LESSON IV.
Some of the lexicons say that this rootעֶבֶדʿebedebedmeans alsoworship, toworshipGod, or idols, &c., without any connection with the idea of slavery. InGen.xxii. 5: “And I and the lad will go yonder andworship;” here, worship is fromוְנִ֥שְׁתַּֽחֲוֶ֖הwĕništaḥăweh, from the rootשׁחהšḥhshahah, which means to bow down. xxiii. 12: “AndAbrahambowed down himselfbefore the people of the Lord,”bowed down himselfוַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ֙wayyištaḥû. xlvii. 31: “AndIsrael bowed himself upon the bed’s head,”וַיִּשְׁתַּ֥חוּwayyištaḥû.Exod.iv. 31: “Then they bowed their heads and worshipped,”וַיִּ֥שְׁתַּ֥חֲוֽוּwayyištaḥăwû. This root, like all others, takes upon itself a change of shape, according to the condition in which it is used. We will present a few instances of its application in Hebrew.Exod.xi. 8: “And bow down themselves unto me,”וְהִשְׁתַּ֥חֲווּwĕhištaḥăwû. xx. 5: “Thou shalt not bow down thyselfתִּשְׁתַּ֥חֲוֶ֥֣הtištaḥăweunto them.” xxxiii. 10: “And the people rose up andworshipped,”וְהִ֥שְׁתַּֽחֲו֔וּwĕhištaḥăwû.Deut.xxvi. 10: “Andworshipוְיִִּֽשְׁתַּֽחֲוִ֔יתָwĕyiišĕttaḥăwîtābefore the Lord thy God.”Josh.v. 14: “And Joshua fell on his face to the earth and didworship,”וַיִּשְׁתָּ֔ח֗וּwayyištāḥû. 1Sam.xv. 30: “That I mayworshipוִהִשְׁתַּ֥חֲוֵ֖יתִיwihištaḥăwêtîthe Lord thy God.” 31: “And Saul worshippedוַיִּשְׁתַּ֥חוּwayyištaḥûthe Lord.” 2Sam.i. 2: “That he fell to the earth and didobeisance,”וַיִּשְׁתָּ֥חוּwayyištāḥû. xiv. 33: “Andbowed himselfוַיִּשְׁתַּחוּwayyištaḥûon his face to the ground before the king.” 1Kingsi. 23: “Hebowed himselfוַיִּשְׁתַּ֥חוּwayyištaḥûbefore the king with his face to the ground.” 2Kingsv. 18: “When mymastergoeth into the house of Rimmon toworshipלְהִשְׁתַּֽחֲ֙וֹתlĕhištaḥăwōtthere, * * * and I bow myselfוְהִֽשְׁתַּ֥חֲוֵיתִיwĕhišĕttaḥăwêtîin the house of Rimmon, * * *when I bow myself downבְּהִשְׁתַּֽחֲוָיָתִיbĕhištaḥăwāyātîin the house of Rimmon.” xviii. 22: “Ye shall worshipתִּשְׁתַּ֥חֲו֖וּtištaḥăwûbefore the altar of Jerusalem.” xix. 37: “And it came to pass as he wasworshippingמִשְׁתַּ֥חֲוֶהmištaḥăwein the house of Nishrosh, his God.”Jobi. 20: “Then Job arose and fell downupon the ground andworshipped,”וַיִּשְׁהָֽחוּwayyišhāḥû.Ezek.viii. 16: “And theyworshippedמִשְׁהֲוִיהֶ֥םmišhăwîhemthe sun towards the east.”
Before we close our examples, let us notice how the Hebrews applied this word in poetry.Ps.xlv. 12 (11 of the English text): “Worshipוְהִשְׁתַּ֥חֲוִיwĕhištaḥăwîthou him,” xcix. 5: “Exalt ye the Lord our God, andworshipוְ֭הִשְׁתַּ֥חֲווּwĕhištaḥăwûat his footstool.” cvi. 19: “They made a calf in Horeb and worshippedהִ֥שְׁתַּ֖חֲווּhištaḥăwûthe molten image.” xcvii. 7: “Confounded be all they thatserve(עֹבְדֵיʿōbĕdêslave themselves to) graven images; that boast themselves of idols:worshipהִֽשְׁתַּֽחֲווּhišĕttaḥăwûhim, all ye gods.” In this instance, the wordserveassociates with the idea of slavery, as does the original; but theworshipwith that of reverence. Both words occurring in the same sentence, will give us some idea of their different uses; yet some think this word in such instances synonymous with the word worship, notwithstanding the Hebrew writers thought differently; yet true it is, this word is sometimes used (as it were by figure) to express humility, subserviency, and devotedness of the trueworshipper. In the same manner, St. Paul expresses the idea, when he says, that he is thedoulos(δοῦλος, slave) of Jesus Christ. In an analogous sense, the Arabic wordsهَلَّhalhelandهَلّلَhallalhallel, Hebrewהַלֵּלhallēlhallal, are used to mean worship, &c.Ps.cl.: “Praise ye the Lord, praise God in his sanctuary,” &c., where this word is in frequent use, and from which our wordhallelujahhas arisen. Also the Arabic wordهَوْدٌhawdunhōd, Hebrewהוֹדhôdhōd, is in somewhat similar use:Ps.cxxxvi. 1, 2, 3, all commencing, “O give thanks to the Lord,” meaning glory, majesty, or dignity to the Lord, as the worship of the Almighty. We trust no one has ever found the wordebedused in such a sense.
But it is said thatעֲבֹדָתʿăbōdātavodameans implements, utensils, appurtenances, (seeGessenius,) andNum.iii. 26, 31, and 36, is quoted in proof: “And the hangings of the court and the curtains for the door of the court, which is by the tabernacle, and by the altar round about, and the cords of it, for all theservicethereof.”Serviceis translated fromעֲבֹֽדָתוֹʿăbōdātôavodatho. The word, as here used, meansslave-labour, and might well have been translated, “For all the slave-labour thereof,”i. e.of the tabernacle. We cannotperceive that it means the hanging of the court, or the curtains, or cords. The other instances quoted are of the same character, and we dismiss their consideration, asking the passages to be read.
But it is said, tominister, tominister unto, is sometimes translated to the wordebed. 1Kingsxix. 21: “Then he arose and went unto Elijah, andministeredוַֽיְשָׁרְתֵֽהוּwayšortēhûunto him.” The word is from the rootשֵׁרֵתšērētshereth, and means to wait upon, to attend to, &c., distinct from the idea of slavery. InMatt.iv. 11: “Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came andministered(διηκονουν,diekonoun) unto him.” This Greek word, we deem, would be a good translation of this word from Hebrew into Greek. This word is used inNum.iii. 6: “That they mayministerunto him.” 31: “Wherewith they mayministerוְשֵֽׁרְת֖וּwĕšērĕtûunto it.” iv. 12: “And they shall take all the instruments of ministryוְשֵֽׁרְתוּwĕšērĕtûwherewith theyminister.” 14: “Wherewith theyministerabout it.” xviii. 2: “That they may be joined unto thee andministerוִֽישָֽׁרְת֑וּךָ֩wîšārĕtûkāunto thee.” 1Kingsi. 4: “And the damsel was very fair, and cherished the king andministeredוַתְּשָׁ֣רְתֵ֔הוּwattĕšārĕtēhûto him.” 15: “The Shunammiteministeredמְשָׁרַ֖תmĕšāratunto the king.” If the wordebedhad been used, it would have shown that she was aslave. The same word is continued to be used to meanminister. In 1Sam.ii. 11: “And the child didministerunto the Lord before Eli.” 18: “But Samuelministeredמְשָׁרֵתmĕšārētbefore the Lord, being a child.” iii. 1: “And the child Samuelministeredמְשָׁ֣רֵ֥תmĕšārētunto the Lord before Eli.” 2Sam.xiii. 17: “Then he called his servant (נַֽעֲרוֹnaʿărôhis young man) thatministeredמְשָׁ֣רְת֔וֹmĕšārĕtôunto him.” Now, had theebedbeen here used instead of this word, as a verb, in the required mood and tense, &c., it would have been proof that the young man was a slave. But, in case the wordebed, as a noun, had been used, instead ofנערnʿrnar, then this word might have been used as it is, without affecting the slave character of the servant. 1Kingsx. 5: “And the sitting of his servants, (עֲבָדָיו֩ʿăbādāywslaves,) and the attendance of his ministers,”מְשָׁרְתָי֜וmĕšortāyw.
This passage shows with great distinctness the different use and meaning of the wordsebedandshereth, between those whoministeredunto him, and those who did slave-labour, between the minister and the slave and so we ever find the distinct uses and meanings of these words. SeeExod.xxviii. 43: “Or when they come near unto the altar toministerלְשָׁרֵ֣תlĕšārētin the holy place.”Deut.x. 8: “To stand before the Lord toministerלְשָֽׁרְתוֹ֙lĕšārĕtôunto him.” xviii. 5: “For the Lord thy God hath chosen him out of all thy tribes to stand toministerלְשָׁרֵתlĕšārētin the name of the Lord, him and his sons for ever.” 1Kingsviii. 11: “So that the priests could not stand toministerלְשָׁרֵ֖תlĕšārētbecause of the cloud.” 2Kingsxxv. 14: “And all the vessels of brass wherewith theyministered,יְשָֽׁרְתוּyĕšārĕtû, took they away.” 2Chron.xxiv. 14: “ Even vessels tominister,”שָׁרֵתšārēt.Neh.x. 36 (the 27th of the Hebrew text): “Unto the priests thatministerin the house of God.” 39 (the 40th of the Hebrew text): “And the priests thatminister,”הַ֥מְשָׁ֣רְתִ֔יםhamšārĕtîm.Isa.lx. 7: “The rams of Nebaioth shallministerיְשָֽׁרְת֑וּנֶךְyĕšārĕtûnekunto thee.” Let it be noticed that the wordstrangersis translated from the wordנֵכָרnēkārnechar. The word is of Arabic derivation fromeker, and has a privative sense, asnescivit,abrogavit,improbavit. Hence, the Hebrews used it to meanstrange,foreign, and sometimesfalse, as inDeut.xxxii. 12: “No strange (false) God with him.”Mal.ii. 11: “The daughter of astrange(false) God.” And this word was used to mean thestrangers, idolaters, and rejected people, out of whom the Hebrews were allowed to make slaves, and therefore it was used inGen.xvii. 12: “Or bought with thy money of any stranger (נֵכָ֔רnēkārneker) which is not of thy seed.” And therefore the propriety of the use of this word in the description of those who should be their drudges and slates, is beautifully expressed by the idea of building up their walls, as here expressed by the prophet. But the idea of the kingsministering, is as before, from the root,shereth. Many more examples of the use of this word might be quoted; but we trust the foregoing are sufficient to establish its meaning to be altogether different and distinct from any use of the wordebed. Yet, there are in the received translation of the holy books, a few instances where this word is translated erroneously, as though it were a synonyme of the wordebed.
InNum.xi. 28, “And Joshua the son of Nun, theservantof Moses,” the word servant is translated fromמְשָׁרֵ֥תmĕšārēt, and should have been theministerof Moses. InExod.xxiv. 13: “Moses rose up and Joshua hisminister”מְשָֽׁרְת֑וֹmĕšārĕtô. In this last quotation,ministeris correctly translated from the word as above, proving the error in Numbers. A similar error occurs also inEzek.xx. 32; it reads thus: “And that which cometh into your mind shall not be at all that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as the families of the country toserveלְשָׁרֵ֖תlĕšārētwood and stone.” Serve is translated from as above, and should have beento minister unto wood and stone. A like error occurs inExod.xxxiii. 11: “But hisservantוּמְשָֽׁרְתוֹûmĕšārĕtôJoshua,” should have been rendered, “hisministerJoshua.” So, also, inNum.iv. 47, the wordebedis translated as a synonyme ofsherath. The passage reads thus: “From thirty years old and upward, even unto fifty years old, every one that comes to do the service of the ministry, and the service of the burden in the tabernacle of the congregation.” In this passage, the wordebed, with affixes, is used four times consecutively, and immediately followed by the wordmassa, which we have before seen meanslabour, with the idea of the burden of labour altogether predominating.
In the translation, it is plain to see that one of these words is totally left out, which, we suppose, no one will pretend is not an error. The translation made of these five words at the Theological College at Andover, is far more correct than the received version. It is thus: “to perform the business of the service and the business of the burden,” &c. Yet this is not the language of the original, which reads thus:לַֽעֲבֹ֨ד עֲבֹדַ֧ת עֲבֹדָ֛ה וַֽעֲבֹדַ֥ת מַשָּׂ֖אlaʿăbōd ʿăbōdat ʿăbōdâ waʿăbōdat maśśāʾ.
If our proposition is correct, that the wordebedis never used in Hebrew expression unassociated with the idea of slavery, then this passage from Numbers should read: “From thirty years old and upwards, even to fifty years old, every one that comes to slave in the slavery of the slave labour, and in theslaveryof the burdens of the tabernacle of the congregation.” We agree that the passage is somewhat difficult to render into English but because we may find some difficulty in making good English, we are not to translate from other words of different meaning from the ones used. The holy penmen said what they meant, and surely meant what they said: there was no double dealing in the spirit of Jehovah, who dictated to them. But that translators should have, in somefew instances, mistaken or confounded the use of one word, is not to be thought strange. Taking into view the volume of the holy books, it is truly wonderful that greater errors were not committed. And we take occasion here to remark, that, of all the ideas, qualities, and actions, given in definition of the wordebed, unassociated with the idea of slavery, upon examination of the language, we shall find graphic symbols representing their phonetic signs, distinct from the idea ofslavery, as we have these already examined.
To show more clearly that the wordעֶבֶדʿebedebedis never used in Hebrew expression unassociated with the idea of slavery, we now propose to examine that word as used by the Hebrew writers in the holy books. Our wordsSERVANT, servitude, service, &c. are all derived from the Roman wordSERVUS, which meant aSLAVE; and our wordservant, when first introduced into our language, as absolutely meant a slave as now does that term itself, and even now fully retains that meaning, where the English language and slavery coexist. The oriental scholar (and let him be invited to examine) will perceive that the wordעֶבֶדʿebedebedwas common to all the Shemitic tribes, and almost with the same phonetic particulars; but as their figures representing the same phonetic power were quite dissimilar, we think it a proof, almost demonstration, that the wordעֶבֶדʿebedebedwas used as a phonetic symbol by them long before any of those languages were written. This circumstance shows the extreme antiquity of the word; and if we succeed to establish the fact, that this word meant nothing but what is now meant by the wordslave, we shall also have established the extreme antiquity of the thing itself. Awordmeans nothing, until it is by some means agreed what it shall represent, what idea, or association of ideas it shall excite in the mind. Hence, it not unfrequently occurs that a thing may be better described by paraphrasis than by the expression of a single term. InGen.xii. 5: “And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and their substance that they had gathered, and thesouls that they had gotten in Haran.” The latter clause of this sentence is from this Hebrew expression,וְאֶת־הַנֶּ֖פֶשׁ אֲשֶׁר־עָשׂ֣וּ בְֹחָרָ֑ןwĕʾet-hannepeš ʾăšer-ʿāśû bĕōḥārān,which is correctly translated in the Andover lexicon, “The souls they had acquired in Haran.” Every one knows that the things here meant areslaves. But, when the scholar comes to examine the power of the language of this Hebrew paraphrasis, he will discover three incident attendants.הַנֶּפֶשׁhannepešhannephesh, translated souls, also carries with it the idea a living soul, to have life, the life itself, the living principle, and is so translated in many places. A slave, therefore, must have life: when dead, the condition ceases. In the same way, the sentence expresses the idea of acquiring property by purchase, or any other way in which property may be acquired so as to be property. The three incidents then are life, a capacity of being acquired, and, when so acquired, property. All this could not have been expressed by the single termעֶבֶדʿebedebed, only as it is made the representative of this complex idea: and God has no doubt caused this passage to be on record at this early period, that these incidents should finally come to the knowledge of all men. A somewhat similar expression is used inRev.xviii. 13. Every one knows that Babylon had been a great slave-market. St. John, after naming the various articles of her merchandise, addsκαι των σωματων, και την ψυχην,kai ton sōmatōn, kai tēn psuchēn, which is translated, “slaves and souls of men:”σωματωνdoes not mean slaves, but a dead body, and is so used by Homer, Xenophon, and by the New Testament itself; but, when united withκαι την ψυχην, means slaves alone. The phrase “souls of men,” therefore, in the translation, is surplusage. But the xii. 16 ofGenesisis more particular in giving the different kinds of property and their appropriate names. “And he had sheep and oxen, and he-asses, and men-servants (עֲבָדִיםʿăbādîmabadim), and maid-servants, and she-asses, and camels.” The wordmen-servantsis translated from the plural ofעֶבֶדʿebedebed. Here we find the conventional term expressing the complex idea, previously expressed by the phrase “ souls gotten,” persons in life, subject to be purchased, and when purchased, property, as were sheep and oxen, and he-asses and she-asses, and camels. InGen.xvii. 9–13, we begin to find the law influencing the conduct of Abraham in the management of this property: “And God said unto Abram, thou shalt,” &c. 12: “And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised,” &c.: “He that is born in thy house, orbought with moneyof any stranger which is not of thy seed.” 13: “He that is born in thy house, and he that isbought with thy money, must needs becircumcised.” And let it here be remembered that God recognises the possession of this property, by giving directions with his own voice concerning its government. And inGen.xx. 14, we have some account of the origin of Abraham’s title to some portion of this property: “And Abimelech took sheep and oxen andmen-servants(עבדיםʿbdymebedim, the plural ofebed), and gave them to Abraham.” xxiv. 35: “And the Lord hath blessed my master greatly, and he is become great; and he hath given him flocks and herds, and silver and gold, andmen-servantsand maid-servants, and camels and asses.” Here the plural ofebedis also used.Suchis the title by which he possessed this property, described as given to him by the Lord. But God had promised that he would bless Abraham,Gen.xvii. 1: “The Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said unto him,I am the Almighty God.” 2: “And I will make my covenant between me and thee.” 7: “And I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and thy seed after thee in their generations, for an everlasting covenant.” 10: “This is my covenant.” (This covenant extends from the beginning of the 10th to the end of the 14th verse.) One part of this covenant was, that theseebeds, translatedmen-servants, whether born in his house or bought with his money of any stranger, should be circumcised. Wherefore, the possession of theseebedsas property became agreeable to the terms of the covenant, a part of the covenant itself—a covenant first proposed and promulgated by the great Jehovah; as he styles himself in the covenant, the Almighty God!Gen.xxvi. 2: “And the Lord appeared unto him (Isaac), and said, Go not down into Egypt: dwell in the land which I shall tell thee of: sojourn in this land, and I will be with thee, and will bless thee.” 4: “And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and I will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.” 13: “And the man (Isaac) waxed great, and went forward and grew until he became very great.” 14: “For he had possession of flocks, and possession of herds, and great store ofservants(עֲבֻדָּֽהʿăbuddâabuddah,slaves, a plural formation ofebed), and the Philistines envied him.”!!!
LESSON VI.
Gen.xxvii. 29: “Let people serve thee (יַֽעַבְדּ֣וּךָyaʿabdûkābe slaves to thee), be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee; cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.” Let us notice the conformity of this passage withGen.xxv. 23: “And the Lord said unto her, two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels, and the one people shall be stronger than the other people, and the elder shall serve (יַֽעֲבֹ֥דyaʿăbōdbe a slave to) the younger.”Gen.xxx. 43: “And the man (Jacob) increased exceedingly, and had much cattle, and maid-servants, andmen-servants(וַֽעֲבָדִ֔יםwaʿăbādîmthe plural ofebed), and camels and asses.”Exod.xx. 1, 2, 9, 10, 17: “And God spake all these words, saying,” 2: “I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage” (עֲבָדִֽי֑םʿăbādiymout ofslavery): 5: “Thou shalt notbow down(תִשְׁתַּ֥חֲוֶה֣tištaḥăwehworship them) thyself to them, norserve(תָֽעָבְדֵ֑םtāʿobdēmbe a slave to them) them.” 9: “Six days shalt thoulabour(תּֽ֥עֲבֹ֔ד֘tʿăbōdslave thyself, or doSLAVE-LABOUR) and do (oso,labour or do work) all thy work,” (וְעָשִׂי֣תָwĕʿāśiytāall thy accustomed labours.) This command embraces all classes, the slave as well as the most elevated. All men, by the fall of Adam, had become subject to slave-labour. 10: “But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thyman-servant(עַבְדְּךָʿabdĕkāthyslave), this commandment we are directed not to covet any thing that is our neighbour’s, including his man-servant and maid-servant. Here the same wordעַבְד֤וֹʿabdôis also used.Exod.xxi. 1: “Now these are the judgments which thou shalt set before them.” 2: “If thou buy a Hebrewservant(עֶ֣בֶדʿebedebed), (יַֽעֲבֹ֑דyaʿăbōdshall slave himself),” 5: “And if theservant(הָעֶבֶדhāʿebedha ebed,slave) shall plainly say, I love,” &c.Exod.xxi. 7: “She shall not go out as themen-servantsdo.” (הָֽעֲבָדִֽיםhāʿăbādîmthe plural ishere used.) 20: “If a man smite hisservantעַבְדּוֹʿabdôor his maid with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall be surely punished: for he is his money.” 26: “If a man smite the eye of hisservant,”עַבְדּ֛וֹʿabdô. 27: “ If he smite out hisman-servant’stooth,”עַבְדּ֛וֹʿabdô. 32 “If the ox shall push theman-servantעֶבֶדʿebedormaid-servant, he shall give unto their master thirty shekels of silver, and the ox shall be stoned.”
Lev.xxv. 44: “Both thybond-menוְעַבְדְךָwĕʿabdĕkāand thy bond-maids which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you, of them shall ye buybond-men,” (עֶ֥בֶדʿebedebed.) 45: “Moreover, of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they beget in your land, and they shall be your possession.” 46: “And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession they shall be yourbond-menתַּ֖עֲבֹ֑דוּtaʿăbōdûfor ever.”
Deut.v. 14: “But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God; in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, nor thyman-servantוְעַבְדְּךָwĕʿabdĕkā, nor thy maid-servant, that thyman-servantand thy maid-servant may rest as well as thou.” 15: “And remember that thou wast aservant(עֶ֣בֶ֥דʿebedebed) in the land of Egypt.” 21 (18th of Hebrew text): “Neither shalt thou covet thy neighbour’s house, his field, or hisman-servantוְעַבְדֵֹוwĕʿabdōēw, or his maid-servant.”Deut.xii. 12: “And ye shall rejoice before the Lord your God, ye, and your sons, and your daughters, and yourmen-servants(וְעַבְדֵיכֶםwĕʿabdêkema plural form ofebed), thy son, and thy daughter, andthy man-servant,”וְעַבְדְּךָwĕʿabdĕkā.Deut.xv. 12: “If thy brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, andserveוַעֲבָֽדְךָ֖waʿăbādĕkāthee six years.” 15: “And thou shalt remember that thou wast abond-man(עֶ֣בֶדʿebedebed) in the land of Egypt.” 17: “And he shall be thy servant (עֶבֶדʿebedebed) for ever.”Deut.xvi. 11: “And thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter, and thyman-servantוְעַבְדְּךָwĕʿabdĕkā, and thy maid-servant, and the Levite that is within thy gates, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow, that are among you.” 12: “And thou shalt remember that thou wast abond-man(עֶבֶדʿebedebed) in Egypt.” 14: “And thou shalt rejoice in thy feast, thou, and thy son, and thy daughter,and thyman-servantוְעַבְדְּךָ֣wĕʿabdĕkā, and thymaid-servant, and the Levite, the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow.”Deut.xx. 10: “When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it, then proclaim peace unto it.” 11: “And it shall be if it make thee an answer of peace and open unto thee, then it shall be, that all the people found therein shall betributaries(לָמַ֖סlāmaslamas, afflicted, cast down, to pay tribute, &c.), and they shallserve(וַֽעֲבָדֽוּךָwaʿăbādûkābe thy slaves) thee.”Deut.xxiii. 9–17 contains certain laws to be observed in time of war with their enemies, &c., one of which is, that a slave escaped to them from the enemy should not be restored, &c.Deut.xxiii. 16 (15th of the English text): “Thou shalt not deliver unto his master theservant,” (עֶבֶדʿebedebed,slave.) xxiv. 18: “But thou shalt remember that thou wast abond-man,” (עֶבֶדʿebedebed,slave.) wast a bond-man,”עֶבֶדʿebedGen.ix. 25: “And he said, Cursed be Canaan, aservantofservants(ebed-ebedim) shall he be unto his brethren.” 26: “And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be hisservant,” (עֶבֶדʿebedebed.) Many more instances of a similar use of this word might be selected from the holy books; some of which we hope to notice in the progress of our study. Such, then, was the Hebrew use of the word, to mean slave, a person purchased or otherwise acquired, and the unquestionablepropertyof the master. Such then being the condition of theebed, slave, it is evident that he could not be contented and happy, in case he had ambition to gratify, with hopes and prospects before him adverse from those of his master; his whole earthly felicities are bound up in his master’s welfare and prosperity; like an individual of an army, he feels that the elevation, the brilliancy of the commander is reflected upon him; and with a Christian spirit, he obeys his master in all things, “not with eye-service, but with singleness of heart, fearing God.” SeeCol.iii. 22. In such a state of mind, the slave finds no unhappiness in his condition, but joy and gladness; and with the slave of Abraham, he implores Jehovah: “O Lord God of my master Abraham! I pray thee send me good speed this day, and show kindness unto my master Abraham: Blessed be the Lord God of my master Abraham, who hath not left destitute my master of his mercy and truth.”Gen.xxiv. 12 and 27. Expressive of a character of perfect devotedness, humility, and obedience. The termebedmight well be borrowed to express the earnest devotion of a worshipper of Jehovah,and is so often used in connection with the patriarchs, Moses, David, and the prophets. The term thus used expresses the quality of their devotedness and obedience, and not necessarily the quality of the individual. In this sense, the apostles style themselves the (δουλοι,douloi) slaves of Jesus Christ; not that they were personallydouloi, but in their devotion and obedience to him, they were what thedouloswas or should be to his master. It is probable that, in some sense, all men feel that in the hand of God they are as clay in the hands of the potter; that the great Jehovah overrules and governs all things; that, as existences, they are from and dependent on him: under such a sense, we sometimes find the termebedapplied, as in the nameObadiah,Obadyahu, the slave of God, and used as a proper noun. But such compound words are dependent for their meaning upon the complex ideas of what their primitives signified; and, in a somewhat analogous sense, the termebedis applied to Nebuchadnezzar, lie being in the hands of the Almighty, as clay in the hands of the potter, the mere instrument, the fabrication of his hand. There is, however, in the books of Ezra, Nehemiah, and Daniel, a use of this word peculiar to them; but we should recollect that they were educated in the Persian capital and employed in high stations by the Persian monarch. We may therefore well expect some variation in their dialect.
And we may well bring to mind the fact that there are two distinctly marked eras in the Hebrew language. The first ends at the Babylonish captivity. The Pentateuch and older prophets, Ruth, Samuel, Kings, Psalms, and Proverbs, come within this era. The second commences with the return of the Israelites from that captivity, and extends to the introduction of Greek into Palestine, subsequent to the conquests of Alexander. The first period may be emphatically called ancient Hebrew; and the latter, more modern. The Hebrew of this period is strongly marked by an approximation to the Chaldee and Persian. To this period of the language belong the books of Nehemiah, Ezra, Daniel, Esther, Jonah, Haggai, Malachi, Ecclesiastes, and a part of the Psalms;and these works will ever be regarded by the oriental scholar as inferior in classical literature to those of earlier date, notwithstanding their other merits of high excellence. But some of the peculiarities of the writings of the second period are not to be regarded as recent alterations, but as the phonetic, unwritten Hebrew of the more remote districts of Palestine itself. The variations of this more modern from the ancient Hebrew are extremely numerous, both as to the substitution of one word for another, but also as to a change of meaning of the same word; as, for instance, the more ancient would have used the wordמָלַךְmālakmalakto signify a king, to rule, &c.; but the more modern have used a word, which, from its strong phonetic relation, has evidently been derived from it,שָלַטšālaṭshalat, to meanto rule, &c., and so usedPs.cxix. 133,Eccl.ii. 19,Estherix. 1,Neh.v. 15,Dan.ii. 39, and in many other places. So also the ancient would use the wordאָמַרʾāmaramar, to signifyto speak,to say; but the more modern uses the same word to signifyto command. What we say is, that we cannot always learn the original meaning of a word from the more modern use of it. We will now notice the use of the ancient wordebedin this more modern dialect of the Hebrews. InEzraiv. 19, we find, “And that rebellion and seditionhave been madetherein” is translated fromמִהְעֲבֶדmihʿăbedmithabed. Let us examine the circumstances under which this sentence was written. Rehum had written to the monarch Artaxerxes in opposition to the building of the walls of Jerusalem, informing him that it had ever been a rebellious city, hurtful to kings, &c.; in answer to which, the king writes, “that the records have been examined, and it is found that this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that rebellion and seditionhath been made therein.” The Persian monarchs were all absolute; they regarded those whom they conquered as slaves; and when they rebelled, they used this word to signify that it was slaves who rebelled. Our wordservileis somewhat analogous, and might very properly be substituted for it in the foregoing text, thus: “And it is found, this city of old time hath made insurrection against kings, and that there hath been servile rebellion and sedition therein.” When we speak of insurrection, sedition, rebellion, or war with slaves, we call itservile, as Artaxerxes did in this case, to show the fact that the war was with slaves.Ezraiv. 24, this wordעֲבִידַ֣תʿăbîdatis translatedwork. So in v. 8,עֲבִ֥ידְתָּאʿăbîdĕttāʾwork, vi. 7,עֲבוׄדַ֭תʿăbwdatwork, to show that the labour was done byslaves, or, figuratively, that thelabourwas intense, devoted, and obedient, as of slaves. vi. 8:תַעַׄבדֹוּןtaʿabdōûn“Ye shall do.” 12:יִתְעֲבֵ֖דyitʿăbēd“Let it be done with speed.” 13:עֲבַֽדוּʿăbadû“So they did speedily.”
21:יִתְעֲבֵ֖דyitʿăbēd“It be done speedily.” 23:יִתְעֲבֵדyitʿăbēd“Let it be diligentlydone.” 26:עָבֵדʿābēd“Will notdo.”מִתְעֲבֵ֖דmitʿăbēd“Let judgmentbe executedspeedily.” These instances of the use of monarch of Persia is speaking, who regarded not only the Jews, but all his subjects, as slaves. It was the court manner of the eastern monarchs in such decrees to throw in occasionally an exclamation of the nature of an imperative interjection, such as,Slave, attend!Pay attention, slaves!Listen, slaves!&c., all in substance meaning that those to whom the decree is issued should perform it quickly and without further notice. And we find the same custom existing among them even at this day, and such is the true sense in which the term is here used. Let us exemplify it.Ezravi. 12: “I, Darius, have made a decree;” then follows the Persian adverbאָסְפַּ֖רְנָאʾosparnāʾasepporna, which means quickly, speedily, diligently, &c.; then the word in question, as before noticed: “quickly, slaves,” is therefore the literal meaning,i. e.what he had decreed they should instantly perform. We do not pretend to say that translating itto do, &c. gives a substantially wrong sense; but it seems it may have led lexicographers to an erroneous conception of the meaning of the word.Jer.x. 11: “The gods that have not made the heavens and the earth:”madeis translated fromעֲבַ֑֗דוּʿăbadû. If this word is the correct reading, the idea of the prophet had regard to thepower, not to theactof a creator,—the gods that have notsubjected, have not placed insubjection, as if in slavery to, whose laws do not govern the heavens and the earth. The gods who could not do these things arenotgods, and they shall perish. This was the idea of the prophet. But this word is marked in all the best copies with a keri, showing that this reading was suspected by the Jewish scholars to be bad; and they supply in the margin the wordsפתח כאתנחptḥ kʾtnḥ, which isat least some proof that they thought its use in this instance unusual; and Kennecott and De Rossi found these words used instead ofעבדוֹעבדוin some copies.
But we have a sure method by which we may discover what meaning Ezra did affix to this word—by examining his use of it in those cases where its meaning cannot be doubtful. SeeEzraiv. 11: “Thy servants,”עַבְדָּ֛י֯ךְיךʿabdāykĕyk. v. 11: “We are the servants,”עַבְדוֹהִיʿabdôhî, having relevance to their devotedness to God. vi. 16 commences with the wordיַֽעֲבַ֣דוּyaʿăbadû, which is omitted in our translation. The sentence should commence thus: “And the slaves, the children of Israel, the priests,” &c. ix. 9: “For we werebondmenעֲבָדִ֣יםʿăbādîm, yet our God hath not forsakenus in our bondage,”וּבְעַבְדֻתֵ֔נוּûbĕʿabdutēnû. These instances clearly show how Ezra understood this word: notwithstanding his writings were touched with the Persian and Chaldee idioms. A similar result will be found upon the examination of Nehemiah and Daniel.Neh.ii. 10 and 19: “And Tobiah theservantהָּעֶ֣בֶדhāʿebed, the Ammonite heard of it”—“And Tobiah theservantהָעֶ֣בֶדhāʿebed, the Ammonite.” v. 5: “Yet now our flesh is as the flesh of our brethren, our children as their children: and lo, we bring intobondage(כֹֽ֠בְשִׁיםkōbĕšîmkovshim) sons and our daughters to beservants(לַֽעֲבָדִֹםlaʿăbādiōmslaves), and some of our daughters are brought intobondage(נִכְבָּשׁוֹתnikbāšôtsubjections, not necessarily slavery) already,” (כָּבַשkābaškovash.) The root from which these two words are formed in no sense means slavery, but to reduce, to subdue, to humble; and in this sense is used inEsthervii. 8, and translated “force.” But this word aids very much in showing what idea was affixed to the wordebed; and we ask to compare this passage of Nehemiah withJer.xxxiv. 8–16: “This is the word that came unto Jeremiah from the Lord, after that king Zedekiah had made a covenant with all the people which were at Jerusalem, to proclaim liberty unto them; * * * that every man should let hisman-servant, (עַבְדּ֔וֹʿabdômale slave,)and every man his maid-servantשִׁפְחָת֛וֹšipḥātô, being a Hebrew or Hebrewess, go free; that none shouldserve(עֲבָד־ʿăbād-slave) himself of them, to wit, of a Jew his brother. Now, when all the princes, and all the people which had entered into the covenant, heard that every one should let hisman-servant(עַבְדּ֔וֹʿabdômale slave), and every one his maid-servant, go free, that noneserve themselves(עֲבָד־ʿăbād-slave themselves), of them any more, then they obeyed and let them go. But afterwards they turned and caused theservants(הָ֥עֲבָדִיםhāʿăbādîmha abadim,slaves), and thehand-maids, whom they had let go free, to return. Therefore the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, from the Lord, saying, Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, I made a covenant with your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bond-men (עֲבָדִ֖יםʿăbādîmebedim,slaves), saying, At the end of seven years, let go every man his brother a Hebrew, which hath been sold unto thee; and when he hathservedthee (וַֽעֳבָ֖דְךָwaʿŏbādĕkāslaved for thee) six years, thou shalt let him go free from thee; but your fathers hearkened not unto me, neither inclined their ear. And ye were now turned, and had done right in my sight, in proclaiming liberty every man to his neighbour; and ye had made a covenant before me in the house which is called by my name. But ye turned and polluted my name, and caused every man hisservant, (עַבְדּוֹʿabdôebeddo,slave,) and every man hishand-maid, whom he had set at liberty at their pleasure, to return, and brought them intosubjection(וַתִּכְבְּשׁ֣וּwattikbĕšû) to be unto you forservants(לַֽעֲבָדִ֖יםlaʿăbādîmfor slaves), and forhand-maids.” The comparison of these passages proves the fact that Nehemiah and Jeremiah used the wordebedto mean a slave, without any variation of meaning. Nor will we hold Nehemiah responsible for his wordכָּבַשׁkābaškavash,subjection, being translatedbondage.Neh.vii. 66, 67, gives an account of the captive Israelites that returned from Susa and Babylon to Jerusalem. “And the whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and threescore. Besides theirman-servants(עַבְדֵיהֶ֤םʿabdêhemmale slaves), and their maid-servants, of whom there were seven thousand three hundred and thirty score.” We trust that so varied, particular, and descriptive are the records left in the holy books through which we may search out what the Hebrews meant by their use of the wordebed(עבדʿbd), that its certainty and definiteness must place the inquiry beyond doubt.But as in this instance the wordכָּבַשׁkābaškavashhas been translatedbondage, it may be well to give a few examples of its use in the holy books, that all may see and know that its meaning is totally distinct from that of slavery.Gen.i. 28: “Multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it,”וְכִבְשֻׁהָwĕkibšuhā.Num.xxxii. 22: “And the landbe subduedוְנִכְבְשָׁ֥הwĕnikbĕšâbefore the Lord.” 29: “And the landshall be subduedוְנִכְבְּשָׁהwĕnikbĕšâbefore you.”Josh.xviii. 1: “And the landwas subduedנִכְבְּשָׁ֖הnikbĕšâbefore them.” 2Sam.viii. 1: “Which hesubdued,”כִּבֵשׁkibēš. 2Chron.ix. 18: “With a footstool,”וְכֶבֶשׁwĕkebešbecause a footstool was in the place of subjection.Zech.ix. 15: “Andsubdueוְכָ֥בְשׁוּwĕkābĕšûwith sling-stones.”Micahvii. 19: “He willsubdueיִכְ֖בּוֹשׁyikbôšour iniquities.” The foregoing examples, we trust, are sufficient to disabuse the mind of the idea of any synonyme of meaning of these two words.
WE propose to examine the Hebrew use of the wordebedin the 5th and 15th of the second chapter of Genesis: “In that day the Lord God made the earth, and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it grew; for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a manto tillלַֽעֲבֹ֖דlaʿăbōdthe ground.”To tillis here translated from this wordebed, with the affix of the prepositionלl. This is the first instance in which the word is used in the holy book; and it may seem extremely strange that the writers of these books found its use necessary in their description of events even before the creation of man. It is not our business to draw out theological doctrine unconnected with the subject of our present inquiry; but we suppose it will not be disputed that the great Jehovah as well knew, before he created the heavens and the earth, and man upon the earth, all and every particular of what would happen, as at any subsequent time: with him, a day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.Wemay behold the birth, maturity, and death of some animalcula, in a day or in an hour. But, with him the succession of generations, of the animal life of a thousand years, pass in instantaneousand present view.Timeappertains alone to mortals.Hesaw the most ultimate condition of man; and the earth and the herb were made to suit it. But from the manner of the expression of the text, may we not conclude that the herb, although made, would not grow until man was created, and in the conditionto till(לַ֥עֲבֹ֖דlaʿăbōdto slave) the ground? The support of the animal world, independent of man, is spontaneously presented before them: not so with man in his fallen state. “He sendeth the springs into the valley, which run among the hills. They give drink to every beast of the field: the wild asses quench their thirst. By them shall the fowls of heaven have their habitation, which sing among the branches. He watereth the hills from his chambers; the earth is satisfied with the fruit of thy works. He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle, and herbfor the service(לַֽעֲבֹדַ֣תlaʿăbōdatfor the slavery) of man: that he may bring forth food out of the earth,”Ps.civ. 10–14. The second instance in which this word is used is inGen.ii. 15: “And the Lord God took the man and put him into the garden ofEden to dress it, and to keep it.”To dress itis translated from this wordלְעָבְדָ֖הּlĕʿobdāh. There is certainly much obscurity in the use of the word in this instance. Professor Stuart, of Andover, supposes that it inculcates the doctrine thatlabourwas imposed on man in the paradisiacal state; consequently, that labour was no part of the curse which followed the apostacy. (See his Chreestomathy, page 105.) This view excludes the idea that the word, as here used, is associated with the idea of slavery, and that, if, in the interchange of language, although the idea of labour may predominate, nevertheless, it must beslavelabour. Our mind does not yield its assent to his position. We had associated with our idea of this paradise the most perfect heaven, the dwelling-place of Jehovah!! and that the generations of man, when guided and governed by Divine mercy in such a manner that we could be happy therein, that it would yet become our ultimate home,—(“He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God,”Rev.ii. 7,)—and that the humble worshipper of Jehovah while in a state of progressive preparedness, would therefore cry out with the Psalmist, “Unto thee I lift mine eyes, O thou that dwellest in the heavens! Behold, as the eyesofservants(עֲבָדִ֠יםʿăbādîmmale slaves) look unto the hand of their master; and as the eyes of amaiden(שִׁפְחָה֮šipḥāhshiphhah,female slave) unto the hand of her mistress, so our eyes wait upon the Lord our God until he have mercy upon us.”Ps.cxxiii. 1, 2. If then the paradise of old was the type of the paradise eternal, it would seem that the labour of theebedwas excluded therefrom: “Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from thebondage(δουλείας,slavery) of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.”Rom.viii. 21. And for this very good reason, that slavery, the consequent of sin, could never find entrance there: regeneration is therefore indispensable.
“It strikes me that the use of the verb (עָבַדʿābadabad, presents no difficulty that calls for explanation. The language of inspiration is man’s language, though employed by God. The events, facts, things, acts, that preceded man’s creation, must still be described by language and terms thathad come into use after man’s creation. Man must first exist before there could bewordsto be used in conveying knowledge to man. A word implyingslaverymight therefore most reasonably be found in adescriptionof thingspriorto the existence of man, or of slavery, which description was written long afterwards by Moses, and in language which was in use amongst the men for whom he wrote. When Moses wrote, when God inspired him,עֶבֶדʿebedebedwas a familiar word.”Extract from manuscript letter of the Rev. J.B. Stratton to the author.
But in the pursuance of the chain of thought that first was impressed on our mind, we have to remark that the wordEdenmeant pleasure, happiness. It seems to have been derived from or cognate with the Arabic wordعَدْنٌʿadanaden, and means softness, gentleness, mildness, tenderness, and daintiness, in that language. The Hebrews had also another word from this same root,עֲדִיʿădîadi, to mean ornaments, &c., andעֲדָיִןʿădāyinadain, to mean luxuriousness and delicate. The word, as used in the text before, is applied to a district of country, and confers the adjective qualities to said district,i. e.a district of country of great pleasure and delight. The general boundaries are given and described by the naming of its rivers. It was of considerable extent, embracing, perhaps, more than the whole of the ancient Armenia.
“And a garden was planted eastward in Eden.” Garden is translated fromגַןgangan. The word is derived fromגַנּןgannganan. Theword means, to protect, protection, a thing protected. The idea expressed by it is not confined to a single walled area; but the two words are often used together, as if it was intended to convey the idea of the fact that the protection extended to the whole of Eden. And it may be well conceived thatinnocencywas its protection. Here cunning art never wove its web for the entanglement of its victim. Here no crocodile tears enticed sympathy within the reach of harm. Here no vile wretch ever betrayed a brother’s confidence. Here the lion and the lamb might have couched together, and the infant have played with the tiger’s paw. We are aware that some modern scholars consider the description of the garden of Eden by Moses a mere picture of the mind. Rosenmaeler says that it is on a par with Virgil’s description of the Elysian fields. This class of philosophers consider the whole as a fiction: but man had his commencement somewhere, and it is a fact that four large rivers, answering to the outlines of the general description of Moses, do flow from fountain-heads not more than thirty or forty miles apart, in the central and most elevated region of Armenia. These streams meander through the same countries described by him, and exhibit the same mineral productions: nor would it be any thing remarkable, if investigation should yet prove that they were all indebted to one and the same source. Let us consider then, whether it was not a fact that the garden of Eden was not confined to a little plat of ground, but included a whole district of country, embracing the visible sources of the rivers named: a district of country, from the mildness of its climate, fruitfulness, and other causes of pleasure and delight, exceedingly well adapted to the early residence of man. We have therefore no well founded reason to believe that the account given by Moses of the garden of Eden was a fiction, independent of Divine authority. But his account must be understood so as to be consistent with itself, and with the facts now existing of which it speaks. We are not under the necessity of supposing that the felicity of our first parents was confined to the locality named: a paradise was to them anywhere. It was their innocence, not the location, that made it so; and thus they were driven out of paradise, perhaps, without a change of location. The use of the wordebedעבדעבד, in ii. 15 ofGenesis, might then well be of the same foreshadowing import as in the first instance of its use, even before the creation of man. For, who must not conclude, when man was first placed in paradise, that God did not as clearly see his apostasythen, as now? By his wisdom, power, and mercy, all nature was ready-prepared for the change, and poor fallen man, without change of habitation, found that habitation no longer heaven, and commenced his first act of slavery by the vain attempt to hide himself from God and his own contempt. And here, let us remark,we find the true commencement of slavery. “And Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, whosoever committeth sin is theservant(δουλος,slave) of sin.”Johnviii. 34.Force,disease,ruin, anddeathwere now introduced to man. For, “A.servant(עָ֑בֶדʿābedslave) will not be corrected by words.”Prov.xxix. 19. God had mercifully contrived that he should be forced to action. “He thattilleth(עֹבֵ֣דʿōbēdslaveth) of bread; but he that followeth after vain persons shall have poverty enough.”Prov.xxviii. 19. When God made “every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew,” foreseeing the apostasy of man—its poisonous effect upon his moral and physical condition—its direct influence to produce immediate ruin and death, he also provided, ordained, and decreed a relation, a law between man and his mental and physical wants, which must cleave unto him, upon his apostasy, and be of the utmost value and efficacy in alleviating, removing, and preventing the final evils incident to his poisoned condition. This relation, law, institution, was theebeduth, theinstitution of slavery, as expressed inEzraix. 8, 9: “And give us a little revivingin our bondage(עֲבדתנוּʿăbdtnûebeduthenu,slavery). For we werebond-men(עֲבָדִ֣יםʿăbādîmabedim,slaves), and yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage,”עבדתנוּʿbdtnû. So in 2Chron.xii. 8: “Nevertheless, ye shall be hisservants(לעבדיםlʿbdymle-obedim, hisslaves), that they may know myservice(עֲב֣וֹדָתִ֔יʿăbôdātîslavery), and theservice(וַֽעְבוֹדַ֖תwaʿbôdatand the slavery) of the kingdoms of the countries.” So inEsthervii. 4: “For we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to perish. But if we had been sold forbond-men(וְלִשְׁפָח֤וֹת לַֽעֲבָדִ֨יםwĕlišpāḥôt laʿăbādîm) and bond-women, I had held my tongue.”