Abraham

[K_C]

For some reason, when I tried to post for the first time my message was ignored as if I hadn’t yet registered - which I had. I hope that this time my question posts. I will make this brief in case it does not.

I would like to know WHY God seemed to reward Abraham when he obviously “pimped” his wife, Sara, to the King of Egypt (Pharaoh). When Abram took Sara to Egypt to escape a great drought, he asked her to pretend to be his sister (a LIE) in order to avoid being killed by Egyptians (COWARDICE) who might want to steal his beautiful wife. Eventually, Pharoah married Sara and rewarded both Abraham and Lot (his brother), thinking they were Sara’s brothers. When the deception was revealed, the king sent them all back to their own land - very wealthy people. Yet, several bible verses later, it seems that God REWARDED Abraham, ignoring these outrageous sins! It seems that even God considered women no more than chattel - at least at that time.

Can anyone explain this without simply making up reasons why God would act this way?

 

[wisdom_3_5]

You might want to re-post this in the scripture or apologetics forums.

 

[K_C]

For those interested in why I was so shocked and disturbed about this scriptural passage, you can read it for yourself at
Gen12: 10 - Gen 13: 17

 

[Della]

What you have to keep in mind when reading any passage of Scripture is: What is the author trying to tell us? It helps if you know a bit of salvation history that started with Abraham. The story isn’t about Sarai and Abram’s relationship or her gender or the actions Abram took in this story. It’s about Abram receiving the lands God wanted him and his descendants to have. The part about Egypt is told to tell the reader that God didn’t want Abram to make his home there. And what would ensure that he didn’t stay there? Trouble with the pharaoh over Sarai.

Women weren’t considered possessions but were considered the holders of a people’s future prosperity because they would bear the children who would inherit the land and fulfill God’s promises. So, by marrying Sarai the pharaoh hoped to gain strong children by her, but learning that she was already married and being a god-fearing man he would not consummate the relationship but sent both her and Abram away.

Abram did act with deception and out of cowardice, but this incident seems to have cured him of those sins. Many of the biblical figures we so admire and who are cited as men and women of faith in the NT had lots of faults and committed some terrible sins. But, God calls sinners to do his work not perfect people. He works in their hearts to make them into what they could not have made of themselves, just as he does with us. Yes?

 

[K_C]

Further reflection upon Abraham recalls the fact that, when his wife Sara could not conceive, Abraham took to himself her servant girl and begot a son. I have heard, recently, that it is said that from this son (who was subsequently disinherited by his father and sent off with his mother into the desert) all the followers of Islam descended. In other words, the huge split between our two faiths began with Abraham’s choice to propagate no matter what.

Which evokes the additional question: Why did God choose Abraham, knowing that in his weakness he would sire an entire religion opposed to Christianity? Jesus said that, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” yet it seems that God’s plan, in this instance as well as in some others, worked against itself!

I find these issues very confusing and am hoping that the Holy Spirit will enlighten someone kind enough to answer them and help me in my struggle. Thank you!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

In other Iwords, the huge split between our two faiths began with Abraham’s choice to propagate no matter what.

Actually, it was Mohammed who said that Ishmael was the “forefather”. It was Mohammed, the “prophet”, who came up with the Quran, and it was his later followers who broke off into the Sunni and Shi’ite groups, developed later traditions and teachings, etc.

Because Mohammed said that Ishmael was the ancestor of the Muslims does not MAKE him the ancestor of the Muslims.

This is from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

According to God’s repeated promise of future greatness for Agar’s son, Ismael grew up, lived in the wilderness of Paran, became famous as an archer, and married an Egyptian wife (xxi, 8-21). He became the father of twelve chiefs, whose names and general quarters are given in Gen., xxv, 12-16. Only one daughter of Ismael is mentioned in Holy Writ, where she is spoken of as one of Esau’s wives (cf. Gen., xxviii, 9; xxxvi, 3). The last incident known of Ismael’s career is connected with Abraham’s burial, in which he appears associated with Isaac (xxv, 9). Ismael died at the age of one hundred and thirty-seven, “and was gathered unto his people” (xxv, 17).

In his Epistle to the Galatians (iv, 21, sqq.) St. Paul expands allegorically the narrative of Ismael and Isaac, urging upon his readers the duty of not giving up their Christian freedom from the bondage of the Law. Of course, in so arguing, the Apostle of the Gentiles did not intend to detract in any way from the historical character of the narrative in Genesis. With regard to the various difficulties, literary and historical, suggested by a close study of the Biblical account of Ismael’s life, suffice it to say that each and all will never cause a careful and unbiased scholar to regard that account otherwise than as portraying an ancient historical character, will never induce him to treat otherwise than as hypercritical every attempt, by whomsoever made, to resolve Ismael into a conjectural personality of the founder of a group of Arabic tribes.

So your questions become moot. . .God DIDN’T make Ishmael the leader of the Muslims or cause a division in Christianity.

 

[K_C]

Della -
Your response seems to make good sense - except for:

“but learning that she was already married and being a god-fearing man he would not consummate the relationship but sent both her and Abram away.”

It certainly IS possible that pharaoh was a god-fearing man. However, WHICH God did he fear, I wonder? Egyptians did not know nor accept the God of Juda. (But it IS possible that Sara informed him!) As for your statement that the relationship was not consummated. On what source do you base this knowledge?

Thank you for your incisive reply! K C

 

[Della]

K C:

Further reflection upon Abraham recalls the fact that, when his wife Sara could not conceive, Abraham took to himself her servant girl and begot a son. I have heard, recently, that it is said that from this son (who was subsequently disinherited by his father and sent off with his mother into the desert) all the followers of Islam descended. In other words, the huge split between our two faiths began with Abraham’s choice to propagate no matter what.

Which evokes the additional question: Why did God choose Abraham, knowing that in his weakness he would sire an entire religion opposed to Christianity? Jesus said that, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” yet it seems that God’s plan, in this instance as well as in some others, worked against itself!

I find these issues very confusing and am hoping that the Holy Spirit will enlighten someone kind enough to answer them and help me in my struggle. Thank you!

First of all, followers of Islam make this claim, but it is not supported by history. God promised that Ishmael would be the father of a great nation, not that his descendants would raise up a religion to rival God’s plans. They (and you) are reading that into the story.

Secondly, you may as well ask why God created man knowing that man would fall. If you can’t answer that, you have a much more serious problem to work out than mere questions about Abraham.

 

[Della]

K C:

Della -
Your response seems to make good sense - except for:

“but learning that she was already married and being a god-fearing man he would not consummate the relationship but sent both her and Abram away.”

It certainly IS possible that pharaoh was a god-fearing man. However, WHICH God did he fear, I wonder? Egyptians did not know nor accept the God of Juda. (But it IS possible that Sara informed him!) As for your statement that the relationship was not consummated. On what source do you base this knowledge?

Thank you for your incisive reply! K C

In those times peope believed in many gods and they believed in consequences if they went against the dictates of the gods, so it would hardly have mattered to the pharoah of that time whose god he might be offending. Offending any god was considered a risk not worth taking.

Also, if he had consummated the marriage to Sarai, he would have killed Abram instead of merely sending him away. He would have done this because of his honor and so he could lawfully keep her as his wife. It would have been a situation similar to the one in which David had Uriah sent to the front of the battle to be killed so he could marry Bathsheda, Uriah’s wife.

And you are welcome! There is a lot of confusion that comes from not understanding the times in which the various writings in the Bible were recorded, as well as from not understanding what the author intended to tell his readers. That holds true for the NT, as well.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Regarding Abram and Sarai and the Pharaoh, let’s not just stop there, shall we?

Jacob (Israel) impersonated his older brother Esau to get his father’s blessing unlawfully. Esau sold his birthright. Yet Jacob fathered the 12 tribes of Israel.

Joseph’s brothers sold him into slavery and lied about it–yet they wound up living high on the hog in Egypt and received all sorts of goods and services.

David committed adultery with Bathsheba and had her husband Uriah killed so that he could marry her; the child they conceived died but a later child, one of David’s YOUNGER sons, became the famous, wise, and wealthy Solomon. And David himself was assured by God that his throne would exist in perpetuity.

Moses struck the rock twice and was denied the Promised Land–yet it is MOSES who is one of the two speakers with Jesus at the Transfiguration, and it is MOSES who will be one of the two figures foretold in Revelation who will live, die, and be raised again before the Final Judgment.

Peter denied Jesus three times–yet became the leader of the apostles.

Paul persecuted the Christians and was complicit in the death of the first martyr, St. Stephen–yet wound up being Apostle to the Gentiles.

P.S. Lot is Abram’s nephew, not brother.

Bottom line: God works with flawed, sinful people; sins can be forgiven and people can become great when they work with God.

As far as women being chattel in the Bible:

1. Esther was responsible for saving the lives of the Jews when she spoke for them to the king.
2. When the Jews would have been destroyed by the pagan general Holofernes, it was Judith, a woman, who struck him dead. . .and it was Deborah, the prophet, who foretold it.
3. It was Ruth the Moabite, a stranger and a poor widow, who became the grandmother of David, because of her piety in remaining with her MIL Naomi.

And please, please, remember Mary. . .she was found worthy to bear GOD HIMSELF.

 

[K_C]

Dear “Tantum” -
Thank you for your further elucidation! As you quote Pope: “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing” indeed - which is why I am seeking enlightenment!

What you say about Mohammed’s claim may be true. However, what reason would he have for lying to his own people?

As for the quotation from the Catechism, I find the ending a bit difficult to translate:

“a close study of the Biblical account of Ismael’s life …will never cause a careful and unbiased scholar to regard that account otherwise than as portraying an ancient historical character, will never induce him to treat otherwise than as hypercritical every attempt, by whomsoever made, to resolve Ismael into a **conjectural personality of the founder of a group of Arabic tribes.”

How does this ascertain that Ishmael was not the origin of Islamic belief? **Perhaps you can translate the end statement better than I? (I have difficulty with double negatives!

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Welcome. . .and please, it is as I say, “A little LEARNING”. . .not “A little KNOWLEDGE”.

A little learning is a dangerous thing;
Drink deep, or taste not the Pierian spring:
There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain,
And drinking largely sobers us again.

Well, let’s see. First, what the statement is saying is that an attempt to make Ishmael into a founder, a la Mohammedism, is absolutely contrary to Biblical truth as given in the Scriptures.
Second, Mohammed did not necessarily lie per se, but then, he didn’t necessary speak truth either. He had his “visions” where the angel supposedly gave him the teachings which have evolved into Islam (the word means “peace”), but those visions were not necessarily truth.

Look at it this way. Why would Jesus Christ lie about His origins to “his own people”–but if you are a Jewish person, you think that Christ was either lying or deluded; if you are Muslim, you think that he was a prophet and that the Jews and the Christians BOTH got his message wrong. . .

So, if you’re a Christian (probably if you’re Jewish, too, but I can’t speak on that), you think that Mohammed’s visions were delusions, and that he either knew it or didn’t. Either way, the visions were delusions, though, IMO.

 

[K_C]

Tantum -
It is interesting that you expanded our discussion to cover David and Bathsheba, because I almost mentioned them as well. And, of course, I realize that God has certainly honored all the various women you mention throughout salvation history - most notably, Our Lady!

However, I still remain struck by the fact that God chooses to honor so many who sin so greatly against Him! With the brother of the Prodigal Son, I wonder aloud about this - Does God PREFER the rebellious sinner to the FAITHFUL servant?? It would certainly seem that He is, at least, somehow fascinated by the rebel.

This theme of the rebel vs. the faithful is especially important to me at this time in my life, so I appreciate whatever insights I can gain to understand better God’s apparent contradicitons.

And thank you, Della, for the additional insights, which are very interesting! K C

 

[Della]

However, I still remain struck by the fact that God chooses to honor so many who sin so greatly against Him! With the brother of the Prodigal Son, I wonder aloud about this - Does God PREFER the rebellious sinner to the FAITHFUL servant?? It would certainly seem that He is, at least, somehow fascinated by the rebel.

This theme of the rebel vs. the faithful is especially important to me at this time in my life, so I appreciate whatever insights I can gain to understand better God’s apparent contradicitons.

And thank you, Della, for the additional insights, which are very interesting! K C

Well, often times the rebel is one because he needs to see things differently from those who are settled into their beliefs. This can be a good thing, if it leads the rebel to desire the truth and not just what he wants to hear/believe.

In the case of the younger and older brother, the younger brother made an outright fool or himself and then repented when he realized who his real friends were and where his true home was. The older brother, on the other hand, sulked and grumbled at his father for being merciful.

You can understand why Jesus gave us this example, I think when you see that he liked people be honest with themselves, such as the publican vs the pharisee and other such parables. Since I tend to be more like the older brother and the pharisee, I take these examples very seriously for I want to be open hearted and merciful, understanding my own faults and being kind to the faults of others.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Well, Jesus came to call the sinners, because they NEEDED Him MORE than the saints do. . .

I don’t know that He is “fascinated” more by rebels. . .but of course, we also have to realize that we’re all sinners. . .some might have more “spectacular” sins at a given time than others, some might have “more” sins at a given time than others. . .but we are all sinners.

The “elder brother” was not as spectacular in sinning as his younger brother. . .but he still sinned. In a way, his pride at being “better than” his brother makes it worse for him. . .because he doesn’t even REALIZE that he is sinning.

Food for thought.
Speaking of food, it’s off to cook noodles in peanut sauce time. Wish I had some beef to grill. . .oh well, peanuts have protein too.

God bless.

 

[stillsmallvoice]

Hi all!

KC, you asked:

I would like to know WHY God seemed to reward Abraham when he obviously “pimped” his wife, Sara, to the King of Egypt (Pharaoh). When Abram took Sara to Egypt to escape a great drought, he asked her to pretend to be his sister (a LIE) in order to avoid being killed by Egyptians (COWARDICE) who might want to steal his beautiful wife. Eventually, Pharoah married Sara and rewarded both Abraham and Lot (his brother), thinking they were Sara’s brothers. When the deception was revealed, the king sent them all back to their own land - very wealthy people. Yet, several bible verses later, it seems that God REWARDED Abraham, ignoring these outrageous sins! It seems that even God considered women no more than chattel - at least at that time.

Can anyone explain this without simply making up reasons why God would act this way?

Hmm, first of all, our Sages do criticize Abram for lying to Pharoah in an effort to save his life and then repeating the same stunt a lottle while later with Abimelech, the Philistine King of Gerar, in Genesis 20:1-11. Look at that second incident:

And Abraham journeyed from thence toward the land of the South, and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur; and he sojourned in Gerar. And Abraham said of Sarah his wife: ‘She is my sister.’ And Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah. But God came to Abimelech in a dream of the night, and said to him: ‘Behold, you shall die, because of the woman whom you have taken; for she is a man’s wife.’ Now Abimelech had not come near her; and he said: ‘Lord, will You slay even a righteous nation? Said he not himself unto me: She is my sister? and she, even she herself said: He is my brother. In the simplicity of my heart and the innocency of my hands have I done this.’ And God said unto him in the dream: ‘Yea, I know that in the simplicity of your heart you have done this, and I also withheld you from sinning against Me. Therefore suffered I you not to touch her. Now therefore restore the man’s wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for you, and you shall live; and if you restore her not, know you that you shall surely die, you, and all that are yours.’ And Abimelech rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears; and the men were sore afraid. Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him: ‘What have you done unto us? and wherein have I sinned against you, that you have brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? You have done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.’ And Abimelech said unto Abraham: ‘What did you see, that you have done this thing?’ And Abraham said: ‘Because I thought: Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife’s sake.’

What did Abraham mean when he said the underlined portion? The Philistines (like the Egyptians) had a magnificent culture, as archaeology well attests. But Abraham knew that even a highly advanced & developed culture is just a facade, a jerry-rigged veneer, if it is not built on, “the fear of God”, that its civilization is “a mile wide but [only] an inch deep”, that can crumble in an instant, if it is not built on a deep & thoroughgoing awareness of the Divine source of all morality, i.e. on “the fear of God.” Abraham knew that (as one of my rabbis writes), “However, when politeness is not followed by Awareness of God, it is no more than the mask of hypocrisy.” Like King Solomon put it (Proverbs 9:10), “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.” We can certainly apply this lesson from the second time Abraham pulled this stunt back to the first time. He was afraid that the ungodly, pagan barbarism of Egypt would assert itself & that Pharoah would be tempted to kill him and take Sarah.

Abraham in no way “pimped” Sarah, he was in fear of his life. Just as God prevented Abimelech from having relations with Sarah (20:6), so did He similarly restrain Pharoah (12:17).

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

Did Abraham do something here that he shouldn’t have? Should have he trusted more in God? Probably, on both counts. But, as our eminent 19th century Sage, Rabbi Shimshon Raphael Hirsch (us-israel.org/jsource/biography/Hirsch.html) writes:

"The Torah is not an ‘anthology of paragons.’ It relates events not because they are worthy of emulation but simply because they took place.

The Torah does not attempt to hide from us the faults, errors and weaknesses of our great men and precisely thereby it places the stamp of credibility upon the happenings it relates. The fact that we are told about their faults and weaknesses does not detract from our great men; indeed, it adds to their stature and makes their life stories even more instructive. Had they all been portrayed to us as models of perfection, we would have believed that they had been endowed with a higher nature not given to us to attain. Had they been presented to us as free of human passions and inner conflicts, their nature would seem to us merely the result of a loftier predisposition, not a product of their personal merit, and certainly no model we could ever hope to emulate. Take, for instance, the humility of Moses. If we did not know that he was also capable of flying into a rage, this humility would seem to us an inborn trait not within our capacity to emulate. It is precisely his outburst (“Here now, you rebels!” Num. 20:10) that lends to his humility its true greatness, for it shows us his humility as the product of a mighty labor of self-control and self-refinement which we should all emulate because it is within our capacity to do so. Also, the Torah relates no sin or error without telling us also of its consequences, great or small…We must never attempt to whitewash the spiritual and moral heroes of our past. They are not in need of our apologies, nor would they tolerate such attempts on our part."

The lesson here is that if Abraham, whom we believe to have been on such a high spiritual level that such as we can scarcely even imagine, could fall prey to such vices, how much moreso do we, are not nearly as great as he was, have to be doubly and triply careful lest we fall into the same traps.

You also posted:

Further reflection upon Abraham recalls the fact that, when his wife Sara could not conceive, Abraham took to himself her servant girl…

With all due respect, you are incorrect. Check Genesis 16:1-3 and you’ll see that it was Sarah who pushed Hagar on Abraham. The initiative here was Sarah’s, not Abraham’s.

By telling Abraham to listen to Sarah (Genesis 21-12), God showed that He wanted Abraham to send Hagar and Ishmael away. But God certainly didn’t similarly endorse Sarah’s harsh treatment of Hagar. Many of our Sages criticize Sarah for this. Our very great medieval Sage, Nahmanides (us-israel.org/jsource/biography/Nachmanides.html), among others, says that the root of our problems with the Arabs/Muslims is payback for the way our mother mistreated their mother. Our Sages ask why Abraham sent Ishmael away with a single loaf of bread & one skin of water. Abraham was a very wealthy man. Moreover, he sent Ketura’s children away with lavish gifts. So why the almost nothing for Ishmael? Ketura’s children were no threat to Isaac, to his status as the heir of the Abrahamic notion of ethical monotheism and the worship of the One God. Thus, they could be sent away in style. But Ishmael presented just such a threat to Isaac and indeed challenged Isaac’s status as the heir of the Abrahamic notion of ethical monotheism and the worship of the One God (much as his descendants still do to this day). Thus, Ishmael was sent away with almost nothing; being sent away in style could be interpreted as Abraham making him his heir. Our Sages comment on the verse that says Isaac and Ishmael came together to bury their father Abraham & teach that they reconciled; I pray that that their descendants will learn from their example & reconcile as well!

(cont.)

 

[stillsmallvoice]

(cont.)

Personally, I have always thought that this brave old man, Abraham, was truly the greatest revolutionary the world has ever known, having been chosen by God to be the vehicle for introducing the idea of ethical monotheism and belief in the One God into the world.

Our Sages note that Abraham’s life, from the moment God decided to introduce Himself to him until his death, was one of constant trial. The late Professor Nehama Leibovitz notes, in her Studies in Bereshit/Genesis:

Our Sage, Rabbi Jonathan, offers the following analogy:

"A potter does not test cracked jars which cannot be struck even once without breaking. What does He test? Good jars which will not break even if struck many times. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, does not try the wicked but the righteous, as it said (Psalms 11:5): “The Lord tries the righteous…”

Yet, as Genesis testifies, Abraham passed every test & withstood every trial. Thus, in Isaiah 51:1-2, God urges us:

Hearken to Me, you who follow after righteousness, you who seek the Lord; look unto the rock whence you were hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence you were digged. Look unto Abraham your father, and unto Sarah who bore you; for when he was but one I called him, and I blessed him, and made him many.

Be well!

ssv