But if Abraham was in all outward respects like any other sheik, there was that which distinguished hiui, as it did Noah before him, and Isaac, Jacob, Jo- seph, and others, after him, from all the world. This distinction consists partlj' in the covenant whereby these men were especiallj' bound to God, and second- arily in the typical character of their recorded actions. Thus God made a league or covenant (q. v.) with Noah (Gen. ix, 8, 9), and afterwards with Abram (^Gen. xv, 8-18), when, as dean Stanley says, " iha first covenant, 'the Old Testament,' was concluded between God and man, and when there was represented by outward signs that which had its 'highest fulfilment' in one who, far more than the Jewish people, reflected in his own 'union of suffering and of triumph, the thick darkness of the smoking furnace, the burning and the shining light.' " This league was often renewed, as with Abraham when circumcision M*as enjoined (xvii, 10), and with Isaac prospectively (xvii, 19), but with eacli of these as being themselves tj'pes of "another seed . . . and another son of promise, in whom the covenant was to be accomplished" (see dean Jackson, Creed, bk. ix, ch. xvi).
From the postdiluvian periods more may be gath- ered as to tlie nature of the patriarchal history. It is at first general in its scope. The "covenant" given to Noah is one, free from all condition, and fraught with natural blessings, extending to all alike ; the one great command (against bloodshed) which marks it is based on a deep and universal ground ; the fulfil- ment of the blessing, "Be fruitful and multipl}-, and replenish the earth," is expressly connected, first with an attempt to set up a universal kingdom round a local centre, and then (in Gen. x) with the formation of the various nations by conquest or settlement, and with the peopling of all the world. But the history soon narrows itself to that of a single tribe or family, and afterwards touches the general history of the an- cient world and its empires, only so far as bears upon this.
Hence in this last stage the principle of the pa- triarchal dispensation is most clearly seen. It is based on the sacredness of family ties and paternal authority. This authority, as the only one which is natural and original, is inevitably the foundation of the earliest form of society, and is probably seen most perfectly in wandering tribes, where it is not affected by local attachments and by the acquisition of wealth. It is one, from the nature of the case, limited in its scope, depending more on its sacredness than its power, and giving room for much exercise of freedom ; and, as it extends from the family to the tribe, it must become less stringent and less concen- trated, in proportion to its wider diffusion. In Scrip- ture this authority is consecrated by an ultimate ref- erence to God, as the God of the patriarch, the Father (that is) both of him and his children. Not, of course, that the idea of God's Fatherhood carried with it the knowledge of man's personal communion with his nat- ure (which is revealed by the Incarnation) ; it rather implied faith in his protection, and a free and loving obedience to his authority, with the hope (more or less
assured) of some greater blessing from him in the coming of the promised seed. At the same time, this faith was not allowed to degenerate, as it was prone to do, into an appropriation of God, as the mere tutelary God of the tribe. The Lord, it is true, suffers himself to be called "the God of Sliem, of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob;" but he also reveals himself (and that emphatically, as if it were his peculiar title) as the "God Almighty" (Gen. xvii, 1; xxviii, 3; xxxv, 11); he is addressed as the "Judge of all the earth" (xviii, 25), and as such is known to have intercourse with Pharaoh and Abimelech (xii, 17; xx, 3-8), to hallow the priesthood of Melchizedek (xiv, 18-20), and to execute wrath on Sodom and Gomorrah. All this would confirm what the generalit}' of the cove- nant with Noah, and of the promise of blessing to "all nations" in Abraham's seed, must have distinctly taught, that the chosen family were, not substitutes, but representatives, of all mankind, and that God's relation to them was only a clearer and more perfect type of that in which he stood to all.
Still the distinction and preservation of the chosen family, and the maintenance of the paternal authority, are the special purposes, which give a key to the mean- ing of the historj', and of the institutions recorded. For this tlie birthright (probablj' carrying with it the priesthood) was reserved to the first-born, belonging to him by inheritance, j'et not assured to him till he re- ceived liis father's blessing; for this the sanctity of marriage was jealoush' and even cruelly guarded, as in Gen. xxxiv, 7, 18, 31 (Dinah), and in xxxviii, 24 (Tamar), from the license of the world without; and all intermarriage witli idolaters was considered as treason to the family and the God of Abraham (Gen. xxvi, 34, 35; xxvii, 4G; xxviii, 1, 6-9). Natural obedience and affection are the earthly virtues espe- cially brought out in the histor}', and the sins dwelt upon (from the irreverence of Ham to the selling of Joseph), are all such as offend against these.