On the other hand, it cannot be denied that recollections of the nomadic age, committed to writing (in the form that has come down to us) in a post-Mosaic era, and evidently strongly coloured by the teaching of the prophets of .1", are likely to have preserved the hist, facts of the remote past ill a form in which personal details are inex- tricably intertwined with racial movements, ami, for simplicity's sake, the destinies of a future nation are anticipated in the features of family experience.
According to this view, A. was the leader of a greiit nomadic movement of the Heljrews (Gn 10" 14'^), who migrated from Mesoiiotamiainto Canaan. 'I'liese Hebrews penetrated as far .as Egypt (Gn 12), but for the mosi part established themselves in tlio
16
ABRAHAil
ABRAHAM
S. of Canaan, and in Hebron and Beeisheba formed friendly relationships witli the dwellers of the land (Gn 14. 21--). The story of Lot seems to indicate that the peoples of Amnion and Moab had originally belonged to the Heb. migration which was led by A., and, having separated themselves from their comrades, occupied the territory of the Rephaim, the Emim, and the Zamzummim (I)t 2"- '9-21).
Again, it is impossible to resist the conclusion that some of the references to Ishmael and the allusion to Keturah contain an Isr. picture of the relationship of the Arabian tribes and clans to the Heb. stock rather than the record of personal history. The Egyp. origin of Hagar ((Jn Iti') and of Ishmael's wife (Gn 21-') will then indicate that the new settlers received into their community a con- siderable admixture of an Egyp. element at the time when they dispersed throughout N. Arabia. The fact that • the sons of Nahor ' (Gn 22*'-2*), ' the sons of Ishmael ' (Gn 25i--'*), ' the sons of Edom ' (Gn 30'^-i*), form groups of twelve, and that 'the sons of Keturah' thus form a half-group of six, is an additional sign of the probability that the record is not only that of the domestic life of a family, but also that of the political distribution of a race.
While this consideration must modify the accept- ance of a uniform literal historicity for the narra- tive of A., it is not incompatible with the view that in A. we have the great leader of a racial movement, and one who left his mark upon his fellow-tribesmen, not only by the eminence of his superior gifts, but by the distinctive features of his religious life, the traditional features of which were the devotion to one God, the abandonment of the polytheism of his ancestors, and the adoption of circumcision as the symbol of a purer cult.
iii. A. intheTheolooyofOT. — Thescattered reminiscences of the patriarchs were collected and compiled, even more for the purpose of illustrating the fundamental principles of the Isr. revelation than with the object of retailing any exhaustive biography.
The religion of Israel dates, according to OT, from A., not from Moses. A. 's servant addresses J" a.s the God of his master A. (Gn 24i-') ; .1" is to Isaac the God of A. (Gn •26-*); to Jacob He is 'the God of A. and the fear of Isaac' (Gn 31"). A. never speaks of J" as the God of his fathers. A. is the founder of the religion ; he is the head of the family which had J" for its God. There is no designatiim of the God of Israel which can go farther back to the origin of the Heb. faith than the often-repeated title ' the God of A.' (cf. Ps 47^).
The story of A. reflects the belief in the free grace of God wliich chose the patriarch and brought him from a distant land, and in spite of his failures loved him and made His covenant with him. The call of A. and the promises made him thus represent the Election {iK\oy^) of Israel. A. as the clinHen servant is the propliet, the instrument of J"'s purpose (Gn 20'). He is the friend of (!od (Is 41', 2 Ch 20'. Cf. Arab. El-KliaW). God's mercies towards him are appealed to by the prophets of the Captivity (Is 51-, Ezk 3.3-<) as the ground of con- fidence tliat .J" would not forsake the heirs of the promises made to A.
The unitjue relation in which A., in I.sr. theology, stood to the God of revelation is indicated by the ref. of the prophets to A. as ' the one ' (see Is oV- 2, Ezk 3.3«, Jtal 2'"). In the Bk of Sir, A. is spoken of as 'great father of a multitude of nations; and there was none found like liim in glory ; who kept the law of the Mo.st High, and was taken into covenant with Him : in his flesh he establi.shed the covenant ; and when he was proved he was found
faithful ' (44''- -") . In these words are summarised the chief points upon which the later Jewish literature esp. insisted in any reference to the life and character of A. He was the founder of the race ; he was credited with a perfect knowledge of the Torah ; he was the institutor of circumcision ; he was tried, and in virtue of his faith was declared righteous.
iv. A. IN THE Theology of NT.— In NT, A. is referred to in a variety of wavs. The words of John the Baptist in Mt 3', Lk S'. and of St. Paul, Ro 9', rebuke the popular Jewish supposition tliat descent from A. carried with it any special claim upon divine favour. Our Lord .speaks of A. as one with whom all the partakers of divine redemption shall be privileged to dwell (Mt 8") ; and as of one who is both cognisant of things on earth, and is also entrusted with the special charge over the souls of the blest (Lk IG--). Our Lord employs the imagery of current religious belief ; A. is the typical representative of ' the righteous ' who have been redeemed ; he is ' the father of the faithful.' Hence He says (Jn 8=*), 'Your father A. rejoiced to see My day; and he saw it, and was glad.' He obtained a vision of the meaning of the promises, and rejoiced in the hope of their future fulfilment. Christ was the consummation of all the aspirations of A., the father of the race. According to the Jewish tradition ( Bereshith Jiabba 44, Wiinsche), A. saw the whole history of his descendants in the mysterious vision recorded in Gn lo**-. Thus he is said to have ' rejoiced with the joy of the law' ' (Westcott on Jn 8^*).