems of Metaphysics, 1910.
Taken from an article originally written by James Lindsay and updated by Henry and Pamela
Reyenga
*Baruch Spinoza was a mid-17th century Dutch philosopher who argued that God was abstract
and impersonal, and constituted the form of all things, or, to put it more simply, that everything
in the universe, when taken in its entirety, was God.

Reading: "Sin" Francis J. McConnell ISBE

Sin was introduced into the world by the first man, Adam and the first woman, Eve. God
created Adam and Eve to serve God and to tend the garden. There were two special trees in
the garden. The tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God commanded
that Adam and Eve were not to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Then one day
Adam and Eve were approached by the serpent, who was the personification of Satan an arch
foe of God. We read in Genesis 3:1-3, "Now the serpent was more crafty than any other beast
of the field that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, 'Did God actually say, 'You
shall not eat of any tree in the garden'?' And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of
the fruit of the trees in the garden, but God said, 'You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is
in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'"(ESV)

Adam and Eve disobeyed an express command of God. The seductiveness of temptation is
nowhere more forcefully stated than in this narrative. We read in Genesis 3:6 that the fruit of
the tree was pleasant to look upon; it was good to eat; it was to be desired to make one wise;
moreover, the tempter moved upon the woman by the method of the half truth, God had said
that disobedience to the command would bring death; the tempter urged that disobedience
would not bring death, implying that the command of God had meant that death would
immediately follow the eating of the forbidden fruit. In the story the various avenues of
approach of sin to the human heart are graphically suggested, but after the seductiveness of
evil has thus been set forth, the fact remains that both transgressors knew they were
transgressing (Genesis 3:2). Of course, the story is told in simple, naive fashion, but its
enduring spiritual truth is at once apparent. There has been much discussion about sin during
the Christian ages, but that discussion points to the willful disobedience to the commands of
God.

1. Sin as Disobedience:

A fairly exact definition of sin based on Biblical data would be that sin is the transgression of
the law of God, as 1 John 3:4 says, "Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices
lawlessness; sin is lawlessness." Ordinarily, sin is defined simply as "the transgression of the
law," but the idea of God is so completely the essential conception of the entire Biblical
revelation that we can best define sin as disobedience to the law of God. It will be seen that
primarily sin is an act, but from the very beginning it has been known that acts have effects, not
only in the outward world of things and persons, but also upon him who commits the act.

2. Effects the Inner Life:

Hence, we find throughout the Scriptures a growing emphasis on the idea of the sinful act as
not only a fact in itself, but also as a revelation of an evil disposition on the part of him who
commits the act. As Genesis 6:5 says, "The LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great
in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."

3. Involves All People:

Then also there is the further idea that deeds which so profoundly effect the inner life of an
individual in some way have an effect in transmitting evil tendencies to the descendants of a
sinful individual as Romans 5:12 says, "Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one
man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned..." Hence, we
reach shortly the conception, not only that sin is profoundly inner in its consequences, but that
its effects reach outward also to an extent which practically involves the race. Around these
various items of doctrine differing systems of theology have sprung up.

4. The Freedom of Humanity

In the early Biblical account of Genesis 3, there is implicit the thought of the freedom of man to
serve God or to reject God.

The Old and New Testaments do not say people are born into sin by forces over which they
have no control. Satan tempts the woman aimed at her will. By easy steps, indeed, she moves
toward the trangression, but the transgression is a transgression and nothing else. Of course,
the evil deed is at once followed by attempts on the part of the transgressors to explain
themselves, but the futility of the explanations is part of the point of the narrative.

In all discussion of the problem of freedom as relating to sin, we must remember that the
Biblical revelation is from first to last busy with the thought of the righteousness and justice and
love of God (Genesis 6:9 tells us that because of justice or righteousness, Noah walked with
God).

God is free and he made Adam and Eve free to follow him or not. Adam and Even choose to
freely disobey with the hope that this act would bring them benefit.

Of course this does not mean that a person is free in all things. Freedom is limited in various
ways, but we must retain enough of freedom in our thought of the constitution of people to
make possible our holding fast to the Biblical idea of sin as transgression. Adam may have
been free to sin or not to sin, but, "in his fall we sinned all."
5. A Transgression against Light:

The progress of the Biblical teaching concerning sin also would seem to imply that the
transgression of the law must be a transgression committed against the light (Acts 17:30; 1
Timothy 1:13). To be sinful in any full sense of the word, a person must know that the course
which he/she is adopting is an evil course.

This does not necessarily mean a full realization of the evil of the course. It is a fact, both of
Biblical revelation and of revelation of all times, that people who commit sin do not realize the
full evil of their deeds until after the sin has been committed (2 Samuel 12:1-13).

This is partly because:

1. the consequences of sin do not declare themselves until after the deed has been committed;

2. partly also because of the remorse of the conscience; and

3. partly from the humiliation at being discovered;

In some sense there must be an awareness of the evil of a course to make the adoption of the
course sinful. E.g. in estimating the moral worth of Biblical characters, especially those of
earlier times, we must keep in mind the standards of the times in which they lived. These
standards were partly set by the customs of the social group, but the customs were, in many
cases, made sacred by the claim of divine sanction. Hence, we find Biblical characters giving
themselves readily to polygamy and warfare. The Scriptures themselves, however, throw light
upon this problem. They refer to early times as times of ignorance, an ignorance which God
Himself was willing to overlook (Acts 17:30). Even so ripe a moral consciousness as that of
Paul felt that there was ground for forgiveness toward a course which he himself later
considered evil, because in that earlier course he had acted ignorantly (Acts 26:9; 1 Timothy
1:13).

6. Sin in the Inner Self

The Bible shows us the advancement from sin conceived of as the violation of external
commands to sin conceived of as an unwillingness to keep the commandments of God in the
depths of the inner life. This has much Biblical support:

In the teaching of Jesus the emphasis upon the inner spirit as the essential factor in the moral
life came to its climax. Jesus honored the Law, but He pushed the keeping of the Law back
from the mere performance of externals to the inner stirrings of motives. It is not merely the
actual commission of adultery, for example, that is sin; it is the lustful desire which leads to the
evil glance; it is not merely the actual killing of the man that is murder; it is the spirit of hatred
which makes the thought of murder welcome (Matthew 5:21,27). Paul caught the spirit of
Jesus and carried the thought of Jesus out into more elaborate and formal statements. There is
a law of the inner life with which man should bind himself, and this law is the law of Christ's life
itself (Romans 8:1-4). While both Jesus and Paul recognized the place of the formal codes in
the moral life of individuals and societies, they wrought a great service for righteousness in
setting on high the obligations upon the inner spirit. The follower of Christ is to guard the
inmost thoughts of his heart. The commandments are not always precepts which can be given
articulated statement; they are rather instincts and intuitions and glimpses which must be
followed, even when we cannot give them full statement.

7. Sin as a Directional Force:

From this standpoint we are able to discern something of the force of the Biblical teaching as to
whether sin is to be looked upon as directional. Very often sin is defined as the mere absence
of goodness. The person who sins is one who does not keep the Law. This, however, is hardly
the full Biblical conception. Of course, the person who does not keep the Law is regarded as a
sinner, but the idea transgression is very often that of a directional refusal to keep the
commandment and a breaking of the commandment. Two courses are set before people, one
good, the other evil. The evil course is, in a sense, something directional in itself.

The evil person does not stand still; he/she moves as truly as the good person moves; he/she
becomes a directional force for evil. In all our discussions we must keep clearly in mind the
truth that evil is not something existing in and by itself. The Scriptures deal with evil people,
and the evil people are as directional as their natures permit them to be. In the thought, e.g., of
the writer who describes the conditions which, in his belief, made necessary the Flood, we
have a directional state of evil contaminating almost the whole world (Genesis 6:11).

And so, in the New Testament, Paul's thought of Roman society is of a world of sinful people
moving with increasing swiftness toward the destruction of themselves and of all around them
through doing evil.

8. Repentance:

It is with this seriousness of sin before us that we must think of forgiveness from sin. We can
understand very readily that sin can be forgiven only on condition that people seek forgiveness
in the name of the Lord. But forgiveness is to be taken seriously. In both the Old Testament
and New Testament repentance is not merely a changed attitude of mind. It is an attitude
which shows its sincerity by willingness to do everything possible to undo the evil which the
sinner has wrought (Luke 19:8). If there is any consequence of the sinner's own sin which the
sinner can himself make right, the sinner must in himself genuinely repent and make that
consequence right. In one sense repentance is not altogether something done once for all. The
seductiveness of sin is so great that there is need of humble and continuous watching
(Galatians 6:1).

9. Forgiveness:

Scriptures teach that even though forgiveness is available the consequences of sin still exist.
Change in the attitude of a sinner necessarily means change in the attitude of God. The sinner
and God, however, are persons, and the Scriptures always speak of the problem of sin after a
completely personal fashion.

The changed attitude affects the personal standing of the sinner in the sight of God. But God is
the person who creates and carries on a moral universe. In carrying on that universe He must
keep moral considerations in their proper place as the constitutional principles of the universe.
While the father welcomes back the prodigal to the restored personal relations with himself, he
cannot, in the full sense, blot out the fact that the prodigal has been a prodigal. The personal
forgiveness may be complete, but the elimination of the consequences of the evil life is
possible only through the long lines of healing set at work.

The person who has sinned against his body can find restoration from the consequences of the
sin only in the forces which make for bodily healing. So also with the mind and will. The mind
which has thought evil must be cured of its tendency to think evil. To be sure the healing
processes may come almost instantly through the upheaval of a great experience, but on the
other hand, the healing processes may have to work through long years. The will which has
been given to sin may feel the stirrings of sin after the life of forgiveness has begun. All this is a
revealing, not only of the power of sin, but of the constitutional morality of the universe.
Forgiveness must not be interpreted in such terms as to make the transgression of the Law of
God in any sense a light or trivial offense. But, on the other hand, we must not set limits to the
healing power of the cross of God. With the removal of the power which makes for evil the
possibility of development in real human experience is before the life. The word of the Master
is that He "came that they may have life, and may have it abundantly" (John 10:10). Sin is
serious, because it thwarts life. Sin is given so large a place in the thought of the Biblical
writers simply because it blocks the channel of movement toward the fullest life which the
Scriptures teach is the aim of God in placing men in the world.

Francis J. McConnell

Reading: "Abraham" J. Oscar Boyd ISBE

ABRAHAM a'-bra-ham:

I. Kindred

Genesis 11:27, which introduces Abraham, contains the heading, "These are the generations
of Terah." All the story of Abraham is contained within the section of Genesis so entitled.
Through Terah Abraham's ancestry is traced back to Shem, and he is thus related to
Mesopotamian and Arabian families that belonged to the "Semitic" race. He is further
connected with this race geographically by his birthplace, which is given as 'ur-kasdim (see
UR), and by the place of his pre-Canaanitish residence, Haran in the Aramean region. The
purely Semitic ancestry of his descendants through Isaac is indicated by his marriage with his
own half-sister (Genesis 20:12), and still further emphasized by the choice for his daughter-in-
law of Rebekah, descended from both of his brothers, Nahor and Haran (Genesis 11:29; 22:22
f). Both the beginning and the end of the residence in Haran are left chronologically
undetermined, for the new beginning of the narrative at Genesis 12:1 is not intended by the
writer to indicate chronological sequence, though it has been so understood, e.g. by Stephen
(Acts 7:4). All that is definite in point of time is that an Aramean period of residence intervened
between the Babylonian origin and the Palestinian career of Abraham. It is left to a comparison
of the Biblical data with one another and with the data of archaeology, to fix the opening of
Abraham's career in Palestine not far from the middle of the 20th century BC.

II. Career

Briefiy summed up, that career was as follows:

A. Period of Wandering:

Abraham, endowed with Yahweh's promise of limitless blessing, leaves Haran with Lot his
nephew and all their establishment, and enters Canaan (Genesis 12:1-9). Successive stages
of the slow journey southward are indicated by the mention of Shechem, Bethel and the Negeb
(South-country). Driven by famine into Egypt (Genesis 12:10-20), Abraham finds hospitable
reception, though at the price of his wife's honor, whom the Pharaoh treats in a manner
characteristic of an Egyptian monarch. (Gressmann, op. cit., quotes from Meyer, Geschichte
des Alterthums, 12, 142, the passage from a magic formula in the pyramid of Unas, a Pharaoh
of the Fifth Dynasty: "Then he (namely, the Pharaoh) takes away the wives from their
husbands whither he will if desire seize his heart.")
Retracing the path to Canaan with an larger and richer group, at Bethel Abraham and Lot find it
necessary to part company (Genesis 13). Lot and his dependents choose for residence the
great Jordan Plain; Abraham follows the backbone of the land southward to Hebron, where he
settles, not in the city, but before its gates "by the great trees" (Septuagint sing., "oak") of
Mamre.

B. Period of Residence at Hebron:

Affiliation between Abraham and the local chieftains is strengthened by a brief campaign, in
which all unite their available forces for the rescue of Lot from an Elamite king and his
confederates from Babylonia (Genesis 14:1-16). The pursuit leads them as far as the Lebanon
region. On the return they are met by Melchizedek, king of Salem, priest of 'el `elyon, and
blessed by him in his priestly capacity, which Abraham recognizes by presenting him with a
tithe of the spoils (Genesis 14:17-20). Abraham's anxiety for a son to be the bearer of the
divine promises conferred upon a "seed" yet unborn should have been relieved by the solemn
renewal thereof in a formal covenant, with precise specifications of God's gracious purpose
(Genesis 15). But human desire cannot wait upon divine wisdom, and the Egyptian woman
Hagar bears to Abraham a son, Ishmael, whose existence from its inception proves a source of
moral evil within the patriarchal household (Genesis 16). The sign of circumcision and the
change of names are given in confirmation of the covenant still unrealized, together with
specification of the time and the person that should begin its realization (Genesis 17). The
appearance of the LORD to Abraham in Genesis 18 symbolized outwardly this climax of God's
favor and serves also for an intercessory conversation, in which Abraham is granted the
deliverance of Lot in the impending overthrow of Sodom. Lot and his family, saved thus by
human fidelity (Abraham's loyalty) and Divine clemency (God's mercy), exhibit in the moral
traits shown in their escape and subsequent life the degeneration naturally to be expected from
their corrupt environment - Lot and his family were influenced by the evil they had lived with in
Sodom and Gomorrah as we see in his daughters' behavior in Genesis 19:30-38. Moabites
and Ammonites are traced in their origin to these cousins of Jacob and Esau.

C. Period of Residence in the Negev:

Removal to the South-country did not mean permanent residence in a single spot, but rather a
succession of more or less temporary resting-places. The first of these was in the district of
Gerar, with whose king, Abimelech, Abraham and his wife had an experience similar to the
earlier one with the Pharaoh (Genesis 20). The birth of Isaac was followed by the expulsion of
Ishmael and his mother, and the sealing of peaceful relations with the neighbors by a covenant
at Beersheba (Genesis 21). Even the birth of Isaac, however, did not end the discipline of
Abraham's faith in the promise, for a Divine command to sacrifice the life of this son was
accepted bona fide (in good faith), and only the sudden voice of the angel of the LORD calling
to Abraham prevented its obedient execution (Genesis 22). The death of Sarah became the
occasion for Abraham's acquisition of the first permanent holding of Canaanite soil, the center
of his promised inheritance (Genesis 23), and at the same time suggested the probable
approach of his own death. This thought led to immediate provision for a future seed to inherit
through Isaac, a provision realized in Isaac's marriage with Rebekah, grand-daughter of
Abraham's brother Nahor and of Milcah the sister of Lot (Genesis 24). But a numerous progeny
not associated with the promise grew up in Abraham's household, children of Keturah, a
woman who appears to have had the rank of wife after Sarah's death, and of other women
unnamed, who were his concubines. Though this last period was passed in the Negeb,
Abraham was interred at Hebron in his purchased possession - the cave of Machpelah, the
spot with which Semitic tradition has continued to associate him to this day (Genesis 25:1-18).
III. Conditions of Life:

The life of Abraham in its outward features may be considered under the following topics:
A. Economic Conditions:
Abraham's manner of life may best be described by the adjective "semi-nomadic," and
illustrated by the somewhat similar conditions prevailing today in those border-communities of
the East that fringe the Syrian and Arabian deserts. Residence is in tents, wealth consists of
flocks, herds and slaves, and there is no ownership of ground, only at most a proprietorship in
well or tomb. All this in common with the nomad. But there is a relative, or rather, intermittent
fixity of habitation, unlike the pure Bedouin, a limited amount of agriculture, and finally a sense
of divergence from the Ishmael type--all of which tend to assimilate the seminomadic Abraham
to the fixed Canaanitish population about him. As might naturally be expected, such a condition
is an unstable equilibrium, which tends, in the family of Abraham as in the history of all border-
tribes of the desert, to settle back one way or the other, now into the city- life of Lot, now into
the desert-life of Ishmael.

B. Social Conditions:

The head of a family, under these conditions, becomes at the same time the chief of a tribe,
that live together in the "beth ab" (pronounced "bait av" and meaning father's house) under
patriarchal rule though they by no means share without exception the tie of kinship. There is
one legal wife, Sarah, who, because she was childless, obtains the coveted offspring by giving
her own maid to Abraham for that purpose. The son thus borne, Ishmael, is Abraham's legal
son and heir. When Isaac is later borne by Sarah, the elder son is disinherited by divine
command (Genesis 21:10-12) against Abraham's wish which represented the prevailing law
and custom. The "maid-servants" mentioned in the inventories of Abraham's wealth (Genesis
12:16; 24:35) doubtless furnished the "concubines" mentioned in Genesis 25:6 as having
borne sons to him.

Both mothers (concubines) and their children were slaves, but had the right to freedom, though
not to inheritance, on the death of the father. After Sarah's death another woman seems to
have succeeded to the position of legal wife, though if so the sons she bore were disinherited
like Ishmael (Genesis 25:5). In addition to the children so begotten by Abraham the "men of his
house" (Genesis 17:27) consisted of two classes, the "home-born" slaves (Genesis 14:14;
17:12,23,27) and the "purchased" slaves (ibid.). The extent of the patriarchal tribe may be
surmised from the number (318) of men among them capable of bearing arms, near the
beginning of Abraham's career, yet after his separation from Lot, and recruited seemingly from
the "home-born" class exclusively (Genesis 14:14). Over this entire establishment Abraham
ruled with a power more absolute, because Abraham was independent of any permanent
superior human authority, and so combined in his own person the powers of the Babylonian
paterfamilias (father of the family) and of the Canaanite "city- king". Social relations outside of
the family-tribe may best be considered under the next heading.

C. Political Conditions:

It is natural that the chieftain of so considerable an organism should appear an attractive ally
and a formidable foe to any of the smaller political units of his environment. That Canaan was
at the time composed of just such inconsiderable units, namely, city-states with petty kings,
and scattered fragments of older populations, is abundantly clear from the Biblical tradition and
verified from other sources. Egypt was the only great power with which Abraham came into
political contact after leaving the East. In the section of Genesis which describes this contact
with the Pharaoh Abraham is suitably represented as playing no political role, but as profiting
by his stay in Egypt only through an incidental social relation: when this terminates he is
promptly ejected. The role of conqueror of Chedorlaomer, the Elamite invader, would be quite
out of keeping with Abraham's political status elsewhere, if we were compelled by the narrative
in Genesis 14 to suppose a pitched battle between the forces of Abraham and those of the
united Babylonian armies. What that chapter requires is in fact no more than a midnight
surprise, by Abraham's band (including the forces of confederate chieftains), of a rear-guard or
baggage-train of the Babylonians inadequately manned and picketed ("slaughter" is too strong
a rendering of the original hakkoth, "smiting" or "defeating" 14:17). Respect shown Abraham by
the kings of Salem (14:18), of Sodom (14:21) and of Gerar (Genesis 20:14-16) was no more
than might be expected from their relative degrees of political importance, although a moral
precedence, assumed in the tradition, may well have contributed to this respect.

D. Cultural Conditions:

Archaeological research has shown that there was a high degree of culture in the area where
Abraham was born and lived, so it is likely that Abraham benefited from it. The high level which
literature had attained in both Babylonia and Egypt by 2000 BC makes it probable that a
wealthy man like Abraham would have had opportunity for education. We may assert even for
Abraham's maturer life the presence of this same culture, since Canaan in the second
millennium BC was at the center of the intellectual life of the East.
IV. Character:

Abraham's inward life may be considered under the headings of belief system, human
condition, and personal traits.

A. Belief System:

The belief system of Abraham centered in his faith in the one and only God, because he
believed God to be possessor of heaven and earth (Genesis 14:22; 24:3), sovereign judge of
the nations (Genesis 15:14) of all the earth (Genesis 18:25), disposer of the forces of nature
(Genesis 18:14; 19:24; 20:17 f), exalted (Genesis 14:22) and eternal (Genesis 21:33). For
Abraham Yahweh was also his personal God in a close fellowship (Genesis 24:40; 48:15). To
Yahweh Abraham attributed the attributes of justice (Genesis 18:25), righteousness (Genesis
18:19), faithfulness (Genesis 24:27), wisdom (Genesis 20:6), goodness (Genesis 19:19), and
mercy (Genesis 20:6). God manifested (showed) Himself in dreams (Genesis 20:3), visions
(Genesis 15:1) and theophanies (Genesis 18:1), including the voice or appearance of the
Divine mal'akh or messenger (angel) (Genesis 16:7; 22:11).

The bringing of offerings to God was diligently practiced by Abraham, as indicated by the
mention of his erection of an altar at each successive residence. Alongside of this act of
sacrifice there is sometimes mention of a "calling upon the name" of Yahweh (compare 1 Kings
18:24; Psalms 116:13 f). This public profession of his faith, doubtless in the presence of
Canaanites, had its counterpart also in the public regard in which he was held as a prophet or
spokesman for God (Genesis 20:7). His mediation (resolving disputes) showed itself also in
intercessory prayer (Genesis 17:20 for Ishmael; Genesis 18:23-32; compare Genesis 19:29 for
Lot; Genesis 20:17 for Abimelech), which was but a part of his general practice of prayer. The
usual practice of sacrifice, a professional priesthood, does not occur in Abraham's family, yet
he recognizes priestly office in the person of Melchizedek, priest-king of Salem (Genesis
14:20). In the time of Abraham it was considered a solemn vow to take an oath (Genesis
14:22; 24:3) and to seal covenants (Genesis 21:23). Other customs associated with Abraham's
belief system are circumcision (Genesis 17:10-14), given to Abraham as the sign of the
covenant; tithing (Genesis 14:20), recognized as the priest's due; and willingness to give his
entire family to God as illustrated in the offering of his son Isaac to be sacrificed (Genesis
22:2,12).

B. Human Condition:

Abraham sought to pattern his life following the will of God. He did not do this perfectly of
course. As with all humans, what we want to be and what we really are is a journey of
transformation through God's power for those who believe. Examples of Abraham's journey are
illustrated in his handling of the situations with Pharaoh and Sarah and Abimelech and Sarah.
Abraham's journey also shows regard for life and property, both in respecting the rights of
others and in expecting the same from them--the opposite of Ishmael's journey (Genesis
16:12).

C. Personal Traits:
Abraham knew how to love both God and others. This love showed itself toward men in
exceptional generosity (Genesis 13:9; 14:23; 23:9,13; 24:10; 25:6), fidelity (Genesis 14:14,24;
17:18; 18:23-32; 19:27; 21:11; 23:2), hospitality (Genesis 18:2-8; 21:8) and compassion
(Genesis 16:6; 21:14; and 18:23-32). Abraham displayed other admirable traits such as self-
respect (Genesis 14:23; 21:22-33; 23:3-9,13,16; 24:4) and courage (Genesis 12:1-9; 14:14-16)
.
V. Significance in the History of Religion.

Abraham is a significant figure throughout the Bible, and plays an important role in extra-
Biblical Jewish tradition and in the Islamic religion.
A. In the Old Testament:

It is naturally as progenitor of the people of Israel, "the seed of Abraham," as they are often
termed, that Abraham stands out most prominently in the Old Testament books. Sometimes
the contrast between him as an individual and his numerous progeny serves to point a lesson
(Isaiah 51:2; Ezekiel 33:24; perhaps Malachi 2:10; compare Malachi 2:15). "The God of
Abraham" serves as a designation of Yahweh from the time of Isaac to the latest period; it is by
this title that Moses identifies the God who has sent him with the ancestral deity of the children
of Israel (Exodus 3:15). Men remembered in those later times that this God appeared to
Abraham in theophany (Exodus 6:3), and, when he was still among his people who worshipped
other gods (Joshua 24:3) chose him (Nehemiah 9:7), led him, redeemed him (Isaiah 29:22)
and made him the recipient of those special blessings (Micah 7:20) which were pledged by
covenant and oath (so every larger historical book, also the historical Psalms 105:9), notably
the inheritance of the land of Canaan (Deuteronomy 6:10) Nor was Abraham's religious
personality forgotten by his posterity: he was remembered by them as God's friend (2
Chronicles 20:7; Isaiah 41:8), His servant, the very recollection of whom by God would offset
the horror with which the sins of his descendants inspired Yahweh (Deuteronomy 9:27).

B. In the New Testament:

When we pass to the New Testament we see Abraham mentioned often. As in the Old
Testament, his position of ancestor lends him much of his significance, not only as ancestor of
Israel (Acts 13:26), but specifically as ancestor of the Levitical priesthood (Hebrews 7:5), of the
Messiah (Matthew 1:1), and of Christian believers (Galatians 3:16,29). All that Abraham the
ancestor received through Divine election, by the covenant made with him, is inherited by his
seed and passes under the collective names of the promise (Romans 4:13), the blessing
(Galatians 3:14), mercy (Luke 1:54), the oath (Luke 1:73), and the covenant (Acts 3:25). The
way in which Abraham responded to this goodness of God makes him the type of the Christian
believer. Though so far in the past that he was used as a measure of antiquity (John 8:58), he
is declared to have "seen" Messiah's "day" (John 8:56).
It is his faith in the Divine promise, which, just because it was for him unsupported by any
evidence of the senses, becomes the type of the faith that leads to justification (Romans 4:3),
and therefore in this sense again he is the "father" of Christians, as believers (Romans 4:11).
For that promise to Abraham was, after all, a "preaching beforehand" of the Christian gospel, in
that it embraced "all the families of the earth" (Galatians 3:8). Of this exalted honor, James
reminds us, Abraham proved himself worthy, not by an inoperative faith, but by "works" that
evidenced his righteousness (James 2:21; compare John 8:39). The obedience that faith
wrought in him is what is especially praised by the author of Hebrews (Hebrews 11:8,17). In
accordance with this high estimate of the patriarch's piety, we read of his eternal blessing, not
only in the current conceptions of the Jews (parable, Luke 16), but also in the express
assertion of our Lord (Matthew 8:11; Luke 13:28).

C. In Jewish Tradition:

Outside the Scriptures we have abundant evidence of the way that Abraham was regarded by
his posterity in the Jewish nation. The oldest of these witnesses, Ecclesiasticus, praises
Abraham for the same three great facts that appealed to the Biblical writers, namely, his glory
as Israel's ancestor, his election to be recipient of the covenant, and his piety even under
severe testing (Ecclesiasticus 44:19-21).

D. In the Koran:

To Mohammed Abraham is of importance in several ways. He is mentioned in no less than 188

verses of the Koran, more than any other character except Moses. He is one of the series of
prophets sent by God. He is the common ancestor of the Arab and the Jew. He plays the same
role of religious reformer over against his idolatrous kinsmen as Mohammed himself played.
He builds the first pure temple for God's worship (at Mecca!). As in the Bible so in the Koran
Abraham is the recipient of the Divine covenant for himself and for his posterity, and exhibits in
his character the appropriate virtues of one so highly favored: faith, righteousness, purity of
heart, gratitude, fidelity, compassion. He receives marked tokens of the Divine favor in the
shape of deliverance, guidance, visions, angelic messengers (no theophanies for
Mohammed!), miracles, assurance of resurrection and entrance into paradise. He is called
"Imam of the peoples" (2 118).

Reading: "Covenants in the Old Testament" George Ricker Berry

ISBE
I. General Meaning.

The Hebrew word berith is probably derived from the Assyrian word biritu, which has the
common meaning "fetter," but also means "covenant." The meaning of biritu as covenant
seems to come directly from the root, rather than as a derived meaning from fetter. If this root
idea is to bind, the covenant is that which binds together the parties.

In the Old Testament the word has an ordinary use, when both parties are people, and a
distinctly spiritual use, between God and people. There are two types of covenants: 1) a parity
covenant between two equals and 2) a suzerainty covenant between a greater party and a
lesser party.

II. Among People

A. Principal Elements:

The covenants in the Old Testament consisted of:

(1) A statement of the terms agreed upon (Genesis 26:29; 31:50,52).

(2) An oath by each party to observe the terms, God being witness of the oath (Genesis 26:31;
31:48-53). The oath was such a characteristic feature that sometimes the term "oath" is used
as the equivalent of covenant (see Ezekiel 17:13).

(3) A curse invoked by each one upon himself in case of disregard of the agreement by either
party. In a sense this may be considered a part of the oath, adding emphasis to it. This curse is
not explicitly stated in the case of human covenants, but may be inferred from the covenant
with God (Deuteronomy 27:15-26).

(4) The formal ratification of the covenant by some solemn external act.

In early pagan cultures the covenant was ratified by the drinking of each other's blood. In the
Old Testament accounts the ratification were acts like a sacrificial meal (for example
in Genesis 31:54) and the sprinkling of blood upon the two parties. Both a sacrificial meal and
the sprinkling of blood (the altar representing Yahweh) are mentioned in Exodus 24:4-8, with
allusions elsewhere, like in the ratification of the covenant at Sinai between Yahweh and Israel.
In the covenant of God with Abraham there is another ceremony, quite certainly with the same
purpose. This is a different observance, namely, the cutting of animals into two parts and
passing between the severed portions (Genesis 15:9-18), a custom also referred to
in Jeremiah 34:18. Here it is to be noted that it is a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch,
representing God, not Abraham, which passed between the pieces. Such an act, it would
seem, should be shared by both parties, but in this case it is to be explained by the fact that the
covenant is principally a promise by Yahweh. He is the one who binds Himself and promises to
pay the debt.

The unchanging nature (immutability) of a covenant is everywhere assumed.

Other features beyond those mentioned are not considered as fundamental. This is the case
with the setting up of a stone, or raising a heap of stones (Genesis 31:45,46). This was an
ancient custom used so that the covenant or event could be recalled to future generations
when they saw the standing stone(s) or heap of stones. Striking hands is a general expression
of an agreement made (Ezra 10:19; Ezekiel 17:18, etc.).

B. Different Varieties:

In observing different varieties of agreements among men, we note that they may be either
between individuals or between larger units, such as tribes and nations. In a great majority of
cases, however, they are between the larger units. In some cases, also, when an individual
acts it is in a representative capacity, as the head of a clan, or as a king. When the covenant is
between tribes it is thus a treaty or alliance. The following passages have this use of covenant:
Genesis 14:13; 21:27,32; 26:28; 31:44; Exodus 23:32; 34:12,15; Deuteronomy 7:2; Joshua
9:6,7,11,15,16;Judges 2:2; 1 Samuel 11:1; 1 Kings 3:12; 15:19 parallel 2 Chronicles 16:3; 1
Kings 20:34; Psalms 83:5; Isaiah 33:8; Ezekiel 16:61; 17:13-19; 30:5; Daniel 11:22; Amos 1:9.
In other cases it is between a king and his subjects, when it is more a command or ordinance,
as 2 Samuel 3:12,13,11; 5:3 parallel 1 Chronicles 11:3; Jeremiah 34:8-18; Daniel 9:27. In other
cases it is between individuals, or between small groups, where it is an agreement or pledge (2
Kings 11:4parallel 2 Chronicles 23:1; Job 31:1; 41:4; Hosea 10:4). Between David and
Jonathan it is more specifically an alliance of friendship (1 Samuel 18:3; 20:8; 23:18), as also
apparently in Psalms 55:20. It means an alliance of marriage in Malachi 2:14, but probably not
in Proverbs 2:17, where it is better to understand the meaning as being "her covenant with
God."

C. Words Used:
In all cases of covenants between humans, except Jeremiah 34:10 and Daniel 9:27, the
technical phrase for making a covenant is karath berith, in which karath meant originally "to
cut." Everything indicates that this verb is used with reference to the formal ceremony of
ratification above mentioned, of cutting animals in pieces.
III. Between God and People - Covenants Recorded in the Old Testament:

A. Noah Covenant: A covenant of this general kind is said in the Old Testament to have been
made by God with Noah (Genesis 9:9-17 and elsewhere). In this the promise is that there shall
be no more deluge.
B. Abraham Covenant: A covenant is made with Abraham, the thought of which includes his
descendants. In this the promise of God is to multiply the descendants of Abraham, to give
them the land of Canaan, and to make them a blessing to the nations. This is narrated in
Genesis 15:18; 17:2-21, etc.
C. Sinai Covenant: A covenant is made with the nation of Israel at Sinai (Horeb) (Exodus 19:5;
24:7,8; 34:10,27,28, etc.), ratified by a covenant sacrifice and sprinkling of blood (Exodus 24:4-
8). This constituted the nation as the peculiar people of God, and was accompanied by
promises for obedience and penalties for disobedience. This covenant was renewed on the
plains of Moab (Deuteronomy 29:1). In these national covenants the individual had a place, but
only as a member of the nation. The individual might forfeit his rights under the covenant,
however, by deliberate rebellion against Yahweh, sinning "with a high hand" (Numbers 15:30),
and then he was regarded as no longer a member of the nation, he was "cut off from among
his people," that is put to death. This is the teaching of the priestly code, and is also implied
elsewhere; in the mercy of God, however, the punishment was not always inflicted.
D. Levi Covenant: A covenant with the tribe of Levi, by which that became the priestly tribe, is
alluded to in Deuteronomy 33:9; Jeremiah 33:21; Malachi 2:4. The covenant with Phinehas
(Numbers 25:12,13) established an everlasting priesthood in his line.
E. The Joshua and Israel Covenant: The covenant with Joshua and Israel (Joshua 24) was an
agreement on their part to serve Yahweh only. The covenant with David (2 Samuel 7 parallel 1
Chronicles 17; see also Psalms 89:3,18,34,39; 132:12; Jeremiah 33:21) contained a promise
that his descendants should have an everlasting kingdom, and should stand to God in the
relation of sonship.
F. The Jehoiada Covenant: The covenant with Jehoiada and the people (2 Kings 11:17 parallel
2 Chronicles 23:3) was an agreement on their part to be the people of Yahweh.
G. The Hezekiah Covenant: The covenant with Hezekiah and the people (2 Chronicles 29:10)
consisted essentially of an agreement on their part to reform the worship; the covenant with
Josiah and the people (2 Kings 23:3), of an agreement on their part to obey the Book of the
Law.
H. The Ezra Covenant: The covenant with Ezra and the people (Ezra 10:3) was an agreement
on their part to put away foreign wives and obey the law.
I. The New Covenants Mentioning the Coming of Messiah: The prophets also speak of a new
covenant, most explicitly in Jeremiah, but with references elsewhere, which is connected with
the Messianic time (see Isaiah 42:6; 49:8; 55:3; 59:21; 61:8;Jeremiah 31:31,33; 32:40; 50:5;
Ezekiel 16:60,62; 20:37; 34:25; 37:26; Hosea 2:18).
LITERATURE.
Valeton, ZATW, XII, XIII (1892-93); Candlish, The Expositor Times, 1892, Oct., Nov.;
Kraetzschmar, Die Bundesvorstellung im Altes Testament, Marburg, 1896; articles "Covenant"
in Hastings, Dictionary of the Bible (five volumes) and Encyclopedia Biblica.

George Ricker Berry