Interpretation.The story of Noah is so simple as scarcely to need interpretation. The world had become corrupt, and, as God cannot abide moral corruption, it seemed better to destroy what he had created. Out of the universal destruction, however, God's providence singled out Noah, because of his moral superiority, to be saved and to start human life on a higher plane. He therefore bids Noah take with him into the ark his family and enough of the animals to assure the preservation of the different species, taking more of the clean animals which are fit for food, and, when Noah finally leaves the ark, He makes a covenant with him, the terms of which are that Noah, is to observe certain moral laws, including the prohibition of murder, and that God would never again destroy all life with a deluge and would guarantee the orderly succession of the seasons as necessary to man's existence. As a token of this covenant God shows Noah the rainbow.
Aim.The aim in teaching this lesson to the child should be to give him the idea of God's control over all the forces of nature and of His special providence exercised over each individual, rewarding the good and punishing the evil. As it is our purpose, wherever possible, to find some distinctively Jewish way in which the child can give expression to the ideals taught this lesson should be made the occasion for teaching thechild theberakah(blessing) on seeing a rainbow which is associated with the Noah story.
Suggestions to the teacher.To connect this story with the child's own life begin with a reference to the rainbow. Let children tell what colors they have seen in the rainbow, call their attention to the fact that it appears always after a storm, and then tell them that you are going to relate a story which will explain to them why God makes a rainbow in the heavens after it rains. And when you have finished the story, again connect the moral of it with the rainbow somewhat as follows:
"And so, children, whenever we see a rainbow it should remind us of this story of how God saved Noah from the flood because of his goodness, and how God promised never to destroy the whole world again by a terrible flood. And whenever we see a rainbow we should all of us say this little prayer orberakahwhich I will teach you, זוֹכֵר הָעוֹלָם מֶלֶךְ אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהֹוָה אַתָּה זוֹכֵרבָּרוּךְ הַבְּרִית בְּמַאֲמָרוֹ וְקַיָם בִּבְרִיתוֹ וֱנֶאֶמָן, which means, 'Blessed be thou, O Lord our God, King of the world, who remembers His covenant and is faithful to His covenant and keeps his promise'".
The term covenant must be explained to the child in this chapter as an exchange of promises.
The story of Noah contains many appeals to the child's interest which the skillful teacher will know how to make the most of. A Noah's ark with all manner of queer little wooden animals that could be put in and taken out again has been a favorite toy with many a child now grown to manhood. A child is naturally interested in animals and, when you tell of how theanimals came into the ark, ask the children to tell you the names of animals they have seen in the zoo or circus.
To emphasize the moral of the story use thehaggadicelaboration of it according to which the period that the ark was in process of construction gave the sinners an opportunity to repent, of which however they did not avail themselves but instead merely mocked Noah for trusting in God and obeying him. Thishaggadais in full accord with the spirit of the Biblical narrative and gives content to the statement: "Noah was in his generation a righteous and whole-hearted man; Noah walked with God."[1]
The episode narrated in Genesis 9.21 to 29 had better be omitted as not adapted for children.
Interpretation.These verses tell how the descendants of Noah in the pride of a new civilization and the acquisition of the new art of building with bricks endeavor to defeat the divine purpose of scattering them over the world and are frustrated in their plans through God's confusing their language. Its moral is the vanity of any attempt on the part of man to defeat God's purpose.
Aim.This lesson is not one that yields a moral which the child is able to apply immediately in his own life. Its moral is rather for society than for the individual in its exposure of the vanity of reliance on the mere material elements in civilization. Inasmuch however as it can be made interesting to the child and appealing to his imagination it is well to teach it that it may become a part of his store of Jewish information which will receive added meaning as his experience grows.
Suggestions to the teacher.This lesson should be introduced by a reference to the different languages with which the child has come in contact. He can then have his attention called to the fact that, as all men are descended from Noah, they must all originally have spoken one language. This at once raises the question how it came about that there are now many languages,and, when the child is interested in this question, he has the proper mental attitude for hearing the story.
The motive for the building of the tower is not given very clearly in the Bible and, in the form in which it is given, is hardly calculated to impress the story on a child's mind. It is well, therefore, to amplify the story in accordance with thehaggadahthat suggests as motive the attempt to avoid the consequences of another such flood as at the time of Noah. The sin, therefore, of the generation of the dispersion lies in the fact that instead of trying to avoid God's displeasure they tried to render themselves immune to its consequences, a moral that carries out the idea of the Biblical narrative only stating it in more explicit terms.
Interpretation.With this lesson the history of our people begins. The Bible wishes us to see in the separation of Abram and his clan from the parent tribe, and their migration to Canaan, not a fortuitous circumstance, but the fulfilment of a divine plan according to which God was to make of the descendants of Abram the chosen people and of the land of Canaan the chosen land. Why Abram was selected of all people is not clearly stated, but one trait of his character is made very conspicuous here and in all subsequent chapters, his implicit faith and obedience. The Rabbis emphasize that, in bidding him to leave his land, God tells him merely to go "to the land that I will show unto thee", without indicating what land was meant. Again He promises him, "To thy seed will I give this land", though Abram is childless. Nor was Abram permitted to believe that his nephew Lot might have been intended by the promise, for, when Abram's herdsmen and Lot's herdsmen quarrel, Lot chooses the land of Sodom and not the promised land. In a word, God seems to have selected Abram to be the father of the chosen people because of his faith, his unquestioning willingness to submit to divine guidance. A second trait of character that is made conspicuous is his love of peace as illustrated in his relations with Lot.
Aim.The primary aim in teaching this lesson to the child should be to inspire him with the thought that he is one of God's chosen people, a descendant of Abram, and should prove himself worthy of his descent by emulating Abram's obedience to God through his obedience to Jewish law. The whole point of this narrative is lost if the teacher fails to emphasize the fact that Abram is the father of the Jewish people.
The secondary aim may well be to stimulate interest in Palestine as the chosen land.
A third lesson that can be taught in this connection is the lesson of the desirability of peace.
The last two aims however must be brought in incidentally, the former as an indication of God's love for Abram and his descendants, the latter as showing wherein Abram was worthy of being chosen.
Suggestions to the teacher.As the whole point of the narrative is lost if the child is not made to feel the connection of the Jewish people with Abram, take pains to explain what is meant by descent and how a whole people can be descended from one man, by showing how a man's grandchildren are usually more numerous than his children, etc. It might be of advantage to use the blackboard for a graphic illustration of this idea. Then, after having explained how God expected to make a great nation of Abram's descendants, ask, "Do any of you know what people today are the descendants of Abram? Well, I will tell you. You and I and all who call themselves Jews are descended from Abram. That is why we always speak of him as our father Abram. Now don't you want me to tell you more about our father Abram and about the great people that came from him and to which we belong?"iblica
Hereafter always call Abram "our father Abram", as he is almost invariably called in Jewish literature אָנִינוּ אַבְרָהָם. This will keep the child conscious of his descent from Abram, increase his interest in him and make him feel that Biblical history is the history of his own people.
As the motives for God's choice of Abram are but vaguely suggested in the Bible, the teacher must make them more explicit. Call attention to the fact that the world had again become corrupt, that idolatry prevailed—and here it becomes necessary to explain what idolatry means—in the House of Terah as elsewhere (see Joshua 24. 2), but that there was one man, Abram, who always obeyed God and who, God knew, would instruct his children to do so. And therefore God told him to leave his family and his people because he wanted to make of him a great people that would always do as he told them and not a foolish and wicked people like those among whom he lived.
The varioushaggadictales of the persecutions to which Abram was subjected by Nimrod and even by his own father, while beautiful in themselves and interesting to children should not be taught as part of the lesson. (See foot-note to page 46.)
In order to make the narrative more vivid and impressive, God's call to Abram and his promise (Genesis 12. 1 to 3) should be quoted in the language of the Bible, as also Abram's words to Lot (Genesis 13. 9) and God's promise when Abram settled in Canaan (Genesis 13. 14 to 18).
When speaking of God's promise to give Abram the land of Canaan, the teacher may digress somewhat to describe the main geographical features of Palestine,showing children on the map where it is situated and pointing out its main topographical characteristics, if the children are of an age when they know how to interpret maps. The description of the land should be such as to create an attachment to it, dwelling on the variety of its climate, the beauty of its scenery, and its fertility. Pictures of Palestine particularly of the places associated with the life of Abram, should be shown.
Interpretation.Abram's blessing begins to become manifest through his military success in the campaign to rescue Lot and his family. He is accorded recognition by Melchizedek, king of Salem (to be identified with Jerusalem), and "priest of God the Most High", who gives him bread and wine and to whom he gives a tithe of the booty. The king of Sodom also recognizes his greatness and the value of his services, which he wishes to reward, but Abram rejects the proffered reward in order to be able to maintain his independence and assert his reliance on the divine promise.
Aim.The aim in teaching this lesson should be to awaken an appreciation of the heroic virtues of courage, loyalty and independence, and, by associating them with the founder of the Jewish people and the Jewish faith to arouse the Jewish self respect of the child.
Suggestions to the teacher.It is very important in telling such stories the moral of which is to be enforced through the child's imitation of the virtues of the characters whose deeds it narrates, not to tag on a moral at the end of the tale. If the child is impressed by the story, imitation is sure to result, and, by adding a moral stated in abstract terms, one only gives the child the feeling that the events of the story did not really happen but were "made up" to point the moral. But the child must be impressed by the story, and the skillfulteacher will know how to make the details of the story itself so impressive as to bring home their moral. For instance, instead of saying at the end of the story, "This teaches us what a brave man Abram was since he was willing to risk his life for Lot and his family", the teacher might begin the story somewhat as follows:
"Now when Abram was sitting one day at the door of his tent, a man came running to him all out of breath and, as soon as he had gained breath enough to speak, he said, 'There has been a terrible battle in Sodom. I and a few others have escaped but your nephew Lot and his family have all been taken away captive and no one can say what will be done to them.' Thereupon Abram called together his few followers to the number of 318 and, together with his friends and neighbors, Aner, and Eshcol and Mamre and their soldiers, followed after the enemy, trusting that God would help him, though he knew the enemy had many more men than he."
The interesting detail of how the enemy fell into the slime pits in the valley of Siddim should not be omitted as it gives greater vividness and reality to the narrative.
The child can be depended upon to respond to the appeal for his appreciation of Abram's martial virtues, but the full significance of Abram's refusal of a share of the spoils and his statement "Thou shalt not say I have made Abram rich" he will not grasp without the teacher's help. Bring out his point by asking, "Why did not Abram want to let the king of Sodom make him rich?" and if, as will probably be the case, the child will have no answer ready, explain as follows:
"The reason is this. Abram had joined the war not to get money or other riches from the enemy, forthat would have been mere robbery. He had fought to save Lot and his family, and, when they were safe, he was satisfied. But the people of Sodom were, as you know from our last lesson, very wicked and their kings were all the time making war, even when there was no good reason, in order that they might become rich by what they took from the enemy. And Abram thought, if I take money now from the king of Sodom, some time later he may say, 'Abram, it is I who made you a rich man; now you must help me fight against my enemies and rob them'. Therefore Abram would have nothing to do with him and would not even take a shoestring from him. He knew, moreover, that if he obeyed God, God would give him all that he needed, and therefore he did not have to take presents from one whom he could not respect and honor."
Be sure to make clear that Melchizedek's tribute to Abram was in recognition of the fact that his victory was a sign of God's favor, and that Abram's giving the tithe was an expression of his recognition of God's help in the battle.
The lesson might be concluded by some such summary as the following:
So our father Abram became great and famous in the new land to which he had come, because God blessed him in all that he did so that he came to be called by the people about him a "prince of God".
Interpretation.In chapter 15 the faith of Abram is once more given emphasis. God promises Abram great reward, but, being childless, he is indifferent to a reward which must ultimately pass to strangers, the descendants of Eliezer, but God explains to him that he is to have a child of his own to whom the reward is to descend, and he has faith in God's promise though for many years it remains unfulfilled.
The vision of Abram, recorded in verses 12 to 16 is significant as showing the providential character of the Egyptian bondage. We need not, however, discuss it here in detail, since its significance is only apparent in the light of later lessons and it is not intrinsically interesting to the child.
For the interpretation of the main theme of this lesson, the reader is referred to the introduction of this book, pages 19-20. It is to be noted that in giving to Abram her servant Hagar as wife, Sarai is doing an unselfish act in the hope that she may thereby help realize the promise made to Abram, and it is little wonder that she resents the arrogant attitude of Hagar, who is the chief beneficiary of her unselfish act and yet vaunts it over her as though Sarai's barrenness were a mark of inferiority and perhaps even of the divine disfavor.
The fact that, when Hagar flees from Sarai before the birth of Ishmael, she is asked by the angel to return, and that after the birth of Isaac, God not only sanctions but commands the separation, shows distinctly that the motive for the separation was that expressed in the words, "In Isaac shall seed be called to thee", and that, meanwhile, Abram was to have his faith put to the test through his attachment to Ishmael, as later through his attachment to Isaac.
It is also to be noted, here as elsewhere, that the patriarchs and their wives themselves had only a dim and often incorrect idea of God's purpose in his dealings with them. Thus Sarai, realizing that she is barren, at first reasons that God's promise to Abram was intended to apply to him alone and not to her and therefore necessitated his taking another wife. When Ishmael is born, Abram thinks that he is to be the child of destiny and it is one of the tests to which his faith is put when, after the birth of Ishmael, God tells him that not this son but another, who is to be born to Sarai, is to be his heir. The point of all this is that the history of the patriarchs is not merely personal biography but that its real significance is to be understood as showing the care that God exercised in selecting the material out of which the chosen people was to be moulded. Not all of Abram's descendants were to be deemed fit for this election, but he was to become the "father of a multitude of nations" of which only one was to be chosen.
In teaching of the covenant that is recorded in Genesis 17, the ceremony of circumcision cannot for obvious reasons be dwelt on in class, but the change of Abram's and Sarai's names should be, and therefore itssignificance needs to be interpreted. To give a new name is a sign of ownership and interest. God shows his love for Abram and Sarai and his intention to enter into closer relations with them by giving them new names. It is to be noted that God also gives Isaac his name (Genesis 18.21) and changes that of Jacob to Israel after he shows himself worthy of the title.
Aim.This lesson is one of a series of incidents which should impress on the child faith in the truth of God's words, which in the end are verified, though at first they often seem impossible of realization and more particularly, faith in God's election of Israel.
Suggestions to the teacher.There are two main difficulties to overcome in teaching this chapter; first, that the moral is such an abstract one, the whole story as we have interpreted it being conceived as a glimpse into the workings of providence in the history of Israel and the world, and second, that the incidents hinge upon family relations of a sort that a child with his ignorance of the facts of sex cannot easily comprehend.
The first of these difficulties can be largely overcome by giving much more emphasis than is usually given to the human and personal aspect of the story particularly to Abram's desire for a son and his repeated disappointments before the final realization of God's promise to him; and a little tact can overcome the second difficulty as well. To show how these two difficulties may be met, it will be necessary here to tell a great part of the story as it may be told to a class of children between the ages of seven and eight. After telling of God's promise to Abram to make of his seed a great nation as numerous as the stars in heaven and of Abram's rejoicing that he would have a son who would become after him thefather of this great people, the teacher might continue somewhat as follows:
But year after year passed and Abram and Sarai were already growing old, and yet God had not fulfilled His promise to Abram to give him a son out of whose children and children's children He would make a great and good nation. And Oh! how Abram did want to have a son. When he would see the children of his neighbors at play with their bright eyes and laughing faces, he would think, "If only I had a little child like that how happy I should be and what delight it would be to watch him grow big and strong! How I would thank God for such a son and how I would teach my little boy to thank God and to love and obey Him and to be kind and good to all people as God wants us to be so that through him and his children and children's children all the nations of the earth would be blessed." And he would often tell his wishes to Sarai and they would try to comfort each other and one would remind the other of God's promise and would say, "We must be patient. God has promised us a son and in His time He will send us one." But one day an idea came to Sarai. She thought to herself, "Maybe it is my fault that Abram has no children. God promised a son to Abram but he did not make any promise to me. Maybe if Abram married someone else, God would let Abram have a son from this other wife." Now Sarai had a servant whose name was Hagar, and she told Abram to marry Hagar too, for in those days men often had more than one wife. And Abram did as Sarai suggested and, surely enough, not long after they were married it was told to Hagar that in a few months she would bear a child to Abram. Now youwould think children, would you not, that after Sarai had been so kind to her servant Hagar and had let her marry Abram that Hagar would love Sarai for it and show kindness to her in return. But Hagar showed herself at this time very mean. She felt a foolish pride because God was going to give her a son and had given none to Sarai and she used to say to her, "See, you are married to Abram these many years and yet God has not given him any children from you, but I have been but recently married to him and now I shall soon bear him a son. Doesn't this show that God loves me more than you? Doesn't this show that I am better than you? Do you think I will be your servant any more? No indeed, I am not only as good as you but better." When Sarai heard these words day after day she was deeply grieved and angry and she complained to Abram, and Abram told Hagar that she must continue to serve Sarai as before. But when Sarai wanted to make Hagar do her work, she ran away and fled into the wilderness.
The above will suffice to show how the difficulties which we mention can be overcome. The passages that have been italicized suggest how the child can be given the feeling that the birth of Isaac was part of a divine plan for the good of the world. This can be still more clearly brought home by the latter part of the narrative in which God rejects Ishmael as a "Wild ass of a man." The teacher must make this quite clear to the class by asking, "Do you think that this boy Ishmael of whom God knew that he would be wild and wicked was the one whom God meant when He told Abram he would have a son who was going to be a blessing to all the world?" He must also emphasize Abram's affection for Ishmael, which made him mistake him for the sonof promise, for Abram presumably did not know of the prophecy with regard to Ishmael's future. This will give the child the idea contained in the narrative that "There are many devices in a man's heart, but the counsel of the Lord that shall stand".
Interpretation.These verses have given no little difficulty to the ancient Hebrew commentators. The first verse contains a statement of God's appearing to Abraham but does not give any content to this revelation, and then the three angels are introduced into the narrative as if another revelation were here intended. Moreover the number of angels that appeared to Abraham when one might have served the purpose as well also presented its difficulty, since Christian theologians, connecting this verse with the preceding, tried to employ it as an argument for the trinity. There are furthermore in these verses frequent changes of number which are difficult to account for. Thus in verse 3, Abraham addresses the angels in the singular, in verse 4 in the plural. In verse 9, we readva-yomeru"And they said" while verse 10 which seems a continuation of this conversation beginsva-yomar"And he said". In verse 13 God himself suddenly breaks into the conversation. A comparison with other parts of the Bible in which angels appear shows that they too exhibit similar peculiarities of style.[2]
The study of these passages shows the following characteristic features of the Biblical conception ofangels which will help to clear up the difficulties of our text. The angel, as the name both in Hebrew and English implies, is the messenger of God. Inasmuch as he exists only to do God's bidding his words are the words of God and may be introduced by the words "God said" as well as by "the angel (or angels) said". This accounts for the apparent inconsistency in the use of singular and plural in our passage. The angel has no discretionary power, as appears from the statement in Exodus 23. 21, that the angel cannot forgive sin. Inasmuch as he has no individual personality or will of his own but is merely a manifestation of God's will, he has no name of his own, the name being a mark of individuality, but bears the name of God, which being a mystery, he may not reveal.[3](Genesis 32. 3. Exodus 23. 21. Judges 13. 18.) This idea of the impersonality of the angels is carried a step further by the Rabbis, who insist that no angel ever executes more than one message and account for the number of angels that appeared to Abraham by assigning to each a separate mission; one to predict to Abraham the birth of Isaac, another to rescue Lot, and a third to destroy Sodom. But such an explanation is scarcely necessary as there are other passages in the Bible where a number of angels are mentioned for no clear reason, as for instance in Jacob's dream. As for the difficulty that we found in verses one and two, it can now be made clear by understanding the appearance of the angels in verse two as the explanation of the revelation referred to in verse one.
Regarding the significance of angels in general, we may consider the accounts of their appearances as intended by the Biblical author to convey his appreciation of the mystery of how God can communicate with mortals without loss to His divine majesty. They certainly do convey something of this appreciation to the child, for the imagination of children notwithstanding their natural tendency to conceive of God in anthropomorphic terms, is impressed by these mysterious heralds of an invisible kingdom with a sense of the majesty of God's rule.
Aim.This episode has always been made use of, and rightly so, to impress the pupil with an appreciation of that courteous interest in the stranger and deferential attention to his wants and desires which constitute the true grace of hospitality, but an equally important educational value, perhaps from the point of view of the child an even more important one, is its power of impressing him with a sense of the mysterious possibilities of this world, in which any passing stranger that we entertain may turn out to be an angel in disguise, who will reveal himself to us and bless us if we do not turn him from our door. The story should leave the child with the feeling expressed in the exclamation, "Is anything too hard for the Lord". The teacher must of course not lose sight nor permit the child to lose sight of the story's connection with the main theme of the birth of Isaac, the significance of which we have already pointed out in the previous lesson.
Suggestions to the teacher.This is a story whose educational value would only be lost by analyzing its moral as the beauty of a flower is destroyed by pulling it apart to show its structure. Tell the story simplyand, as nearly as possible, in the language of the Bible itself. Be careful to give the story its characteristic picturesque setting, and begin therefore by contrasting modern conditions of housing and travel with those of Abraham's days, thus establishing a point of contact with the child's present experience. The following facts should be impressed on the child:
1. That Abraham's nomadic life, which was also the life led by many of his contemporaries, necessitated his dwelling in a tent which could be pitched wherever he wanted to make his home,
2. That traveling was to a large extent on foot over hot sand or stones,
3. That travelers were not sure of obtaining food at regular intervals, and
4. That it was consequently a great kindness to offer them rest and refreshment.
After this introduction, tell the story of how Abraham one day saw three tired travelers on the road approaching in the direction of his tent and invited them to rest, refresh themselves and partake of food. Then, in a manner which would suggest that you are confiding to the class a great secret, tell them that these men whom Abraham had invited were not really men at all but angels of God.
The incident of Sarah's laughing when the angel delivers his message and then denying that she had laughed should not be omitted as it affords an interesting human touch to the story and still more as it gives the occasion for the angel's reply which contains the moral of the story, "Can anything be too wonderful for God?" There is no need of glossing over Sarah's prevarication and certainly no need ofgiving it undue emphasis, but the incident should be told in such a way that her motive is made clear. Say, for instance; "Now as you know, Sarah was very old, so old that she thought herself too old to have a little baby, and when she heard, from behind the curtain of the tent, the angel telling Abraham that in a year's time she should have a son she laughed, just as you would laugh if I told you that a rose bush would have roses in mid-winter. But the angel said to Abraham, 'Why does Sarah laugh? Is there anything that God cannot do?' Then Sarah was ashamed and said, 'I did not laugh'. But the angel said, 'Nay but thou didst laugh and Sarah was more ashamed than ever, for she knew that she had not told the truth, and she said no more."
Interpretation.The incident of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, like that of the destruction of the generation of the deluge, is meant as an assertion of God's justice. The insistence on the justice of God is made the more emphatic by the recognition of the fact that His dispensations are such as may lead us at times to call His justice into question. When, therefore, Abraham exclaims, "Shall not the judge of all the world do justice?" he is not rebuked for his presumption, but, on the contrary, God seems to prefer his attitude to one that would accept apparent injustice with complacent resignation, and God does not disdain to justify Himself to Abraham in very much the same spirit as the Book of Job represents Him as preferring the blasphemous accusations of Job to the pious apologetics of his friends. (Job 42. 7.)
The particular crime assigned as an instance of the wickedness of Sodom was a form of immorality of which strangers were the especial victims. Lot's offer to surrender to the men of Sodom his daughters instead of the strangers was not only prompted by a sense of the obligation of hospitality but by the consideration of the different degree of immorality involved in the two acts. It goes without saying that the specific crime of the men of Sodom cannot be explained to the children otherwise than as a disposition to abuse strangers,the antithesis to the attitude of Abraham and Lot towards them, and, inasmuch as the nature of the crime cannot be taught, Lot's offer to substitute his daughters for the strangers cannot be taught since this act would then appear as an attempt to remedy one injustice by perpetrating another.
Aim.This lesson yields more than one moral for the child. The style of Abraham's plea for Sodom and Gomorrah is a very fine example of devotion in prayer and should affect the child's attitude in prayer. The lesson of hospitality taught in the story that preceded is given further emphasis by the contrast between the reception of the strangers by Abraham and by Lot, who was reared in Abraham's household, on the one hand, and by the people of Sodom on the other. This contrast between the character of Abraham and that of the people of Sodom should appeal to the Jewish pride of the child as a descendant of Abraham, the value of which pride we have had occasion to point out before. The transformation of Lot's wife into a pillar of salt is an excellent lesson in the value of prompt obedience and the danger of hesitation and inordinate curiosity.
Suggestions to the teacher.In teaching of Abraham's plea for Sodom and Gomorrah, do not merely give the substance of Abraham's prayer but thoroughly assimilate and impart the reverential spirit contained in such introductory phrases as "Behold now I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, who am but dust and ashes, peradventure, etc." "Oh, let not the Lord be angry and I will speak", and again, "Let not the Lord be angry and I will speak but this once". In order that this part of the lesson shall affect the child's attitude in prayer, speak of Abraham's plea as a prayer by saying"Then Abraham prayed, etc.", rather than simply "Then Abraham said", but do not, of course, go into a dissertation on prayer; let the child draw his own moral.
In telling of the reception of the angels in Sodom it is well to emphasize the contrast between the way the men of Sodom treated strangers and the way that Abraham and Lot treated them. The accusation of the men of Sodom, "This one fellow came in to sojourn and he will needs play the judge" is a fine involuntary tribute to Lot's moral superiority and should be quoted. The final picture in verse 28 should not be omitted as it emphasizes the connection of Abraham with these events and furnishes, so to speak, a concluding tableau to the story.
A description of the Dead Sea region of Palestine, accompanied by a good picture showing its present desolation, might furnish a good conclusion to the lesson. The following questions will test the child's comprehension of the story's moral:
1. How did our Father Abraham treat strangers? How did Lot? Where did Lot learn always to be kind to strangers? How did the people of Sodom treat strangers?
Why did God want to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? When God told Abraham that he would destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, was Abraham glad or sorry? What did he do? Can you repeat his prayer?
What did the angels tell Lot and his family not to do? Did they all obey? Why did Lot's wife look back? What happened to her because she did not obey?
Interpretation.The incident recorded in Chapter 20 is intended to show the care exercised by God in preserving the purity of the chosen seed, but it cannot be taught to children because of their ignorance of the facts of sex. Chapter 21 verses 21 to the end of the chapter may be omitted since they offer nothing of interest to the child.
For the interpretation of the main theme of this chapter see introduction pages 19-20 and Chapter VIII. It is to be noted that God's choice of Isaac does not mean that His providence does not extend over Ishmael as well. Not only is Ishmael's life saved but God's promise to Abraham regarding Ishmael is kept as well as His promise regarding Isaac.
Aim.The aim in this lesson is practically the same as in Chapter VIII, to inspire faith in God's providential interest in human affairs in general and in Israel's destiny in particular. The child need not understand all the implications of the narrative at the time it is taught him but if it be taught properly the story will make its impression and he will understand them more completely later. God's hearing the voice of Ishmael should suggest to the child the value of prayer and thus influence his immediate life.
Suggestions to the teacher.Before beginning the narrative of this story recall to the children, by welldirected questions, the previous history of the relations of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael, as we have explained them in Chapter VIII. Then point out the complications which the birth of Isaac introduced since God had promised that Isaac was to be the son to inherit the blessing of Abraham together with the possession of the promised land, and Ishmael, who was now beginning to grow up into the "wild ass of a man" according to the prophecy that had preceded his birth, would dispute this with him. It therefore became necessary for Hagar and Ishmael to be sent away after the birth of Isaac. Inasmuch as the idea of inheritance and the idea of national destiny are too abstract for children, the story must be adapted to their comprehension by putting it on a more personal plane somewhat as follows:
"Now when Hagar saw that God had given a son to Sarah also as the angel had promised and that this son Isaac and not her own Ishmael was the one to whom God told Abraham he would give the land of Canaan and whose children would be the great Jewish people, she became jealous and hated Sarah very much and even Sarah's little baby Isaac. And Ishmael too, who was now grown up into a big wild boy—you remember the angel had said he would be a wild man when he grew up—also was jealous of Isaac. And Hagar tried to persuade Abraham to give her son part of this land of Canaan that God had promised to Isaac. Now Sarah saw all this and she knew that it would not be good for Isaac to grow up together with this wild and wicked Ishmael and so she told Abraham to send Hagar and her son away to some other country where theycould not do any mischief to Isaac whom God had chosen to be the father of the Jewish people."[4]
In concluding the story one might interest the child by telling him that there are descendants of Ishmael alive today who like us feel proud to be descended from Abraham, and describing some of the habits of the Bedouin Arabs, their nomadic life, their pastoral occupation similar to that of the patriarchs and also their tribal feuds and not infrequent raids for pillage which still would justify the prophecy, "His hand shall be against every man and every man's hand against him", but one should in justice say that this is not true of the large number of Arabs who have settled in more civilized communities. A picture of Bedouins in modern times would be of interest to the class and help give a sense of reality to the Biblical story.
Interpretation.The story of the'Akedah, that is the intended sacrifice of Isaac, represents the supreme test to which Abraham's faith was put. After Ishmael has been sent away and Isaac has been definitely declared to be the son of promise, Abraham is commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac. The test to Abraham's faith is not merely of the willingness to sacrifice sentiment and affection in obedience to God, but this latest command is a direct contradiction of God's previous words to him and yet he obeys.
The story can only be understood fully in the light of the religious customs of Abraham's day, according to which human sacrifice was not uncommon. (See II Kings 3. 27, also 21. 6, 23. 10 and Jeremiah 32. 35.) Viewed in this light God's asking Abraham to sacrifice his son meant nothing which to a contemporary of Abraham would have seemed essentially inconsistent with the divine character. It is God's forbidding the consummation of this act which is the innovation, so that this lesson teaches in a narrative form the same idea which later received its legal formulation in Leviticus 18. 21 and 20. 2-5. The chapter has therefore a twofold message; (1) that to be the elect of God requires of us the willingness to sacrifice any personal desire and even natural affection in obedience to him, and (2) that God's will, to which He claims obedience,is a benevolent one and does not demand or desire human sacrifice.
The idea that God does not desire human sacrifice was a great moral discovery and this narrative in our Bible gives us an interesting illustration of how such new spiritual insights in general are born; namely through the willingness to commit ourselves completely to whatever vision of truth is ours at the time. It was because Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac in accordance with his previous sense of what duty demanded of him, that this new revelation of God's will as opposed to human sacrifice was granted him. Had he, while sharing with his contemporaries the belief in the legitimacy of human sacrifice, hesitated to live up to this idea when it involved suffering for himself, he would never have been given the understanding that God does not desire human sacrifice. Our standards of morality are at all times imperfect, but it is only those who commit themselves without reservation to whatever standard they really hold that are the discoverers of new moral truths.
The part that Isaac played in the incident is but vaguely suggested in the Biblical narrative. Theagadicelaborations of the story frequently represent Isaac as knowing what fate was intended for him and fully acquiescing in it. That Isaac probably had his misgivings is suggested by the question, "Behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" At all events he must have known what Abraham's purpose with regard to him was when he was being bound to the altar and, as the narrative records no protest, the Rabbinic conception of the part Isaac played is not contradictory to the Biblical story.The teacher is therefore justified in imparting the story in a way which would imply that Isaac lent himself willingly to Abraham's designs regarding him.
In the substitution of the ram for Isaac one gets a glimpse into the significance of animal sacrifice. It probably meant to the ancients a symbolic expression of the recognition that God had the right to demand the sacrifice of human life in his service and that it was a sign of his love and grace that no such demand was made. It suggests the important role that animal sacrifice played in history in weaning mankind from the habit of human sacrifice.
Aim.The aim of this lesson is to make the child feel that as a son of Abraham his love for God should be such that, like Abraham, he should be willing to make any sacrifice that his religion may demand of him. The traditional association of theshofaron Rosh ha-Shanah with the Ram of the Akedah suggests that this story may be used to give meaning to the New Year celebration.
Suggestions to the teacher.The pathos of this narrative is so deep and intense that many teachers, laboring under the notion so common in our day that children should be reared only on what is cheerful and bright and be kept far from a knowledge of any of the more tragic aspects of life, would like to omit teaching it to children all together. When therefore the curriculum of the school requires them to teach it, they tell the story in as matter of fact a manner as possible and seem anxious to get over it. This is a mistake however, for children have always had a fondness for stories containing something of the tragic, even of the weird and uncanny, as witness the popularity of Little Red RidingHood, and the story of the Akedah is one which can, by very reason of what to our modern mind appeals as weird, impress its lesson on the child's imagination. To pass over it slightingly is to spoil what is undoubtedly the climax of the whole Abraham story and ignore one of the best opportunities of deeply impressing the child with the lesson of faith, obedience and self sacrifice.
Begin the lesson by speaking of Abraham's love for Isaac, now the only son that was left him and of the hopes he cherished of seeing him grow up to be a great man according to God's promise. Then tell how God resolved to test Abraham's obedience by seeing whether he would be willing to give up that which he loved most if so commanded. Before telling of God's command to sacrifice Isaac remind the child of the prevalent custom of animal sacrifice which he had heard of in connection with Cain and Noah. The fact of the general prevalence of human sacrifice at that time should not be taught the child as it will be impossible for him to comprehend such a practice and as the story only gains in force for him by making God's demand of Abraham appear extraordinary. We need not scruple that we are violating the Biblical moral in this instance, since the Bible's denunciation of human sacrifice is not a moral that the child has need of. A reference to animal sacrifice will therefore suffice to make comprehensible the command to sacrifice Isaac. All the conversation in this story should be quoted in the language of the Bible, not omitting Isaac's pathetic query, "Behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" And Abraham's evasive answer, "God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son". Intelling how Isaac was bound to the altar emphasize the fact that he did not rebel although he knew now that he was to be the sacrifice, because of his obedience to God and his father and his confidence in them. When telling how the ram was found caught by its horns in the bushes, ask, "How many of you have ever seen a ram's horn?" There will probably be no response. Then show the class ashofaror a picture of one and ask, "What is this?" The answer will be "ashofar". Then continue; "Well, ashofaris the horn of a ram. When we hear theshofarblown on Rosh ha-Shanah it should remind us of this ram and of how Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac and Isaac was willing to be sacrificed when God commanded, and we should think of how we, who are sons of Abraham and Isaac, must be willing also to obey God and our parents in everything even if it should be very hard to do so, even if it should cost us our life." In order to make sure that the child has understood the motives of the story the following questions may be asked in reviewing it: 1. When God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, did he really want him to kill his son? 2. Why did God ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? 3. When Abraham tied Isaac to the altar did Isaac rebel against his father? When we hear theshofarblown on Rosh ha-Shanah what should we think of?
Interpretation.The incident of the purchase of the Cave of Machpelah need be mentioned only casually in connection with the death of Sarah as the political questions involved in the dialogue between theBene Hethand Abraham are beyond the child's comprehension.[5]
The care exercised in the selection of a wife for Isaac from his own kindred rather than from the daughters of Canaan emphasizes again the interest of Providence in selecting the stock out of which the Chosen People was to come. Abraham's servant—presumably Eliezer, who is mentioned in Genesis 15.2—was not permitted to take Isaac out of Canaan as that would have been equivalent to a desertion of his historic mission which was connected with the Promised Land. Significant are the qualifications of the ideal wife for Isaac suggested in the prayer of Eliezer—kindness and hospitality.
Aim.The value of this lesson to the child, apart from its connection with the more general theme of God's selection of the seed from which the Chosen People is to spring, lies in the example of faith in Godand fidelity to his trust exhibited by Abraham's servant, and of the kindness and consideration shown by Rebekah, which the child's sympathy with the characters of the story would naturally lead him to imitate.
Suggestions to the teacher.By following the Biblical narrative closely, you will have little difficulty in imparting it to the child. When telling of the death of Sarah, dwell on her virtues a while and then explain Abraham's concern that his son Isaac should have just such a wife as Sarah had been, one that would be worthy to be the mother of the great nation God had promised would be descended from Isaac. Then relate how, not finding such a wife among his neighbors, Abraham sent to the land from which he and Sarah had come. Explain Abraham's refusal to let Isaac go to Mesopotamia because God had told Abraham to leave that place and had promised that in Canaan he would make of his seed a great nation. Emphasize the length and difficulty of the journey, pointing out the route on the map if the children are old enough to interpret a map.
Interpretation.(Chapter 25. 1 to 10 may be omitted as containing nothing of interest to children, except that Abraham's death and burial should be mentioned.)
The story of Jacob and Esau in their contention for the birthright and the blessing is one that is frequently misunderstood. The tendency to idealize the forefathers of the race has lead many teachers to attempt to justify the conduct of Jacob in his efforts to secure the birthright and the blessing, totally ignoring the fact that all the wretched consequences which followed naturally upon his attempt would seem to indicate that God did not approve. What these consequences were will be discussed in subsequent chapters. Other teachers sin in the opposite direction and make out Esau to be the innocent victim of Jacob's cunning and avarice. How they can reconcile this with the choice of Jacob to be the patriarch rather than Esau, how they can conceive that God's will could confirm the act of Jacob and the hand of Providence be, so to speak, forced into blessing Jacob though Esau was the more worthy of blessing, is difficult to understand. The mistake common to both these versions of the Biblical meaning of the story is that they look at it mainly as a character study of two contrasting types, whereas the moral of the story lies not so much in the characters as in the incidents, which, when given closer attention, reveal the fact that themotive underlying the whole story is not the personal contest between Jacob and Esau but the carrying out of God's plan, contained in his promise to Abraham, the plan of bringing into existence the people to whom He was to reveal Himself. And this idea is brought out, as in the story of Abraham's relation to Ishmael and Isaac, by contrasting the purposes of the human agents with God's purpose and showing how God's purpose is made to triumph by His so shaping the incidents of Jacob's life that they correct Jacob's original misconception of his mission.
Let us see how the incidents in this chapter cast light on our theme. Note in the first instance the prophecy contained in Genesis 25.23 which indicates in advance that Jacob and not Esau was intended from the beginning to be the heir of the blessing of Abraham. Note also that the prophecy speaks of "two nations" and "two peoples", showing distinctly that the events of the narrative were shaped by God with a view to subsequent history not merely to the lives of Jacob and Esau as individuals. The very fact that "the elder shall serve the younger" is to give emphasis to the divine election of Jacob, for, according to the law and custom of those days, the elder was entitled to the obedience and service of the younger. Had Jacob been the older of the two brothers his subsequent preeminence and that of his descendants would have seemed but part of the natural course of events and would not have argued divine election, but with Esau the first born the subsequent elevation of Jacob does so argue.
This, as well as much else in the story, becomes clearer to us if we understand what was meant by the birthright. In patriarchal times, the father was absoluteruler over his descendants. At his death, the oldest son took his place and inherited as even in later times, twice as large a portion of the estate as any of his other sons. (See Deuteronomy 21.17.) But this is not all that was involved in the birthright. If it were all, Jacob's desire for it would have been mere avarice and ambition and would have justified that total condemnation which many a teacher has given him. But we must remember that the first born was also the religious head of the tribe. (See Numbers 3.45.) It was therefore most natural for Jacob to assume that God's promise to Abraham, with all its spiritual implications, naturally went with the birthright.
Now let us examine the characters as they appear in this chapter. Esau is not the consummate villain that he is so frequently depicted as being in later Jewishagada. But on the other hand, he is not the injured hero. The story characterizes him as a skilful hunter, interested in his woodcraft, and caring little about either the privileges or the responsibilities of his birthright. To Jacob however the inheritance of the blessing of Abraham was important, perhaps a knowledge of the prophecy that had preceded his birth making it even more so. Esau had forfeited his moral right to the blessing through his failure to appreciate it. Not too much stress must be laid on Esau's words "Behold I am at the point to die and what profit shall the birthright do to me?" as these are to be regarded not as a statement of sober fact but as the exaggeration of a hungry man, for the Bible takes pains to explain Esau's attitude in the words, "And he did eat and drink and rose up and went his way. So Esaudespised his birthright", showing that he was at the time perfectly satisfiedwith the bargain he had made. This takes from Jacob the stigma of having forced the bargain on Esau when the latter could not help himself. He merely took advantage of Esau's contempt for the birthright, which was sufficient evidence that he was not worthy to possess it. At the same time, Jacob's employing these means to secure the birthright does not seem, as will appear more clearly in later chapters, to meet the divine approval, because (1) this attempt to wrest the birthright from Esau through taking advantage of Esau's weakness in itself argues a lack of complete confidence in the realization of God's promise, in other words, a lack of that quality oftemimut, of naive acceptance of God's will, which was so conspicuous a trait of Abraham's character, and (2) because he does not fully understand the spiritual character of his mission inasmuch as he regards its realization as dependent upon the legal status of the birthright, which he could, so he thought, secure by purchase.
Aim.The aim of this lesson is to teach the general truth that a privilege which is not appreciated becomes forfeit, and the particular truth that to be a Jew is to possess such a privilege, which we must learn to appreciate.
Suggestions to the teacher.Before beginning the narrative of this chapter itself, prepare the way by questions that will bring out the fact of the election of Abraham and his descendants and the choice that God exercised in selecting from among his descendants only those properly qualified. Such questions are the following; "Do you remember, when we were learning about Abraham and about how God told him to leave his land and go to the land that He would show him,that God made Abraham a promise? What was that promise? (Note: The answer must include the idea that his descendants would be a great nation, a blessing to all the world, and would inherit Canaan.) When our father Abraham died, did this blessing go to both his children, to Ishmael and to Isaac? To whom did the blessing belong?"
After having thus prepared the way proceed as follows:
"Now Isaac and Rebekah also had two children. The first born or older was called Esau and the younger Jacob, and it was known that only one of the two was to inherit the blessing, but for a long time it was not known which one."
Then contrast the two characters emphasizing the physical prowess of Esau, which won him the more universal admiration and the preference of his father with the quiet thoughtfulness of Jacob. In order to impress the child, the contrast must be given largely in terms of their physical appearance. We continue the narrative as a teacher might tell it in class:
"These two sons, Esau and Jacob, were very different one from the other. Esau was a big strong man, rough and hairy in appearance, who delighted in all sorts of sport and exercise, especially in hunting. People admired him for his great strength and skill and most of them thought that surely this big, strong man was the one whom God had chosen to be the father of His people. And Isaac himself loved Esau more than he did Jacob, because, now that Isaac was growing old, Esau used to hunt food for him in the forest and would tell him wonderful stories of his strength and skill in catching the deer and other game that he prepared forhim for food. But Jacob was very different. He was not above the average man in strength and he had no particular skill in hunting as had Esau. He was a quiet man, who used to sit for hours in his tent, while his flocks were pasturing nearby and think about the things he had learned from his father and mother and from his grandfather Abraham, about how God had made the world, and about how he had told Abraham to leave his country and go to a new land, and, above all, about the promise that God had given to Abraham to make of his descendants a great people. Which of these two sons of Isaac and Rebekah had God chosen to become the father of the Jewish people? Most people, no doubt, thought at the time that Esau was meant, because he was the stronger and more successful in the hunt, but there was one person who thought differently, and that was the mother of these two young men, Rebekah. For she remembered a prophecy that God had told her before either of the two children were born, and this prophecy said, 'Two nations will come from thee and two peoples will be born of thee and one will be stronger than the other, but the elder will serve the younger'."
The prophecy is introduced here rather than at the beginning of the story because it is well to stimulate the child's curiosity as to which of the two is to receive the blessing of Abraham before giving him any hint as to the answer. By thus beginning with a statement of the question, the child's attention is at once directed to the central theme of the narrative without which the incident of the sale of the birthright is not comprehensible. But now one comes face to face with the subject of the birthright itself. Explain, that beside Esau's strength and skill, there was another reason why peoplethought that Esau was to be the chosen son, and that is because he was the older, for it was the custom in those days that the oldest son enjoyed what was known as the birthright. The idea of the birthright can be explained by saying that in the days of which we are speaking the father used to be the king over all his children and their families and servants, that he used to lead them in war and judge all their disputes in time of peace, and that he was also their priest, who used to perform the sacrifices for them and lead them in their prayers and hymns to God, but that, when the father died, the oldest son got all these rights and this right of the oldest son to become priest and king after the death of the father is known as the birthright.
After the child has a clear idea of the meaning of the birthright, tell how Jacob thought that the one who had the birthright was he whom God meant to make the head of the great nation he had told Abraham about, since whoever had the birthright would be king and priest over all the others after Isaac's death. I continue the narrative as the teacher might tell it:
"So Jacob kept thinking to himself, 'If only I had the birthright! If only I had the birthright!' but Esau, who had the birthright, seemed to care very little about it. So long as there was game enough in the forest to keep him busy hunting, he bothered his head very little about what he would do when, on Isaac's death, he would have to rule the people and lead them in the service of God, and the promise made to Abraham that some day his descendants would become a great nation concerned him even less, for he thought only of the affairs of the day and to the future he gave no thought at all."
This brings us to the climax of the narrative, the actual sale of the birthright. It must be told in such a way that the child understands the point that Esau lost his birthright because he did not know how to appreciate it, and that, as a universal proposition, a privilege not appreciated is lost. This can best be done if, before telling the story of the sale of the birthright, one presents a hypothetical case somewhat as follows:
"Suppose, children, that a man owned a very valuable book which he wanted to leave when he died to one of his two children, and suppose that one of his children was a great lover of books and the other did not care even to look at a book or to take the trouble to learn to read, which of the two children do you think ought to have had the book after the father's death? Of course, the one who knew the value of the book and how to appreciate it, because we only deserve what we know how to appreciate. Now who do you think should have had the birthright, Esau, who did not care about being the father of the great people God had promised to make of Abraham's descendants, or Jacob who did care? (Answer: Jacob.) Well, Jacob thought so too and so he began planning how he might get Esau to give up the birthright to him."
In quoting the dialogue between Esau and Jacob, paraphrase Esau's words in verse 32 so as to make it perfectly clear that they are an expression of contempt for the birthright, "I am so hungry I could die. What do I care for the birthright!"
After having told the story question the children with a view to seeing whether they understand its leading ideas. The following are suggestive questions:
What promise did God make to Abraham and to Isaac?
Was this promise meant for both of Isaac's children?
Which of Isaac's children do you think God wanted to have the promised blessing? Why? (Note: If the child gives the wrong answer, the teacher must ask a number of leading questions until the right answer is secured.)
What does birthright mean? Who had the birthright at the beginning of our story? Did Esau care very much for the birthright? Did Jacob want it? Why did Jacob want it? What did Jacob do to get the birthright?
This lesson lends itself easily to dramatization by the children. (See Introduction, page 31.)