My view, perhaps to some, is biased, but after many years of reading this Book, I have seen in it pictures quite different from those who are far from religion. The boiling of life, the confrontation of systems - if you study the Bible like an investigator, you will see the intricacies of stories of cosmic proportions, the intrigue of which is not inferior to any detective or fantasy work.
Many of those who consider the Bible their board book, unfortunately, do not try to see it as a coherent text, reading it as scattered passages, forgetting what they read yesterday, not trying to follow the figures of history and the meanings of events. The perception of the "sacredness" of what they read prevents them from seeing the need to carefully follow, analyze, and study everything that passes before their eyes. Many people think that reading a passage of scripture has energized them, and they rest easy, but it is hard to overstate the extent of the loss of this approach... At one time I lacked this vision of sacred history, and there was no one to suggest what was revealed to me much later. But I sought, and the One who encourages people to seek revealed much of what I lacked. Only that I now share it with those who also, like me before, feel the lack of something vital. So that they will have an attention-grabbing movie running through their minds when they read this Book, rather than a boring dusty set in a dark closet.
This may be of interest to people who are unfamiliar with the Bible, but who don't mind familiarizing themselves with it, also for those who are too lazy to read serious things like the Bible. Although its presentation is also not the easiest reading because of the possible abundance of detail, but for many who feel unsophisticated in the intricacies of religions, this presentation of biblical facts will help to enter this vast world and familiarize themselves with the perception of a person who knows the Bible well, to see what those who live it see in it, to get a little bit up to speed. This account is not calculated to replace reading the Bible itself, nor does it pretend to be a comprehensive survey, and aims only to give some idea of the history, though striving for voluminousness.
How deeply do I want to delve into the biblical narrative and in what way do I approach reading the Bible at all? - This presentation of the Bible will be the impressions of an ordinary person who is more or less advanced in this area. The result is for you to judge. What will not be here is a mystical approach that seeks information not in what is directly said, but in the numerical meanings of words or some order of letters in lines or ciphers. The author operates only on what is explicitly said or what can be deduced by ordinary reflection armed with the knowledge of history and science that a layman can reach. All in all, a rather moderate approach, typical of Christians in many churches who are oriented toward what they call "salvation of the soul." Which means that everything described in the Bible will be taken and presented as real, whether it be miracles or the presence of God among men, without trying to interpret it all allegorically. Yet this is quite sufficient....
In the beginning, God created the universe, which is spoken of as the creation of "heaven and earth." That is, among the created star systems that make up our universe was our planet within its solar system[1] . This was quite a long time ago, the seven days of creation took place on earth not immediately at the creation of the universe, but some time later. It unfolded matter from nothing, which is considered quite "scientific" today, many people know what they say about vacuum physics, and is reminiscent of the big bang theory. It must have been a long story while the stars went through their cycles of formation and life, building up the heavy elements for the next forms of existence. Of course, He could have created a ready-made world with all its details at once, and He did so in some cases, but as an Inventor, Engineer and Scientist He was pleased to see the processes as they unfolded and followed the paths calculated by Him, to see how His plans worked, how they were realized in practice from His ideas and calculations. In any case, the events of creation of the Universe and arrangement of the planet Earth for life on it are significantly separated in time[2] . First there was the whole Universe, then, unknown how much time later, there was the creation of life on Earth. Also in the description of the seven days of Creation of the Earth it is clearly stated that on the first day was created light, which illuminated the already existing planet, and not the planet, and especially not the universe, as many think about the biblical history of the appearance of the Earth and the universe. There is simply no room in the seven days of Creation for the creation of our planet, that is, the "heavens and the Earth" were created outside of these seven days.
If we think that He had to create everything at once in a ready-made form, i.e. that He did not want to see the successive realization of His calculations and designs, then we have little understanding of His joy of creation, how He was interested in realizing everything step by step. Often impatient people jump from the task at hand to the answer at the end of the textbook, not wanting to deal with anything between the plan and its finished realization. But God is more understandable to those who love not only the result, but also the work of realizing it. In this, God bears little resemblance to a magician, though he wields powers and capabilities far greater.
After some parts of the Universe were ready for new steps, when enough different elements[3] for planets and life on them had been developed in the star systems, God began to create inhabited worlds. Some were created earlier, others later. Our Earth was one of the last, if not the most recent .[4]
And so God approached the planet with an entourage of many onlookers who were interested in seeing how God worked, it might help them understand how they themselves were once created. Both the Father and the Son were here, for it sounds plural when it says "we shall create", and Solomon in Proverbs[5] has the Son next to the Father in creation. The Son created everything directly, because the Bible unequivocally says that the Son of God was the creator of everything, visible and invisible[6] , and not only in our solar system, but everywhere in the universe, and the universe itself also came out of His hands. The Father, as the main one, watched with pleasure how the Son realized what they had conceived, their original plans, clearly and flawlessly unfolding detail by detail, step by step, producing on the planet, speaking the language of science fiction, terraforming, preparing conditions for living forms. It was a truly paradisiacal environment once the process was complete.
Have you ever installed an operating system on a disk that has nothing on it yet, only the ability to format the surface by creating a file system on it? Although it seems like a dry, purely technical chore, in my early years of interacting with computers it had a touch of socialization, and installing the system, formatting it, and preparing it to work was something akin to the appearance of a new creature. Probably I could even fixate on installing the system and lose the sense of working on it, as some newcomers do, but I had ideas about what to do on the installed system, so the installation and subsequent configuration and work in it were in harmony with each other. But the solemnity of the beginning still mesmerizes me to this day. And just on our planet something similar was happening - the formatting of the planet for the future life for protein creatures, conducted by the Specialist for Life Arrangement. By the way, the human mind, the brain, is a machine, which also has its own operating system, which allows thinking, joy, feeling and sensing, making decisions and acting - all this was also once developed in the "human" project, and now it was being prepared for launching on our planet.
Usually one installation is planned and further work should go on without interruptions and failures. In our world it is difficult to achieve such a thing, but with God with the possibilities of His thought there are no errors. Yes, at the level of using His products it is possible to spoil them, to direct them to the wrong place, it all reflects just the richness of possibilities, laid down by Him, almost inexhaustible; yes, there are weak points in living systems, or some mechanisms of even inanimate systems of the planet have fragility of construction, but it shows rather impossibility to do otherwise than the Creator's shortcomings. And one more point - the fragility of living things shows that the universe was not designed to act in the mode of evil... We on the one hand were unlucky to be the arena of struggle between good and evil in front of the whole universe (why would you give away your dominion to Lucifer, succumbing to his tricks, I mean Adam and Eve, after them it is impossible to change anything in the conditions of life, except to wait for the time of restoration), but on the other hand we will see the real reformatting of the planet and its biosphere, like described by Moses in the beginning of the Bible. Revelation speaks of a "new heaven" and a "new earth", after the planet, defiled by evil, will be destroyed in the final punishment of evil and its supporters and rebuilt again. And people, not those who survived the cataclysms of the Apocalypse, but those who entered into life, will be able to see this with their own eyes.
"Let there be light" - day one
"Light!"[7] - The Son commanded, and light appeared, the planet was illuminated[8] . Whether it was the lighting devices or the space itself that began to glow, it is difficult to say. But the planet was at first illuminated on all sides, but then the illumination was left only on one side, the other side was now a shadow, that is, night, for it is specifically noted that "there was evening and there was morning." The rotation of the planet created the change of day and night, the boundaries of night and day were constantly moving, and there was always morning and evening. From the outside, i.e. for an observer from outer space, the contrast is striking, whereas for those on the planet, day and night, which last for their proper time, are more relevant than their relatively short change.
It is more reasonable, probably, to consider that the Sun was included[9] , it is the most natural variant. It is also worth remembering that the planet was in a different state than today, as it is said - "sightless and empty" - the chaotic state of the surface and dusty atmosphere did not allow light to reach the surface, why the sun, although it could shine from its place, was not visible from the planet. On the fourth day the transparency of the atmosphere was established, and then the sun and stars "appeared", became visible from the surface, whereas before the fourth day the light could not reach it.
However, even without the inclusion of our star called the Sun, God had ample opportunity to illuminate the planet on this first day of Creation. Artificial illumination from some devices to the glow from Himself....
Nothing else had been created on that first day, only day and night, and their changing mornings and evenings at the borders. That light must have reached the surface, though the dusty atmosphere muffled it. But to those who saw our planet from the outside, it was interesting. God noted to Himself that the illuminated planet, though with a surface indistinguishable by mere sight and dust in the atmosphere, still looked beautiful. The light was good. And so was the night.
Atmosphere - day two
On the second day, the work of settling the Earth was carried out as if also unhurriedly. The command "let there be an atmosphere[10] in the midst of the waters" was sounded. We usually perceive this vault or firmament critically, not seeing anything solid in the air, but this airy, soft, intangible atmosphere protects the planet and you and me quite successfully from all kinds of space bodies flying in sometimes, and from radiation from space. It may not be an absolute protection, but it works.
Just what waters does it share? At the bottom at that moment there is no land shown yet, water seems to prevail, and the conclusion is that the planet is still quite flat. In general - a shallow ocean with islands of separate elevations, as science says about the days of the origin of life, referring them, however, to much more remote times. But above the atmosphere there is also some water - what is it? I think that the Bible describes those waters that were poured out in the flood, and now those waters are no longer around the Earth. Could there have been a ring around the planet like Saturn's?
One person on the net criticized me a lot for this view, saying that he is a scientist and that he knows for a fact that this could not happen, as it would drastically change the equation of motion of the Earth and is not possible at all due to physical limitations. And if I knew physics, I would never say such a thing. Alas, I am neither a physicist nor a scientist, but a high school (or even college) course gives absolutely no basis for such conclusions. He, on the other hand, although he called himself a scientist, did not classify himself as a physicist. From what I know about the subject, I don't even guess at any fundamental constraints on how the Earth could have such an additional shell. Even if there were very significant masses of water (the total mass didn't change, after all), it's still as if it's not "forbidden" by science in any way, just as the rings of Jupiter and Saturn or our planet's moon are not "forbidden". I really asked him to enlighten me, at least to tell me in which section of physics this is described, to look there for what he was talking about, but he didn't condescend. I realized it was just plain trolling. In the end, without giving me any information or even a hint, he only reinforced my assumption, especially since I am not the author of this notion of "waters above the Earth".
Thus, the second day passed in ordering the initial chaos[11] , in which the surface of the planet was.
Land and Seas - Day Three. And the plants
On this day the command to separate the waters from the land was sounded. The period of shallow vastness was over, the continents rose a little higher, and the waters gathered in low places. It is possible that the oceans were not large, as a huge portion of the waters were hidden underground and perhaps above the planet, if I am not mistaken with the assumption of a water ring in space. This was accomplished by lowering the oceanic crust or raising the continental crust. Of course, it could also be done by horizontal movement of land areas, but then it would lead to the fact that new mountains would appear on the planet, because such a scenario involves the movement of plates of the Earth's crust, at the collision of which many cataclysms occur. And this is a problem, especially on the eve of the emergence of life. Extreme conditions of mountain formation, collisions, cracks, magma on the surface, earthquakes and volcanoes with other strong effects are not conducive to life, although it took place after the Flood[12] and possibly during it. The processes of smoothing the mountains that rose from the collision of migrating plates required a lot of time, and to do it on the eve of the emergence of life is not the best solution. And the tectonic plates were already long-formed, so moving them now would be a problem. These processes were completed much earlier.
In general, the geological state of the planet's surface has changed in the past times obviously more than once, and at this moment the final chord in this area occurred. True, the human factor subsequently made great corrections to this, so that during the Flood[13] again there were sinking and rising, as well as traveling continents with their splitting. And this process continues today, though no longer so catastrophically. However, the unpleasant surprises continue to smolder and may yet reveal themselves at the end of this world.
Up to this point, there was nothing living on Earth yet, not counting, however, the "invisible" life - microorganisms that processed "crude" inorganic materials into more complex forms that could nourish plants with the right substances. Sedimentary rocks, bound calcium, released oxygen, and red rocks with iron oxides are all the result of an invisible army of small living things that acted as robotic servants and accomplished a gigantic work of planetary proportions. Their work began long before the days of creation, it is about their creation and God's management of their work that the words "The Spirit of God carried (or "vibrated", which is very similar to "radiated") over the water" speak, which meant that the work of preparation was active, and God already then made the necessary influences on these or those processes, including the creation of some living, or pre-living forms for the processing of inorganic matter. However, the living microcosm is still directly involved in the regulation of life on the planet and the cycle of substances, only this microcosm is somewhat different from what it was before the days of creation, because then there was an addition of many and many more complex life forms in the microbiota.
And on the same day that the dry land appeared, God launches the plant world project. All the plans are finalized and calculated, and now only the word "let the earth grow green" - grasses, trees, and all other forms of plants - is spoken. From this word came the germs of various plants. Whether these were single germinations over large areas, or whether the whole soil was sown with them in abundance, is not stated. However, as stated in chapter two, all these things were not yet growing, that is, they began to grow naturally, gradually, and only in one area called Eden, or according to the synodical translation Eden, known as Paradise, there all these plants were grown very quickly, probably even instantaneously - "God planted a garden in Eden in the east." By the time man arrived there, it was already full-grown trees, bearing fruit for the nourishment of man and the other inhabitants.
Day four - the luminaries
Here it is worth quoting a statement that I read now I do not remember where[14] , but it is important: "surprisingly, the maximum transparency of our atmosphere falls just in the region of the visible spectrum" - but "surprisingly" it is only if you look at the origin of life through the filter of the theory of evolution and coincidence from modern science. For a view through the biblical information about the origin of the world, it is just natural, for "it was designed that way". But in general it is said very much in favor of God, because if the transparency of the atmosphere was maximum in the radio range or X-ray, infrared, ultraviolet, and the illumination of the planet would be completely different, and let the light reach us one way or another, but the plants would not have enough energy for the synthesis of substances, and life on it would be under a big question. Even in this "trifle" there is a dependence, so fragile and delicate, on all sorts of most unexpected conditions affecting our existence. That is, the air and atmosphere, even free of dust and suspended particles, do not guarantee enough light... But we have what we need, for which we should be grateful to the one who is called the Source of everything, who calculated and realized all these small and large details.
So, on the fourth day the luminaries - the Moon and the Sun, stars and planets - appeared for the observer from the surface of the Earth. Versions: the first - created just now in addition to the Earth (the most illogical, since this denies the existence of life in the Universe before the Earth, along with the Universe itself, if there was nothing before the Earth; behind the Universe also disappear angels, who are just now watching, according to Job, the creation of life and the arrangement of the planet ...). Another - the Earth was created in one place in space, and is now "inserted" or built into the solar system (as if it makes more sense, it doesn't seem to be too difficult for God's technology). Third - were in their places, and now only "appeared" on the firmament, when God arranged the atmosphere, eliminating dust and clouds of moisture after the actions of the second day, or eliminating any factor closing the external view from the planet, the same factor of transparency. There is much speculation about the Moon being artificially added at some point in time, but most likely it is with the Earth from the beginning.
Besides the fact that it is a beautiful and fascinating sight in itself - the night sky and sunsets and sunrises, they serve, as God says, to measure time from days to years and beyond - by the position of the planets in the star configurations one can measure much longer periods of time. However, there is an interesting point in God's words, as if to hint also at what today is the basis of astrology, when these stars, planets and the Sun and Moon can be Signs, landmarks and signs of destiny or better, signs of tendencies. Planets and stars as reflections of the characters, moods, peculiarities of people, related to what we ourselves are as embodiments of the elements or designs-formulas of God? Or just a reflection of forces influencing a human being? Is it possible? - who knows. These are the words that I myself have tried to translate from the original and realize: "Let there be for signs, and for times, and for days and years". And the "signs" come first... Yes, in the Bible God laughs at the stargazers, but the problem is that the pagan mindset worshiped the Signs as deities, which was a violation of God's law, His second commandment. Signs cannot be asked to change, they unambiguously show their figure and position, they cannot be influenced. That is why, when Babylon was threatened with trouble, brought by the Almighty, God mockingly says to the king of Babylon: "gather the stargazers (together with other occult figures) - maybe they will help you[15] ...". Stargazers are not magicians, they cannot persuade the stars and planets to change their place or position to change a sign of trouble to something favorable. It is as pointless to worship, beg and plead with them as it is to command them.
What approach should be used in interpreting the Bible and the words of God and the prophets? First, we must analyze the words in their closest sense, the familiar and ordinary sense. If we cannot read the meaning or message in this layer of meaning, then we must move to the next level of awareness - to look for the figurative, non-qualitative meaning, usually closely related to the functionality of the word. For example, Christ tells the disciples about Lazarus that he "fell asleep." The disciples took it in the simplest sense, but they were mistaken. They might have wondered why the Master, being away from Lazarus, would speak of his sleep. Yes, they knew that He could know it, being a prophet, but somehow in this situation it was a bit illogical to speak of a "common dream". They had only recently learned that Lazarus was sick, and the Master did not rush to his aid. Suddenly he says that they must go, since he had "fallen asleep". If, as they thought, he had simply fallen asleep after going through a crisis, that would mean that he had already begun to recover, and then why go, since there was no need to help anymore? So the disciples had a clue for a correct understanding of the Master's words, but they did not use it, although the wise men of all times and peoples are always trying to speak indirectly, to confuse the simple-minded and too direct simpletons. Slightly paraphrasing the hobbit proverb from Tolkien, we can say - "do not ask the wise man and the wind for advice, both will give an answer - that yes, and no". But they do not do it out of malice, their task is to pull others up to their level, to pull them out of the swamp of simplified existence.
In principle, the second level of analysis is sufficient for understanding most places in the Bible, and we will talk about the rest when we come across such cases. In this place with "signs", it seems that the very first approach is enough, because the word "sign" already means that there is a transition to indirect meanings of things. If planets and stars are symbols, it means that they symbolize something, show the connection of what we see with something else of a similar nature. It looks like there is something behind these signs, but is this the astrology we are familiar with, or is the real science of signs something else that we are not familiar with today? It seems to me that the second one is that astrology has gone off in the wrong direction somewhere, causing it to be forbidden by God.
Fish, aquatic animals and birds - day five
"Let the waters swarm with teeming, living life," God said. We can also translate this as "let the waters swarm, swarming with life" or as in the Synodal translation, "let the waters produce reptiles, a living soul." This produced a multitude of small creatures in the water, which is exactly what fills the volumes of the ocean. We usually perceive as normal, noticeable to the eye and attention, only that which is closer to us, animals big and reasonable enough, with their appearance and structure close enough to ourselves, and look aloofly at all others, unlike us. However, the Creator of life has some of His own ideas about how to organize the living world, and perhaps we just do not know how to cooperate with species of living beings far from us in appearance and structure. It is unlikely that we can cooperate with them, but they participate in a very large-scale regulation of substances, and the existence of all others depends on them.
In addition to the small animals of the seas, God created fish and birds, as well as, as the original mentions, large animals, giants of the waters. It is unclear whether this day speaks of God's work as if only with the waters - did the birds come out of the water then? Quite possibly, although subconsciously we tend to see them as connected to the earth, they are seen closer to the animals that emerged from the earth the next day.
Mammals and Man - Day Six.
"Let those who dwell on the earth come out of the earth - animals, reptiles, and beasts". The section labeled reptiles included insects, and everything else that crawls, has scales or other coverings, in general all others that are not mammals. Those closest to man and occupying a position of proximity to him, with opportunities to participate in his affairs, with sufficient intelligence to interact and learn.
However, it should be noted that all this miracle of life began in only one place on the planet, called Paradise; the rest of the surface was filled with life, both plants and animals, gradually, as plants grew and animals spread to these places. This detail is introduced in the second chapter of Genesis when it is said that "nothing had yet grown on the earth," only "Paradise was planted in Eden in the east." However, this has nothing to do with evolution, since everything has already been set, programmed and implemented, and it only remains for animals to spread from the Eden sanctuary as plants grow in the rest of the territories and habitats are prepared for them.
After the animals, it was the turn of the last and final project - man. He was the steward and keeper of the created wealth, with the task to develop and evolve, to decorate with dignity what the Creator had created, being himself an instrument of the Creator, created by Him in the likeness of Himself with far-reaching plans, as well as everything that came out of His hands.
Adam gave names to the animals that God brought to him, wondering what he would call them. The first humans had not only good senses, but also undistorted perception and a clearly working mind. The language in which Adam spoke and thought, as well as all other beings in the universe, was unified, not torn into parts by emotions and passions of people. It is thought that the primordial language of mankind was pictorial and figurative, symbols read in details of the surrounding world were connected by a single link with sensations and meanings reflected in the mind. Graphics, sounds and sensations worked together, or it is better to say that a letter or symbol had reflections or likenesses in sound, colors, outlines and lines, and feelings. To some extent, even in today's languages, there are still some links between the sound and the meaning of the symbol, but too many languages that were once close have diverged, and too many words have changed, taking with them layers of meaning, although many have returned in new words formed from the remnants of previous ones, losing touch with the original meanings.
As the Bible describes, there were no suitable helpers for Adam among the animals, although it is more accurate to say that it is not about helpers, but about those who are suitable, who can stand next to him, be in the same row, be a match for him. They could not be among the animals because of their limited abilities, but in this way God showed it to him visually. But all animals were pairs, and Adam was alone, so although Adam could not get bored with anything during this short first day of his life, and God was beside him, he could feel a certain question from the situation itself, why he was alone[16] ... God looked ahead, knowing that one day man would definitely feel incompleteness or emptiness around him. And the plan was about two people at once, so after this demonstration of helpers for man, which were suitable only for a limited range of possibilities, God puts Adam to sleep and takes away his rib... When Adam woke up, perhaps feeling a change in himself, though hardly painful, God this time brings to him a real helper, or rather a helper, suitable for him on all counts, not like animals. That is not only a human being with the same parameters and structure, but also in the narrowest sense suitable or corresponding to him, so that even their desires and peculiarities of their expression were similar and complemented each other. So he recognized his own at once and accepted it. The name he gave to the woman meant "life." It is in every sense, and the mother of all living, and the light of his soul personally, for the sake of which he risked to go even against God. But more on that later.
God then blessed the couple, instructing them to inhabit the Earth and govern it well, caring for the happiness and good of all, just as He Himself had arranged the Earth for their happy existence.
Day seven
For Adam and Eve it was the second day of life, but they counted the days not from Friday, personally the first day of life, the sixth day of creation, but from the first, entering into the counting of the Creator's days as He started them for the planet. They "entered into His rest" with Him. If modern people, who pervert everything they touch, were in their place, they would easily count the days from the origin of man, they could put their own week, which would be a symbol of independence from God and the self-value of man, but in ancient times no one thought about it, and today traditions have left practically no room for such frills. On this day nothing was created, also nothing was found forgotten, left for later, no incompletions and nothing requiring correction. For some time, and probably all that day and night, God spent with men, and so it has been from that time until now, and so it will always be - men "enter into His rest," this day, every seventh day in the week, has since borne this completeness, the peace and rest of God. Of each of His operations it is said that He liked everything individually, but the whole was for this reason even more grandiose. After the completion of the parts into the whole, the whole became perfect. It is good to see things realized and fulfilled from pre-designed plans. Such things move a man to a new level, they have healing power, even the humps are straightened and any ground for depression disappears at the sight of wealth and success of hands. This is also characteristic of God, similarity in many things connects us with Him, so that we can understand Him at least on the level of feelings, if somewhere we lack knowledge and capabilities.
Man was also coming into possession, embracing with his mind and senses the grandiosity of their new world, which was not yet furnished everywhere, only their home, the Garden of Eden, was in bloom. God was bringing them up to speed by explaining or simply showing them their possessions.
The seventh day of the week has been charged with such a charge ever since. Every seventh day carries the aura of perfection or rather completeness, the closeness of God, His joy and pleasure, peace and tranquility. It is not suitable for business, it is suitable for rest, renewal of strength, recuperation, socializing. Even the pagan tradition, calling the seventh day the day of Saturn, emphasizes this appointment, because the sign of Saturn, the personification of wisdom and intelligence, is unfavorable for activity and action. This day was blessed and sanctified by God, that is, made sacred. It has remained so ever since, and it remains so forever, carrying to those who rest in it those powers and benefits laid down from the beginning. Thus it entered also into the law of God, declared at Sinai, its fourth commandment .[17]
This is how the arrangement of our planet was completed during these seven days, which are called the days of Creation. From this time the time of life on the Earth is counted, and it is clear that these six thousand years (approximately, you can count them later) are not the age of the planet itself, this account goes only from the time of the appearance of highly organized life on it.
Rivers of Eden
It is written that a river flowed out of the garden and divided into four rivers. Revelation, the last book of the Bible, also describes a stream flowing from the Tree of Life. After the Flood and the catastrophic division of the continents that followed about 100 years afterward, the river situation may have changed dramatically. Although the Tigris (very similar to the Hiddekel, "flowing before Assyria," which is described in Genesis) and the Euphrates seem to remain in their places, only their sources now begin in the mountains that rose in the Caucasus region (the Caucasus mountains are geologically new, they rose higher after the separation of the continents), and flow into the old channels. But the other two rivers are harder to find. Especially the Fison, which flowed around the land of gold. However, the other, the Gihon, has recently been discovered. This is the Amazon...
Although it's probably hard to believe just for the heck of it, there are some very interesting facts. It is known that Africa and South America were once a single continent, as were Europe and North America. The Mediterranean Sea may not have existed at that time or it may have been smaller in size. It was the super continent we call Pangaea today. In South America, the Amazon today flows west to east from the west coast mountains, the Andes. These mountains rose during the violent westward advance after breaking up with Africa. So recently researchers have discovered that the Amazon once flowed in the opposite direction, from east to west, along the same course, there is an article about this[18] . When the mountains in the west rose, the Amazon stopped. Although more likely it dried up first, because the water flowed into the ocean on the east side, into the gap between the African and South American plates, losing recharge from the African side. But it later flowed the other way as mountains, sediment and jungle gave it water. The main point is that on the African continent, too, a channel remained, just corresponding to the position of the continents once upon a time. From east to west of the unified African-South American continent a river flowed then, across what is now the Sahara Desert, and the source of this huge river is guessed at the side of the former Eden.
It turns out that there were rivers coming out of Eden to all four sides of the world. However, the former Eden is not on the Earth now. It was either destroyed by the Flood, which is the easiest to assume, or, more likely, it was taken away from the planet somewhere for a while, after which it will return here again, as, in fact, Revelation describes when it speaks about the New Jerusalem coming down to the Earth from heaven at the end of a thousand years after the Second Coming, about which Christ, leaving the Earth after the resurrection, said that "He is coming to prepare a place for us", a city, "the artist and builder of which God[19] ". What will come after a thousand years of desolation on earth may be called the Third Coming, although that time already has another name, the Last Judgment. But it will also end, and with it will end the era of evil, started once by Lucifer, and after it this city together with soil and earth, with all its territory will return to the place from which it was taken once before the Flood. The Tree of Life will stand on the Earth again and the River of Life will flow from under its roots as it once did, giving rise to the same rivers again. We can probably think about the new position of rivers and continents and mountains, but I am inclined to think that God will restore "as it was", at least the Garden of Eden remains the same as it was, except now there will be a city in it. Though the garden will remain, and there will be no contradiction or conflict between the city and the garden.....
Life. Arrangement and configuration
Chapter 2 describes some of the instructions God gave to Adam and Eve in putting the created economy of the planet in their hands.
Household
They were given the task of cultivating and organizing the garden that became their home. This shows that although what the Creator created was perfect at the time of creation, it may no longer be so after the passage of time. To maintain, to keep order or to give direction, to set the vector of development is an important work, without it it is impossible to maintain perfection or at least the set order. Besides, it can hardly be said that people had only to maintain a given order, because people are capable of more, rather God created the initial conditions for our world, and man had to further show the possibilities inherent in his nature.
Marriage
The union that ensures the happiness and fulfillment of human existence was established in Eden, when evil and problems did not yet exist. When troubles came, marriage was subjected to the destructive influences of evil, and yet it initially carries a great potential that many people do not realize. The pursuit of pleasure, as a rule, and almost always, is destructive for happiness, but even for the pleasure itself it is also destructive, because the pleasure center gets tired and adapts to increased loads. And old pleasures cease to be such, which leads many into the temptation of perversion. However, pleasures are an integral part of life, one only needs to observe the safety precautions that are in place even in this subject. Our life is very sophisticated, so every element of being has rules for their safe use.
Nutrition
The diet or ecological niche of man in the natural world of the Earth was established. Nuts and fruits, fruits of trees, also berries and grains, seeds of herbs and other plants belonged to them. These are all things that sustain life and health, the proper state of the internal environment of the body, best suited to the design of man himself and his digestive system. Those who try to live by this system today, eating it all unprocessed or minimally processed, always report amazing health gains, although the current state of man and the biosphere, because of the departure from the original path, has created problems for returning to the original basics of diet and lifestyle - a digestive system accustomed as a child to overly mixed and heat-treated[20] foods can have problems with such a healthy (in and of itself) diet. But if one moves in this direction without fanaticism, a great many people could become much healthier, and also happier, as the state of the brain and psyche is very much influenced by both the composition and condition of foods and the gut microflora.
Some health advocates (enthusiasts with no systematic knowledge) have advanced the theory that grains are not a species-specific human food, merely on the grounds that they are inconvenient to gather and process. However, their consideration of "inconvenience" is very speculative, in their calculations some ancient (from the theory of evolution, that is actually an animal) man, apparently, collects one grain at a time and in any other way, and when he gets bored with it, he gives up this business... For some reason they did not consider technology as a species trait of man, putting man on a par with animals and birds, which are not capable of technological development or having only rudiments of it, using stones or crevices to hold the object. Allegedly, if to pick ears with hands, it is long and inconvenient, and clever devices and techniques with technologies, they say, people could not or should not have used in the initial period of their existence. But the mind, capable of the highest development, is just a species trait of man, as well as his hands, able to do many things that are inaccessible to any animal... This is an echo of the theory of evolution, according to which people once had no mind. However, this very construction speaks about the divergence of the theory of evolution from reality, revealing the unscientific nature or weakness of these ideas. Humans emerged at once in an intelligent and skillful state, so the use of grains was no problem for them, neither in gathering nor in processing. Technology was man's native element, even if their initial conditions did not contain any tools for making things or caring for themselves. But they had all the knowledge of the universe at their disposal, until a deviation from the Way severed their ties to the Greater World.
Prohibition and Trial
More was said about what could not be said. It would seem that much was excluded by the fact that what was specified was meant for them, hence the rest was not for them, but for the rest of the living creatures. But here God explicitly forbade one tree, called the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, which is somewhere near the Tree of Life, since both are specified to be in the "middle" of the garden. If you eat of it, He said, "you will die a death." This was the test. The world was created so that there was no reason or occasion for evil, everything was arranged as safely as possible, but man himself was capable of breaking the rules. I like one expression I have read in books that speaks of "hidden evil". The world is a very complex place, but God's safety techniques were worked out very well, and there was no suffering and grief in it. However, due to possible irrationality leading to imbalance of forces, or carelessness, as well as from deliberate evasion of the rules, as well as from the malicious intent of someone teaching bad things, all this could appear and manifest, come into life, from possibility to reality.
It should not be thought that naming a tree the Tree of Knowledge means that God preferred people to be ignorant. Knowledge is needed all around; without knowledge, without the brain being loaded with thought and information, there is no man. The Bible and everything God has said does not support this view. When Solomon asked for knowledge and wisdom, it received the highest approval from God, it was pleasing to Him, which is evident from His words and sounding intonation, not counting the remark of the prophet, the author of that record, that by this request Solomon pleased God very much. Besides, the tree was called not the tree of Knowledge, but exactly Knowledge of Good and Evil, just many people remember the short version, which leads to distortion of the essence. Good was not forbidden, was it? No one can even think of such a thing, so why should knowledge be declared forbidden? Only the tree was forbidden, not knowledge. Evil, of course, is forbidden, but that is without reference to the tree. The symbolism of the tree is that the observance of the prohibition is good, and its violation is evil. And observance or non-observance is a test, where the spiritual state of the subjects is revealed, hence "knowledge", which is acquired through experience, practice, and behavior.
So the notion of God creating blissful idiots who escaped the darkness of ignorance only at the cost of breaking the prohibition and losing Paradise has no basis other than some inattentive reading. Though most likely it was just someone's nagging, with no basis at all.
Also, besides the fact that there were no reasons for discontent in the world, there is also such a factor as the will and choice of living intelligent beings who can deliberately throw the system of life out of balance. The example of Lucifer shows that these concerns are not at all in vain. Lucifer, having gone himself beyond the limits of sound principles, by his influence and activity has led a considerable number of other beings out of harmony with the Creator. But even apart from the dangers of the seducer, the test was necessary in this world, where evil was covered with many veils, so that it was not real, but only possible. A man had to know himself, to know and understand his inclinations, what motivated him, to have an object revealed to him that could be and for a very long life in a prosperous world could remain untouched. Only he who understood his own structure, who saw his weaknesses, who felt the possibilities of doing something outside the order, and who kept on the road, could be considered reliable. And that means of testing was the Tree of Knowledge. It hardly carried any special substances that changed the human condition or, moreover, were evil, just the presence of the test object and the prohibition created a moment of temptation in the man himself, and by his choice the man discovered and confirmed his state of faithfulness or unfaithfulness.
Do we hear claims that "forbidden fruit is sweet", that prohibition necessarily leads to violation? It is not true, it is just a lie, which is not supported by anything except the limited experience of some people, who are characterized by spoiling and capriciousness. Prohibition is only appealing when a person is already in a lost state. For people before evil came into the world, such an ordeal was not a fiery excitement attracting curiosity like a magnet. Even in our world, prohibition is far from producing such effects, especially in those to whom it was a foreign matter to disobey the will of the Creator. For Eve to take from the fruit of the tree, the tempter had to do something very sophisticated; without his special efforts, the Tree of Trial would have had to wait a very long time, an infinitely long time, for anyone to approach it... Even with all the efforts of the tempter, success was not guaranteed.
And they were both naked
Such was the peculiarity of the world they (and we with them) lost that people didn't wear clothes, and that was perfectly normal. But we should not in our imagination frame modern people in a picture of that time and that world, our nakedness will not show what it was like then. Can we say that they were naked as people are today when they remain unclothed? The Bible paints a somewhat different picture of people being in an unclothed state. And it is not at all a picture of blissful idiots, as some critics have tried to portray the times when people "knew no good and evil."
Okay, let's cast a glance at this idea as presented by the detractors of religion. The good they knew because they lived in it, they just didn't have anything to compare it to. Was it a bad thing? Was it some kind of loss? But here is someone saying that without evil, no one will understand or appreciate the good. This may be true for some in our world, but isn't a person too much belittled by this idea? It is, in fact, an insult to man, when it is said about him that "he does not understand good"... When there was no evil and troubles, when the unity with the divine beginning was not yet broken by the retreat, man had a heightened sensitivity and sharpness of mind, which today, to put it mildly, is somewhat blunted, many people just to the point of inability, and education, and lifestyle. The experience of evil just reduces sensitivity to evil... Some people become so immersed in crime that they stop seeing another way of life as possible, they stop understanding good. In general, I absolutely disagree with the idea that one must have encountered misfortune in order to appreciate well-being, although for generations of people born after the fall, this is unfortunately true. I repeat, this is true only for us who were born after the fall of man, and even then a little suffering is enough for some people to appreciate the good, while the harshest punishment is of little help to others.
Moses, when he had been on Horeb with God for a long time, after two forty-day periods, one of which he did not eat anything (if I am not mistaken, the other time too), began to glow. And this glow was clearly visible even in the daytime, so that he had to cover his face in order not to embarrass ordinary people (for some reason it was unbearable for them). This fact shows well the natural state of man when he is close to God, when the harmony of interaction with Him is not disturbed by anything. From this it is obvious that people were shining before coming to the world of evil, and this light created a different picture of the human body, a different accentuation of details, a different vision and perception, so the openness of the body was not seen or perceived as we do today. Who knows, perhaps this light may even have obscured certain details like a fog, but even without it, people looking at each other saw differently.
Falling - advice from an outsider
When Lucifer first began his journey of deviation from the truth, he attracted associates to him, using both personal contacts and official position. Those who were friends and close to him, and because of this were inclined to believe him, it was difficult for them to doubt his plans - because before lies did not exist in the world, it was simply inconceivable that someone could say the wrong thing. He acted openly when he convinced others of the superiority of his revolutionary path, of his rightness in the dispute with God. However, he was not personally known on Earth, he had no access to people, being already persona non grata. People were still extremely young and inexperienced. He could physically meet them directly to deceive them, but it was a sure loser, because they knew the Creator directly and many angels visited them. He had by then been cast out of heaven and everyone knew him as a troublemaker and deceiver who rebelled against the Creator. It is unlikely that the people were not warned about this, they just might not know all the details of what was happening, their test so far was only the tree of Knowledge.
In these circumstances Lucifer could not act directly, for he would probably not be believed or accepted, nor would he be allowed to go to the people for propaganda purposes, and he could only act in the current context of the circumstances, i.e., if he wanted to divide and divide the people from God, then, by merely leading the people to violate the probationary prohibition, he would accomplish all his purposes at once without having to repeat to them what he had enticed others to do. He could only act within the limits of their temptation, which was where the Tree of Knowledge was. Later, when they had finished their training, he could have had the same access to them as everyone else, but he was not satisfied with the timing, by then they would be different, much more knowledgeable and mature individuals.
Attack on Eve
Almost everyone knows the story of Eve with the serpent and the apple, though usually in a distorted light and limited view. So let's take a closer look at what is happening.
Eve somehow found herself near this tree, and alone. Having been warned of the maximum liability for breaking the rule about the Tree of Knowledge - death for eating its fruit - they should have avoided it, avoiding temptation. It was also best not to appear alone in a dangerous place - simple safety precautions of which they should also have been warned by their teachers and mentors. The people were not left to themselves after the days of Creation. God spent the seventh day with them, which was their first full day of their lives, and gave them explanations and instructions about their tasks and activities. Children need to be taught many things, they could not be left to themselves, so they were visited by the inhabitants of heaven assigned to them and practiced with them. The civilization of the universe included our Earth, and there is no way to think that people were left to their own devices without the slightest guidance and lessons. The more advanced a society is, the more knowledge one has to learn, it's elementary. So they were well taught everything, including safety rules. However, Eve still found herself alone and in close proximity to the tree of temptation.
Many works describing these events assume that Eve was under the influence, that something was influencing her, causing her to come here. I also understand that Lucifer turned on all of his powers of influence that day to suppress Eve's will as she was more prone to being led, since she was the second to be led by the leader, Adam, a quality that Lucifer emphasized. It was not enough to draw her to the tree of Knowledge, however, but to succeed, which was not guaranteed.
Lucifer did not act directly, but used the serpent-dragon as an intermediary, taking control of it. This animal is described as the most skillful in the Garden of Eden, that is, it had considerable intellectual capabilities. There are a number of representatives of the animal world, which are closer to man and can understand him at least partially. This was the basis of the bait, which consisted in the fact that the serpent, allegedly having eaten the fruit of this tree, became equal to man in intelligence and capabilities, having acquired higher abilities of speech, which animals by nature did not have. Another bait consisted in the trick of his question to Eve, which looked, in fact, as follows: "Listen, I have heard that you are forbidden to eat all the fruit from all the trees of this garden - what is it, how do you eat then?".
Do you know the origin of the expression "playing hosepipe"? It seems to be inspired by the German Bible. In German, the serpent is der Schlange, and there Eve was seduced by a "hose", which for the purpose of disguise the devil "pretended" to be, or took control of - the difference, in the end, is not important, how exactly he did it. The main thing is that the trap worked perfectly. Eva, obviously slightly stupefied by Lucifer's overwhelming influence, didn't notice the trick.
What was the point here? Psychologists in their studies have noted that people with damage to the different hemispheres of the brain perceive the tasks given to them differently. They were given a simple syllogism - "It's cold in northern countries. Argentina is a northern country. Is it cold in Argentina or not?" People with a damaged right hemisphere, i.e. with damaged imaginative thinking, on logic alone, answered as asked and concluded that "Argentina is cold" since it lies in the north. People were not inclined to check the raw data, they just acted within the framework given to them. But people with damage to the left hemisphere, responsible for logic, but with working intuition, did not make mistakes, they easily uncovered the catch - "but Argentina is not in the north!", although the problem itself would be difficult for them to solve. Revealing the substitution of concepts freed them from the problem itself.
Eve also had some kind of intuition blockage now[21] , she fell for the question, indignant at such rumors, as if wondering who could distort things so much - the limitation on one tree to spread to all the others, and she entered into the conversation without thinking that such a lie or such a mistake should not, could not arise in their world at all. And if someone brought an impossible distortion of things, there was something lurking here that had to do with the Creator's warning of the workings of the evil beginning, and the Deceiver. Behind this distortion of things was death, crime, deception.
But somehow she didn't think about it. Probably, when she saw who was addressing her with a question, she noted to herself the strangeness of this flying kite, which could not speak like humans. Though there is some semblance of words in the animal world, and man can, by using tone of voice and imitating the sounds of animals, communicate to them something within their comprehension, just as they can communicate to man their condition and desires. And suddenly his speech was on the level of human speech! But she was caught up in the question, so that she was distracted from her initial thought, she resented the distortion of the facts, pushing the strangeness of the situation into the background. A little later, to her bewilderment at the speech of the wordless reptile (that's today, but then it was flying...) was added the thought that perhaps it was the Tree of Knowledge that had endowed the serpent with a new level of reasonableness. And that it would be a step to an even higher level for man. Even without words Lucifer skillfully arranged the circumstances, creating hints that God had hidden from men some highest possibilities, the key to which he had put in this Tree, and the mastery of this key would give man something. But everything here was a deception, both the words and the hints.
Here, however, Eve was not yet defeated, though she was being led around. She hadn't made a choice that would put her on the enemy's side. For now, she began to explain to this flying serpent, who couldn't speak before (and hasn't since), that he was wrong, that they had the right to eat from any tree, and that there was only one tree they weren't allowed to eat from. Just the one that this dragon was sitting on, which she shouldn't have gone near, since she wasn't going to take anything there.
And the enemy made his next move. When Eve said that they were forbidden to touch the fruit, Lucifer pretended to be a kind uncle, a benefactor of the human race - "No, you guys won't die, it's not like that at all... God knows that when you taste this, you will be equal to God, you will know good and evil". That's what he said about the Creator and their Father. Lucifer took a risk because he didn't know for sure if people would die immediately from the fruit of the tree or if there would be a time lag. But he still had strong considerations about it, based on his own experience of breaking the rules. Personally, he was still alive after all the outrages he had done in the inhabited universe, and that was the basis for his "revelation" that Eve would not die the same day she broke the rules. And his calculation turned out to be correct, though not entirely as he thought. But it was a victory for him, too.
How does he know what God thinks? Why does he represent Him as such - a secretive and not entirely positive father who hides good from his children? So this dragon already knows God, if he knows such things? And it is obviously not the best acquaintance - then isn't it the one who outrages the whole universe against the Son of God? And has God really kept anything from His children? Is it only good and evil that distinguishes God from created beings? Could it be that there are many more differences, and they are more serious and weighty? Why doesn't he say you will become omnipotent, powerful like God? Why not omniscient, not creators, not omnipresent seers? Yet Lucifer cites only the slightest of His attributes as a property of God, which is a fraud - out of all the abilities of the Godhead, he singled out only the knowledge of good and evil. It is as if you were sold a certain product under the guise of a famous quality brand, and the only signs of this brand were the box or the label. Although here it is rather a roughly plastered semblance of a trademark. But somehow Eva did not pay attention to all the words of the serpent. She just didn't have time. She could have, if she had stopped and thought, but Lucifer was not going to give her such an advantage, he needed success, so the experienced cheat continued the pressure, without giving time for reflection. And that was the easiest and most win-win part of his plan, the hardest part was to start, to grab her attention and get her talking, but he succeeded.
So far he had succeeded in everything, but at this point the matter might be stalled. Eve tried to weigh the pros and cons, though she couldn't do it in such a short time, especially when her attempts to make sense of it were cut short by the alien influence. There was an urgent need to get away from here, but she stood in indecision, her intuition very much drowned out by the hostile influence, reasoning - "it seems like a tree can advance a lot", and that was something she valued highly. What is strange - sinless Eve fell for the bait of higher development, but people already in the fallen state are not all able to appreciate these higher possibilities, they are too indifferent, they are much closer to pleasures, in the sense of simple, primitive pleasures of the body, than to higher possibilities. What happened is sin - it devalues man and deprives him of the opportunities that awaited Adam and Eve in the future, when the time comes and they develop to the necessary levels, and deprives even the thirst for the highest. Not all, fortunately, but too many. Already from this we can understand that Lucifer even in this deceived rather than advanced man.
But Eve was not yet in a hurry to take the fruit, which the serpent tried to induce her to do. Seeing that she herself, the more time passed, the more likely she would refuse, or even go after Adam, so that together with him she could not hurry to deal with the tempting offer, the serpent put one of the fruits in her hands. However, the moment was chosen by him at the right time - Eve was looking at the fruits of the tree, and their beauty fascinated her, attracted her, and Lucifer's influence was also present. And when one of the fruits suddenly touched her hand, held out by the paw of the dragon, she did not pull away... It is written that she did not pluck it from the tree, but "took" it, that is, it was held out to her. Before doing so, she answered the serpent to his provocative question that they were not allowed to eat only from this tree and yet added that they were not allowed to touch them either, lest they die. It was a perfect moment for the serpent, and at the right moment he held out the fruit he had plucked to her. With this, Lucifer was saying, "See, nothing has happened to you, and you were afraid! You are alive, aren't you? However, if she had died, he would not have cared, he only cared about his own plans. But it turned out just as he had supposed, that Eve should not die at the moment of touching or eating the fruit from the Tree, otherwise Adam would not be available to him because of his worries about his dead wife. Lucifer realized that he had lost a lot by leaving his former position of the Supreme Archangel, having violated many things during his rebellion and subversive activity, however, although he had to pay for all this in some future, he was still alive and well. And he still had to live to see the final reckoning, and besides, he thought that he had a certain chance to win. Or not to defeat God, but to win - as long as someone believes in him or at least doubts about God, God will not be able to remove him without damage to Himself and others. You can find deep calculation and knowledge of God's character in his plans and actions. He must have known that against His power he had no chance, but it is possible to act in ways other than force by bringing the Creator into conflict with creation - to destroy trust, to destroy the bond with created beings by deceiving them and keeping them in distrust of God for as long as possible, to destroy God's heart, His love and harmony in creation.... and then for the Creator to be disappointed in a creation that can't be in harmony with Him all the time (if you mess up and destroy something all the time, turn it against, lie to it, then there will kind of always be someone to believe it...). Somewhere in all of this was a fair amount of insanity. But he saw his perceived chances clearly and wasn't going to pass them up. And if he lost, he would lose with a great scandal, so that even after his death the seeds of his work would destroy God's plans. He understood a great deal about God, but still not everything, because he had begun to judge Him by himself....
When Eve didn't die when she took the fruit of the forbidden tree in her hands, she felt that she had already broken the prohibition, and so she thought that it didn't matter and now she could taste it... If she didn't die by touching it, nothing should happen if she ate it. So she tasted what she was given.
Many people today think that the words about not touching the Tree of Knowledge and its fruit are self-inflicted. In fact, it is not as if God said that, He only said not to eat them. However, such a view leads to the fact that Eve's sin began long before that day... If they distorted God's words, then it is already evil, yet such a view is too hasty and wrong. Why not believe Eve was not speaking from herself, making things up and exaggerating, but was repeating what they had been told in meetings with God and angels, where they received more detailed instructions and explanations?
The people spoke correctly and the logic is very simple - if these fruits are forbidden, one should not touch them. This is an elementary safety technique - if something is a temptation, one should stay away from it. He who approaches tempting things, plays with them, goes to temptation himself, so it is not safe for a former alcoholic to approach the alcoholic rows. Therefore, for both Adam and Eve themselves, these words are entirely true and correct. They are details to that brief instruction that the Creator gave them, explanations of it, what angels or God Himself taught them in details later. But this instruction is true only as applied to their own behavior. If someone else gives them the forbidden fruit in their hands, touches them not of their own free will, then since it is not their game, they are innocent, it is the provocation of the enemy. Eve at this point did not deal with this twist of temptation, she was unprepared.
Many would still be principled at this point, refraining from the next steps of violation, realizing at least that the main rule of "no eating" has not been broken, but the usual tactic of the devil is to say that "now you don't care anymore", go all out. Get a person to touch the forbidden in a way where it is not the person himself who touches, but another brings him into contact with the forbidden, and convince him that you have already violated. So quite often low people tried to work Christians to break them, and sometimes it worked. But as long as she didn't eat the forbidden fruit, she had every chance of getting out of trouble, because what came before that was abuse and fraud. But she was persuaded that she had already crossed the line, and by this she was demoralized. The appeal of the alternative path also played a part, she became okay with trying knowledge from that tree. "And she ate..."
Adam's treatment
Lucifer realized that it was too early to celebrate victory. His plan was not just to harm the Master, to show the rightness of his idea about the needlessness of laws, the artificiality of rules, restrictions and prohibitions, that the will of a reasonable being is the only law. Such are the voices of his ministers today, and they bring nothing new. But, as it seems to many, the point was also that he and his supporters had no normal base in the universe. They all, as the Bible says, "forsook their places" when they rose up to protest and probably seize power - a kind of revolution or revolt - and afterward were all driven out of the inhabited worlds together. By their structure, many of them, being angels, could probably even live on lifeless planets or open space (or they were all deported to an uninhabited planet somewhere), though it's hard to judge all of this, there's no direct data, but if on some planet they were given hospitality and the whole planet, without abstainers or those "against" them, accepted them, they would have the right to be there and build their own world. On Earth they had the opportunity, if Adam and Eve had accepted them, to become masters of the situation. If people on Earth had time to reproduce, the chances of the rebellious angels to take over the territory would be noticeably reduced, because even if a small percentage of the inhabitants of the Earth were "against" their presence, remained faithful to the Creator, they would not be allowed to be here. So they needed to act urgently, while the humans were inexperienced and there were only two of them, to ensure unanimity. At this point half the work was done, one vote out of two was obtained, but there remained Adam. Had he remained faithful to God, Eve would have perished and Lucifer's task would be as far from solved as it had been before the attack on Eve. While this would not have stopped his subversion of inhabited worlds, it would have made it much more difficult for him, tainting his image as a fighter for a better life. On Earth, he could build a society according to his own principles, plans and designs, and he hoped to enthuse everyone else in the universe who didn't believe him or doubted him, if he could make something viable and at least somewhat appealing. Back then he still seemed to believe in it, that life could be built on other foundations. Though as a deceiver he now simply states to those who would lay claim to him for a world filled with evil and suffering that either you want freedom or you want prosperity, it is impossible to have both at the same time[22] . Yet why is such a thing possible with God? Or is the alternativeness of a path, necessarily different from God's, an end in itself for him?
Eve walked toward Adam. She was filled with new, previously unprecedented sensations that confirmed the serpent's words that they would become like gods. It was not difficult for Lucifer to arrange these sensations for her, since his knowledge of nature was great and he himself was still one of the first in power and intelligence of beings in the universe. And alas, she was not going on her own, now she was already serving as a tool of the Deceiver, was a conduit of his power and influence. The serpent was no longer needed, it was released. She brought Adam the fruit from the forbidden Tree and told him everything the serpent had said and what she herself experienced after eating it. She had shown considerable persistence and persuasion, and she herself was glowing with excitement, presenting an attractive lure for Adam. She wanted to bring him up to the height of being that she herself was, or rather felt herself to be.
It was not the case that Eve gave the fruit to Adam without informing him where the fruit came from. If it had been, Adam would have spoken very differently, and he would have had a serious complaint against Eve. To God he would have said that he did not know he was violating His prohibition, and would it have been a violation? Lucifer would not have been able to prove that Adam voluntarily joined him. In fairness, such a thing should be considered an additional offense to Eve and Adam would be the victim here, not the perpetrator. Here it was precisely that she was agitating him, persuading him to join her and the serpent in violating the prohibition against the tree of Knowledge.
The Bible does not say that Adam believed her. There is no indication that he questioned, questioned, questioned anything as she did in her conversation with the serpent. No, it was clear to him that what the angels and God had warned them about had happened (the fact that God visited them often, the Bible itself says in the very next verses, and it is clear that visits from beyond the planet were a constant, regular occurrence), that the Deceiver had come into their cozy world and that he had just succeeded and ruined their lives. The only question for him was what to do now that Eve was doomed to die. She was very dear to him, and that was what Lucifer was playing on now. And won. In a way, Adam had accomplished a feat by choosing to die with Eve, to share her fate. Noble? I don't know. Because his choice was driven not so much by helping her as by the idea that he couldn't live without her, although compassion for her played a role too. But, on the other hand, by doing so he betrayed God, who created him and Eve (and could, and certainly would have given him another wife after some time), to whom he owed his life, existence and all feelings and sensations, and Eve herself, by the way. Betray his Father for his wife? Eve is his friend, and God - He is big and strong, it is easier for Him (He will bear everything much easier than they will) - He is not in danger of death and the losses that they are facing now... This thinking some will later call slavish, in which there is no place for honor. It's not the best solution. It's not a way out, it's suicide. To some extent it is inspired by the same rebellious suicidal spirit of Lucifer himself (since the time when he raised his supporters to rebellion, he was taking risks, realizing it, but was ready to do a lot for the sake of "try what will happen" to test himself and how much God will yield), as he at that moment did not stand aside, but actively tried to influence Adam's emotions.
But Adam could also think about the fact that God might not kill both of them at once, that is, he would not kill them at all, because if both of them were destroyed, the Creator's plan for the Earth would be destroyed, and God would hardly go for such a thing. Lucifer also counted on it, that people would stay alive, and then the whole planet together with them would pass into his hands. If Adam, the ruler of the planet Earth, submits to him, Lucifer, the prince of heaven in exile, then this subjection of the prince of Earth puts his possessions into his hands as well. In general, Adam thought that one Eve would surely perish, and if he risked it, he would either perish with her, and the thought of separation from her made him despair, or God would spare them somehow, because it was not for nothing that He had worked so much with the planet, and He needed them for some reason. This was actually blackmailing God (not in the eye, but still, but what if the master is so kind...), although it was also a big risk. And it turned out that Adam's risk and Lucifer's calculation were justified. Not completely, and not in the way they wanted, but they succeeded in continuing life. But it didn't work out with the Lucifer-run Earth publicity project. Nor with the appeal of his lifestyle on a cosmic scale.
Adam deliberately takes the fruit from Eve's hands and eats it. It's like he's saying to her, "I'm with you. You, although now you are so enthusiastic and energetic, but you are almost gone, yet I don't want to live without you, and I want to die with you. True, she did not realize it at the time, a different, messianic mood possessed her. And then there was no time to evaluate, completely other thoughts came... Maybe much later, when everything calmed down and the shocks of all the changes had passed, when another, not glorious life had settled down, they shared with each other what they had to experience in those decisive moments. If the Creator had been around at that time (and people were connected with Him closely enough and were in awe of Him, realizing the magnitude, power, His kindness and sensitivity to what He had created), Adam would have been very uncomfortable. He would have felt more clearly that he would not have wanted to live without God either (we are such heroes today, but if we had known Him better...). That God is dear and desirable in His own way, and in general is the source of even the very feelings of man, and the very love that Adam felt for Eve, and Eve herself. Yet he also felt a split - to whomsoever he turned his allegiance, in both cases someone was sorry to leave. He could have stayed on the Creator's side, but it seemed to him that by doing so he was betraying Eve, God was stronger and would survive somehow... Later, when he became a father of many people, when he saw the amount of suffering on the planet, and not only among people, but also in the rest of the living world, he realized a thousand times that he was wrong to choose Eve, and underestimated at first the Father's experience and how he betrayed Him, leaving him alone before Lucifer and his followers. However, this could not help, except to add patience in the long journey to the lost home, and to explain to the descendants that God is above everything, that any loss He can compensate and even return.
And eating what his wife had brought, and afterwards he hardly experienced the slightest pleasure, even from the taste of the fruit. And even then, when one does not do what one ought to do, one's soul is seldom able to enjoy anything. He clearly felt that he was doing something unnecessary and vain, that what he was doing was no help. However, having started, to quit? - Is there any point...? It's really too late to jump back once you've gone over the edge, the offense has already happened. In many other cases, for example, as in the saying "war stops halfway through - and that's good" - it makes sense to stop on the way of violation. Where it's about the amount of evil, it always makes sense, but where there's only black and white, either-or doesn't. There was a joke somewhere about "discoveries by British scientists" - something like "quickly picked up doesn't count as falling down", or "inserted and quickly pulled out doesn't count as inserted", but these are just jokes, and have little use in describing real things. We can try to "un-count" ourselves for something done wrong, but how will the audience, in front of whom all this tragedy is taking place, count? Neither they nor God can be fooled, and even with one's own conscience it is quite difficult to do so.
Eve, too, enjoyed the unusual surge of energy and heightened sensations for a short time. After Adam had sadly finished the fruit or nut she had brought, she had a setback, caused by Adam's lack of the effect she had experienced. Either she was angry at Adam's lack of enthusiasm for breaking the commandment, or Lucifer had left them, as he had nothing more to do here now by reason of complete success, and the fueling of emotion from the extraneous fire was gone. Feeling herself decline, she suspected that she had been cruelly deceived and equally cruelly used in deceiving her own husband. Should she be angry, frightened, flee? And at that time that glow of light which had been emitted from their skin vanished. Their bodies appeared to them in the light that we see them in today in us cross breed humans - we bear no guilt for what our forebears did, but the consequences remain, we are all born into what they had. For them, this new state of things was unfamiliar. Along with their bruised consciences, it was very unpleasant. It was a clear sign of their guilt and the loss of something very important. And they began to look for something to cover themselves with, to feel at least a little more normal, not so openly-naked. They were far from degradation, their ingenuity and vivacity of mind was hardwired into their being by the Creator, and they quickly found a way to combine the leaves into a sort of cloak. I wonder why they chose fig leaves, because these leaves are very similar to sandpaper on the underside, it is worth touching them when picking figs with bare hand, and though not to the point of blood, but where the skin is not so rough as on the palms, it is torn and sore. It was clearly a manifestation of remorse and self-punishment. A normal reaction as if, a normal human reaction. But what will God say to all this now, will their self-punishment count for payback?
Punishment
It is not known how often visitors from beyond the Earth came to them, but the new world was not left to itself, to the long agonizing search for ways through mistakes and losses, to the evolution of consciousness, and other ideas of our time about the beginning of mankind. God's visit to the Garden of Eden does not seem unexpected and rare, rather it is a routine visit with regular lessons. They were introduced to the civilization of the universe, taught everything they needed to know about everything, taught all the knowledge they needed. Although it seems that this process didn't go far, we don't know how long Adam and Eve lived before their fall happened. On the one hand, we can assume that they had time to learn a lot, since there are many accounts of the ancients as possessing advanced knowledge and technology, meaning that at least several years had passed since Creation. On the other hand, if that time was significant enough, they would have had time to finish their education, and they would have started having children. All in all, they didn't have fifty years or even twenty. Their flight was interrupted clearly at the very beginning. Or, better to say, they were shot down on takeoff before they could take off.
God came to them during the "cool of the day," the original refers to the time when the wind blows. In any case, it is not morning; the events that took place around the Tree of Knowledge took part of the day, and even if they began in the morning, their subsequent reflection and realization of what had happened took many hours. Most likely, as usual, when the sun is at its zenith, wind is less likely, but the approach of evening, with its proximity of darkness and light, cool and warm areas, brings wind. And it is unlikely that even pre-flood climates differed in this respect from the present state of affairs. That is, they had enough time to experience and comprehend.
It was unlikely that people had played hide and seek with God before, their absence didn't seem normal, so God called out to them - "Adam, where are you?" Adam was not far away and responded at once. Shame and an unfamiliar sense of guilt prevented him from calmly approaching the one who had created him, as if nothing had happened.
We should note something about the Person of God coming to Earth here and later. Although everyone speaks of the monotheistic religion of the Jews, this monotheism looks like such only in comparison with paganism. That being said, one must distinguish Jewish theological thought of the rabbinic post-Plen time from that of the pre-Plen time. The problem is that it is impossible to find theological thought in Israel and Judea before the Captivity, strange as it may seem. All the energy of the people went anywhere but into the sciences and making sense of life. The only one who made a little mark here was Solomon, but there was no tradition or school left after him, and even if there were attempts to preserve his legacy, there is very little in Scripture that can clearly testify to the development of his heritage. Therefore, there is no theoretical reflection on deity at all, and not because Jewish thought is so integral. Rather on the contrary, it was the absence of aspirations to deepen knowledge and cognition of their God that led to the weakness of the analytical beginning in it. When "the scribes and Pharisees took Moses' place," they built something that put them and Christ on opposite sides of the barricade, their theology was not quite biblical. Therefore, Judaism's ideas about deity and the Messiah can serve more as a description of the state of mind than as a reliable source for understanding the Bible and God.
The situation is somewhat complicated. Everyone has heard of the Trinity (although it is already a Christian idea, but from the same Bible, not only the Gospel), when three figures are seen in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Spirit (or of two visible and manifest Persons and an invisible all-pervading Spirit, who is also quite personal). The Father and the Son appear visibly and tangibly in the Bible, and while many can argue about the personhood of the Spirit, there is less debate about the Son, and if there is any debate, it is only about His beginning and when He became God. For me (like much of Christianity) He is God from the beginning. And this Son acts not only as Jesus Christ of New Testament times, but in Old Testament times most of the Bible's references to God should be attributed to Him, the Son. It is said of the Father that "no man hath ever seen God; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath manifested." In fact, by all indications and signs, it is He who represents the Father, serving as a kind of mediator between Creation and the Highest. Although the Son is the Creator and Maker Himself, He almost always acts "on behalf of" (and with full right to do so), and even the name "Being" or Jehovah (Jehovah, Yahweh) is one for two between Him and the Father.
Adam called back from somewhere in the bushes - "I was afraid of your voice because I am naked. Probably the translation is not quite accurate, he was rather ashamed since he is talking about nakedness. But on the other hand he must really be afraid because he knows what must follow eating the forbidden fruit. He has clearly experienced both. The phrase would be more like, "I am afraid of your voice, and I am also naked," but he was probably being brave, not speaking of fear directly. Such a confession is the most perfect truth - many people try to justify their guilt by some considerations, but they work only in front of people (and that is not always the case with all people), they are ineffective in front of themselves, and they leave a lot of residue. However, if a person feels the presence of God, or someone brings His influence with him, like Adam during this visit, then those leaves of self-justification disappear, are not felt, as if they did not exist. In general, if it were only guilt and fear for his life, he could still go out and look God in the eyes, but this unfamiliar nakedness and shame did not allow him to straighten up....
God doesn't scold, doesn't blame at this point. He is figuring out what happened by pulling them, most likely out of the bushes. This is important for them now to understand why they ended up where they did. God wonders - "Who told you that you were naked? Perhaps you ate from the tree from which I forbade you to eat?" How else could they have ended up naked? Adam confirms this. Only for some reason not directly, that "yes, I ate," but by shifting the focus to his wife - "she whom you gave me, she gave to me...and I ate." It's kind of like, "What about me?" Does he realize now that only recently he was going to die with her together? And perhaps thought that such a demise would be something glorious (at least some gentlemen are sure of that)... Only it doesn't look glorious at all now that he blames Eve. Maybe the fact that God spoke to them, and neither scolded nor blamed, awakened some hope in him? What if his fault wasn't too bad and he or they would be forgiven? Or perhaps the loss of the radiance was already the punishment they had been warned about from the beginning, a symbolic death of sorts? Is the real death no longer threatening? In this case, it's as if there's no need to be a hero.
But still it should be emphasized - before his fall he could think of heroism or heroism, but the sin, the experience of violation, changed him, he became another being, which turns out not to be as he thought of himself, it is different, it shows unexpected properties, and not the best, not noble. He sets Eve up, even if not for death, as he had suddenly hoped, but still, he tries to justify himself by putting the blame on her. He says that if he is to blame, she is more to blame. And if as a result (hypothetically) he was left to live and she, with her greater guilt, was not, what would he do?
Perhaps there is another side to Adam's words, neither blaming Eve nor justifying himself. His words are ambivalent. On the other hand, he is only stating a fact, the purest fact. If he were to take all the blame, that would also be a lie, and people have not yet had the experience of lying. Some are even still not very skilled at it, to man's credit, because to lie, the body turns on certain mechanisms in man that, when told the truth, are not engaged. It's like an insincere smile differs from a real smile in that they have other muscle groups working, and any person subconsciously sees this perfectly well (although it may not reach consciousness). But let's go back to Adam and Eve - Eve did bring him fruit, and he, speaking briefly, Western action-style, does not state his motives, thoughts, or feelings, but only gives a dry account of actions - "it was brought to me, I ate". But even if he states the facts as they are, his words still in themselves say more than he would like to say. The facts do point to Eve, and hint that he is less guilty, or maybe not even guilty at all... The situation... There is still a case for self-justification though, look - he doesn't just say "the wife brought it to me", he includes God himself - "the wife you gave me"... This is something devious and tricky that could not have happened if he hadn't let sin into his life. It would have been a normal phrase if he had said, "My wife brought it to me, and I ate." But he brings God into it. Or is this a reference to the fact that God's gift is so precious to him that this value is the reason he wanted to share her fate? It could be either. But now, because of the crime he has committed, which has become part of his world, the bio- and noosphere (Eve, if she had violated it alone, would not have affected the world, but only herself, but when the two of them, at that moment constituting the whole of humanity, crossed the line, they framed the whole world, everything they owned or were endowed with), his words sound in such a way that he himself no longer knows whether they are pure or deceitful. And it undercuts him. How Eve felt, however, is hard to express. She felt not only guilty, but also deceived, tricked, fooled. And naked again. And as deservedly she took the hints from her husband, whom she had seduced with her own hands.
It is interesting how the Son of God, who led this conversation and investigation, behaves. Adam told Him that he was the injured party, although he did not deny guilt. Well, God says, let's ask Eve. And He asks the difficult question - "What did you do? How did you do it? Why? Do you realize what you ended up doing, and how come you did the work of destruction? Did you realize you were doing evil, or did you think it was something right?" A simple question would be if "why" was asked, or "what did you do?". But here there is "what did you do that" or "what is it that you did", "what was it in your mind that you did?" Eve answered that when she did what she did by bringing Adam the fruit and agitating him to eat it, she thought in her mind that she was really doing something important or necessary. Her response is "the serpent seduced me and I ate." In other words - "I acted in seduction," that is, I believed the deception, now seeing that it was a deception. Lucifer in fact presented the case so attractively that she believed him, so believed it that she ate it herself, and felt that Adam should certainly try it and join in the dragon's plan. "I was seduced" and acted in that state of mind....
God is not yet drawing conclusions, and having one more link in the chain of guilt, must ask the serpent as well. However, the serpent is no longer the bearer of another's mind or its mouthpiece. Lucifer, convinced of the success of his case, did not wait for the denouement. He simply left Eve with her frustration and walked away. To stay near those who entrusted themselves to him, was not in his plans, not his business. So the serpent could not answer, Lucifer had not left him the gift of speech by inheritance. However, if the serpent could speak, the maximum he could answer would be "something came over me that made me do things I would never have thought I could do in my life". Eve now saw the serpent in its present form, too, no longer able to speak and no longer acting so mysterious and seductive, becoming again just a flying reptile as it had been before. And what did she think of herself afterward, who had allowed herself to be so deceived... and also of the one who had deceived her. I can imagine what modern people say in such cases, both about themselves and those who deceived them.
Since there was no one to ask, the serpent remained just a serpent, albeit a flying one, God pronounced in his face the curses that the Deceiver deserved, but which also affected the serpent. Lucifer, listening from afar to the words addressed to him personally, though spoken as if to the poor serpent, shuddered somewhat. He felt that he had done something worse than anything he had done so far. Before he had deceived his own kind, mature and independent beings, and here he had touched children who had barely begun their journey - how much honor is that?
The serpent himself did not get much, though he was not personally guilty. He was deprived of the ability to walk and fly, he was told that he would "walk on his belly", i.e. crawl, reptile, not fly, and eat earth, or rather ashes. Snakes, crawling since then, hardly feel deprived of anything, hardly remember other possibilities that their bodies once had, but here Lucifer heard in it rather unpleasant promises for himself. He was being stripped of his capacity for good, for something higher. He had not been able to create living things like God before, and, in fact, one of his main goals was to get as close to God as possible. But now he is told that from now on he will not be able to do anything good, no good will come from him. For him, a highly developed and gifted being, this was very unpleasant to hear. All he was given to excel at now was evil and destruction. That was hardly what he was aiming for, he would have wanted to create his own kingdom of success and prosperity, which would be an advertisement for his principles, to show how it was possible to live outside of God's rule under alternative laws or no laws at all, in complete freedom, while being "reasonable" of course. But different. In his struggle for the place of the Son of God, he came up with this ruse - freedom and other laws. He hardly saw any other way to live other than prosperity for all, he hardly wanted his kingdom to be ruled by death or ruin, violence and desolation, so he hoped he would come up with something. However, when two people argue, they are inevitably pulled in different directions, there is repulsion, as dictated by the role the parties have assumed in the conflict (or as dictated by the conflict itself), and even if they thought alike before the conflict began, their confrontation can cause them to first speak and then think differently. The distortions usually start with the initiator of the confrontation and the guilty party, and it is he who is pushed into untruth. This is how many heresies and heresies have arisen - not from the head, but from the heart, from behavior, from emotion. Any mind may at times oscillate between two versions of understanding, but it is very difficult for minds in conflict to stay united. It is only a matter of time. And so, standing in opposition to the Son of God, claiming His place, Lucifer unwillingly began to talk about his laws and orders differently than the ways and laws of God. This was also attractive, because it looked new and unusual. In order to draw the inhabitants of the worlds to him, he had to invent new things to distinguish himself from Christ. Therefore, he had to become a bearer of lies, death, deception, and there was no other way left for him, because "the Way, Truth and Life" could not be separated from God, or God was not going to change Himself, and it was impossible for the right to refuse the truth. Having chosen an alternative path, he had to break with these life-forming things as well. For God this step of Lucifer and the subsequent punishment were visible consequences of his way, but for Lucifer it turned out to be an unexpected prediction. But he felt that God was right here, and that the "reward" he received was quite natural. He could no longer be good and pleasant, nor could he build something good and eternal. Developing in deceit, he has now become a murderer, and death has appeared in this world because of his deceit. A little delayed, but it had already come. It was promised to him that the Earth would never become a showcase of his lifestyle in the sense he wanted, but it would become his anti-advertisement, an indication of his real image and lifestyle - the very thing that would forever drive away from him all those who did not follow him, if there was ever any doubt in their minds, who might not fully understand God's righteousness at once. It will be a matter of disappointment and self-condemnation for him and all those who chose him as their leader.
There is a famous phrase from "Faust", where the spirit of evil advertises itself as eternally striving for evil, but somehow good comes out of it. As if unwittingly he contributes to something like that, to progress and development. But he distorts it, as usual, and says what he wants, but not what is real. With these words he argues with that verdict. In fact, he was just striving to do some alternative good (as he presented his way to his supporters), but now it turns out that he always does evil. And even his good, if it seems so to some, always ends badly and tragically. Money from casinos does not bring good, bought love does not bring not only happiness, but even as a pleasure satisfies not everyone. And what curses are accompanied by sold... So in all honesty the demon would have to characterize himself the other way around - wanting good, but always bringing evil. But a cheater can't do that. And since then, a lot of water has leaked, and he has long been interested in doing evil, causing suffering to take as much as possible with him to the grave.
And, God added, "I will establish enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and hers. It shall stab thee in the head, and thou shalt sting it in the heel." This was a prediction of the end of Lucifer. The heel is a rather painful place on the body if anyone has ever encountered it, and the devil inflicts very significant blows and defeats on the race of the righteous, just as he was able to inflict severe suffering on Christ, but this Messiah who came out of the midst of men will inflict more severe blows, up to and including the destruction and death of Lucifer. The descendant of the woman deceived by him, the One born of her, will smash the dragon's head. He will avenge the deception and the suffering it brought, and the women and men who had to live in the world he destroyed, with unbalanced nature and order, with deception and violence. This was a prophecy about the Messiah also, who would be born of a woman, but would be at the same time a Person of a different origin, who would be able to stand on equal footing against the devil. Humans cannot do this on the scale of personality. If there were not a covering from above over the earth for all people, regardless of their righteousness or sinfulness, people would be easily enslaved by dark forces, but with this gracious covering everyone has freedom of choice and will. Unless he personally opens access for the enemy to dominate and seize the soul, but this does not happen immediately.
Some people believe that there is some kind of contract of balance between darkness and light. It is a vague notion that it is either impossible, or impossible at all, or so agreed - that there should not be only one good, as well as only one evil. That from the preponderance of one over the other something will be disturbed in the world... - but what else can be disturbed in the already disturbed world? This is basically a wrong approach, it is like thinking that it is impossible to be healthy for everyone, so that some kind of germs will not disappear[23] ... They can hardly justify their ideas, because the holy books do not give any reason to think so, especially the Bible. However, there is still some kind of "rule of the game". It is hardly a contract, rather it is from the sphere of "concepts", and it boils down to the fact that people should have freedom of choice. This means that no one should force evil or good, neither from the divine side, nor from the dark side, meaning the superpowers of angels. And this "balance" was established not by a contract between the parties, but by God's unilateral action, as He is the owner of everything by right who created everything, including Lucifer. God has limited Himself with regard to humans, He cannot force to be righteous or force salvation - that would be contrary to the principle of freedom with which humans were created. He does not do it Himself, and He has also set a limit for the dark forces beyond which they have no right to cross.
But this is about the interaction between the higher powers and people. For people themselves, since they are on equal terms with each other, there is no such rule of balance or non-violence, they can, as a rule, take care of themselves. In this they rule themselves, and in our horizontal relations the higher powers cannot interfere, but something special is required for this, for believers it is prayers, a request for protection or an agreement, as God had with Abraham. And the results may not always be obvious.
There are no other restrictions visible (though I have not tried to analyze it in depth), everything follows from this condition of freedom of choice. It is not born of a contract, it is a natural limitation of common sense - Lucifer himself recruited supporters exclusively by persuasion and deception, and if he used even the slightest force on anyone, especially on people who are not equal in power to angels, no one would understand him, and God would have the right to intervene. That's why the devil didn't push Christ off the temple when tempting Him, because it wouldn't have been His choice and He or the Father would have had the right to use force in response. The whole basic game goes around capturing the attention and interest of man, for his choice of whose side and whose principles he will choose. There are cases, of course, when dark forces have a firm grip on a person, but there is always some reason why he gets into such a dependence, and these issues are solvable, it would be the desire of the person, although it should be commensurate with the size of the problem, and if the desire to get free is small, the problem will remain. In general, though, God's representatives should also be on top of things, nominal Christianity (which is in fact only a shadow of the proper) is usually powerless here. It happens that there is no one to help, there are few people who are close enough to God and have achieved something in the field of spirit and power, but maybe there will be more successful people, if only because of these lines.
Now, after dealing with the cause of the problem, God returns to the deceived transgressors. Eve hears her sentence, which for some reason does not speak of death, but of life, though not the same as before. If the devil had actually led them into some higher realm of life, it might make sense to view the execution of the guilty, in terms of a rivalry between the gods, but can anyone say (even among the most advanced proponents of the theory that Lucifer was the benefactor of mankind) that they were actually ennobled, not deceived? What did they receive from the Tree of Knowledge? Intelligence? - they had it before, it didn't add up to anything, and the further away they went, the worse it got with the intelligence of "man the intelligent". Knowledge? - Knowledge of what? Humans have not advanced in any sciences. Rather, they lost access to the training they had before, and only much later they began to catch up, having lost almost everything they had. There was no talk of strength and power at all - it was all deception. In general, people turned out to be victims of a major diversion, and they, along with some punishment, were helped as victims of circumstances, whose lives and livelihoods were destroyed.
So Eve had her rights diminished, which in our twisted world has degenerated in some communities into more disenfranchisement, to the point of denying women the right to knowledge, to voice, to many opportunities, you name it. God said her husband would dominate her. She also received an increased psychological dependence on her husband, which seems to be at the root of his domination. Not that this dependence creates this domination, but it helps her not to feel humiliated - "to your husband your attraction is yours, and he will rule over you." Today, in our rather upside-down world, this dependency makes many women resent the very fact of its existence and leads to a revolt of feminism, leading them to deny and destroy this mechanism. The reaction, of course... It doesn't seem that this revolt is healing society or the women themselves, only creating new problems and tensions, new points of discord within man and society, destroying man himself. But what was God to do? Reward Eve with more rights? If Adam obeyed her, let him continue to obey her? When men surrender to women, something like this comes out, but is it good for the women themselves? There is no peace or good, only conflict. So it is better still to obey the supreme command.
Another punishment Eve and all women received from her was painful childbirth. I have read the statement that non-Christian and non-Judaic peoples have not had and do not have problems with painful childbirth, and that only Jews and Christians, "who have listened to their preachers, ha-ha," have this problem. Such is the power of indoctrination and self-hypnosis. And if they had thrown off their fetters, they would have forgotten about the problem of childbirth and liberated women. However, this statement is similar to how medieval scholars, following Aristotle, repeated that the spider, like insects, has six legs[24] . Spiders have eight legs, anyone could count, but for some reason this statement was repeated, contrary to the obviousness of life. So here too, following the old atheistic fictions about the relativity of religious prohibitions, they repeat that only in Semitic religions women have a problem with pain during childbirth, but none of them wants to ask obstetricians. Or from pagans, Buddhists and others. They all have pain, even those who have never heard of the punishment of women by the biblical Yahweh, it does not come from self-inflicted pain at all, but on a much deeper level. Although physiologically it is as if there is no particular reason for the pains, they are there. And no alternative beliefs or disbeliefs help here. The only thing is that the size of these pains can be stronger or weaker, depending on the health and energy of the body, and on the state of the mind and emotions. You can do something about it with self-hypnosis and self-control, which are significant factors. Knowing how to relieve or block pain can help to some extent, but only to some extent. If you read on forums of women dealing with this topic, trying to learn such self-mastery to anesthetize the process of childbirth, it will be clear what we are dealing with - with suggestion, with self-mastery or with something else beyond human capabilities. The pain did not come from suggestion, and suggestion cannot take away the pain even halfway. When God said about the pain of childbirth, He did not suggestion, He just changed something in the nature of man, or rather in the settings of the system, and it is not possible for man to eliminate this factor. And if they try to use strong painkillers (medics will never do it), then the labor itself stops, so that women have to wait for the second "run", and the fetus is overpregnant....
The attention was now turned to Adam. His guilt was in its own way greater than that of Eve. She was the victim of a rather harsh influence (though she could easily have avoided it all by simply getting away from it sooner), he was not particularly deceived, but was induced directly into unfaithfulness to God. In a sense he could not escape temptation, it was harder for him - Eve could have left the tree and the serpent, but Eve came to him on her own. It was blackmail, it was an abuse of his compassion and empathy. He must have noticed by now that sin and guilt had changed him more than he had noticed at first with the loss of the natural glow[25] of his skin. Now he had easily set Eve up for the fall, though before he had been ready to die with her. But it was impossible to escape from the state he had fallen into of his own free will[26] , even if he could suppress all the deviations in his impulses and desires that had arisen since crossing the line. He would have liked to return to innocence, that quality now proved too precious, but there was no door leading the other way. He saw, however, that God was reaching out at least in the fact that Eve's punishment was not death. What was issued as punishment was more a means of correction, albeit a painful one. A similar thing was prescribed for him. He was appointed to work, to labor "in the sweat of his brow." In overcoming the difficulties that God had henceforth "provided" for man (although the real difficulties began as if only after the Flood, and besides, it seems unlikely that God changed the nature and conditions on Earth, it was done, it seems, by the changed nature of man himself, which now had an inner discord), there was a way out of the problem of sin, to develop the qualities needed to return back to harmony with God and the universe. It was, it seems, occupational therapy. Although it was man's portion, his part to restore what was lost, this does not mean that gaining righteousness or holiness depends on man alone. It cannot happen without labor, without man's participation, but labor and effort alone does not create any righteousness. It comes down on man from above, and man must participate in it, in accepting and internalizing it, but he is not the source. To accept it and become accustomed to it, to become comfortable with it and internalize it - this is perhaps the most apt description of the divine plan for man's salvation. Everyday affairs, survival, the provision of necessities are the means of man's restoration, of his sanctification. Those who declare that not working for man is the highest good available to the elect, rebel against God's help to men, against His work in men, become opponents of God and helpers of the devil. Those who despise labor and those who work with their hands, who exalt idleness as the highest privilege, open themselves to the worst forces.
All this was appointed to him, as God emphasized, "because you obeyed the voice of your wife. Between the voice of Eve and the voice of God he chose the voice of his equal, but by doing so he rejected and humiliated the superior. This was offensive on Adam's part, and his responsibility is greatly increased by it.
Of course, as with everything, labor is not so simple. Just as it can heal and uplift when it is conscious and productive, it can also destroy if it fails to unlock a person's potential and possibilities, but is meaningless and futile. This only goes to show that one must put a lot of mindfulness (this is perhaps the most important part of occupational therapy) to make it creative rather than destructive. When work is used to subdue and suppress the will, it is mostly criminal, except to subdue the particularly violent. But for the violent and unconscious it is better to use another branch - the deprivation of bread, which arises as a result of labor, the principle "if you don't work, you don't eat". Hunger would be the best means of enlightening any however perverted and depraved criminals and unintelligent people. And to punish with labor - better not, they don't work anyway, but make others work instead of themselves. It is suitable for those who want to change, and should suit their abilities. Although going through a small school of labor that is not suited to an individual's abilities is good for everyone, for learning about their limitations as well as for development. However, work in a field that suits the individual's character, that is to his liking, is much easier and healthier and more productive in ennobling the individual than where the individual's abilities do not match the circumstances and peculiarities of the work. The highest uplifting means will be labor according to ability; there man is most effective. The involuntary communication and dependence of people on each other is manifested in the work, it also produces socialization of a person along with development. The use of man according to his abilities - his strong, not weak traits - enriches society considerably, while forced compulsion to work not according to abilities will destroy and impoverish both society and man, so that fanatics in power who like to bring a man down on an alien task or meaningless work are enemies of society and should not be allowed anywhere near the administration. It should be said that in the Soviet Union the middle management level was dominated by the sentiments of the "where we say, you go to work" type, i.e. it was as if the development of society was given over to destructive tendencies. "At the top" did not seem to understand this either, judging by what is written and spoken today about the management of the country in those times. Some voices in the scientific sphere tried to talk about it, but the gap between theory and practice, thinkers and managers, was the problem of the Soviet Union, and it is a problem everywhere.
"Thorns and thistles shall she grow unto thee" - Adam's curse involved not just labor or hard work, but a changed nature, not as benevolent and kind as it was originally created. It is difficult, if not impossible, to fully appreciate the magnitude of the change. It is unlikely that these changes took place all at once, i.e. not all of them were instantaneous, but occurred gradually. For example, the appearance of needles and thorns on many plants. Back in school we learned that these thorns are reduced leaves or branches, that is, what was a normal part of the plant, became thorns, as if preserved, curled up. This requires a change in genetics, and the Author of Nature, the Programmer of all living things, has introduced such changes[27] into the programs of living organisms, or these properties, manifesting themselves under certain conditions, have already been incorporated in them. Or maybe the manifestations of genes and their activity could be tied to man, to the noosphere, and his problems were reflected in nature? The thorns are only a small part of the changes that took place after the fall of man. It turns out that the whole nature was affected by man's unfaithfulness, why later Apostle Paul wrote that "creation submitted to vanity not voluntarily", i.e. nature got into problems because of man, and "the whole creation groans and agonizes to this day", "waiting for adoption, for the manifestation of the sons of God". The appearance of saved people, when they are many and in control, should restore nature to its original harmonious state. In practice, however, it will be a little different, after the Great Judgment.
From there, from fallen man, come changes in food chains, ecological niches, the appearance of predators, and other changes. In nature man received a clear illustration of the state that began to reign in his soul, the inner world of man and the outer world of the planet were brought into conformity... The knowledge of sin did something to the psychic nature of man, the experience of violation was extremely critical for the entire human world, for the noosphere. What did this violation do? - Man fell out of the unity of the world and God. The experience of violation was followed by man's separation from God, from his Source. Here lies the essence of what is called in Christianity the "sinful nature of man." The slightest seeming disobedience (a small ban on one tree out of many in the garden was a very effective indicator...) triggered other mechanisms of feeling and perception, separation or detachment from God creates uncontrollability of inner expectations, urges and reactions, a discord of the controlled and the controllable within man. I believe that as a result of separation from Source, human nature functions in emergency mode, in a backup mode, as in a hostile environment, why it easily interprets many signals as hostile, although it often creates this hostility itself. Be that as it may, we have within us an influence producing a deviation from sensible things. And this, strange as it may seem, is our own self, why in Christianity there is a voice for self-denial, though it is not necessary to suppress it, only to put it in its place, under the influence of a higher beginning, coming from God, as it originally was. Without this, the self is prone to transgression, and according to the particular nature and condition of the individual, these temptations are different for everyone. In yielding to these temptations man becomes corrupted, that is, he develops in the violation of norms. In the steadfastness of self-restraint a person is sanctified (not by the action is sanctified, but in these actions, because he responds to the call from above to the actions of good, because of obedience through him flows the will of God, and this current and accomplishes our sanctification - we act under His influence), develops the skill of self-control. God works to restore the connection, and this work of His in us, calling us to good and giving our actions a healthy influence, is called grace. Without grace it would be useless, and indeed impossible, but in conjunction with God's work in people, perfection is possible until harmony is fully restored in man, even in this life.
Introduction of the Atonement
Grace was shown to them, which is the name given to the plan of action that the Father and the Son devised in case someone needed to be restored from their fallen state. While they were still planning Creation, this moment was considered by them and the measures that are now required were developed. It can be characterized in different ways, from different sides, but here it is worth saying that it was a temporary suspension of the sentence, providing an opportunity and time for correction. To Lucifer and his followers was not applied what was given to people, and it is obvious that they were in very different conditions.
Adam and Eve would have to wonder why they were alive. Although they were happy about it, why do God's words seem so far at odds with His actions? He had said "ye shall die," and yet they were alive? To this question God had a ready answer. He called one of the animals grazing nearby, and when it approached, trustingly expecting a caress and a kind word, God suddenly struck it with a sword. The sight of the blood and torment of the animal, which had not expected such a thing, was terrible for the people, and they were horrified. Their punishment was not over at their sentencing, they were as if they were unharmed, and though they had suffered some losses, they were alive, and though outside Eden, they would be able to live and do all their work and study as before. And now they saw what really awaited them, what would happen to them, what God had spoken about when He warned them not to touch the tree of knowledge. They could ask, and maybe they did - "Why? Why an innocent animal?" What happened was what the words of Revelation speak of - "The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world," that is, the Sacrifice that took the place of men, by which men were enabled to return to sinlessness and life. How God answered them, I do not know, but the meaning was that "if you were punished, you would no longer be able to understand all this and be made right." They saw the value of their life, of their forgiveness. Without that Sacrifice there could be no reconciliation with God, and He had to explain to the others why people could be forgiven. And not only forgiven, but restored to their former state. And why this is impossible for Lucifer. And how pardon can be combined with justice.
Why couldn't God just forgive? Why was a Sacrifice necessary? There are many factors involved. The main thing is that God, though Lord and Master, is not a tyrant. What they think about Him, what they will think, what they can think - it means a lot for the One who created the living world endowed with reason and consciousness. Since He Himself entrusted such a great instrument of knowledge to the living, He must explain His actions so that He can be understood, especially if someone has tried to confuse others and quarrel them with Him. If the world does not understand God sufficiently, that will be a problem. But if the world, while not understanding, does not trust God, fears Him, and misinterprets His actions, that is an even greater threat. He, who loves the living, would want goodness, love and harmony to reign in His world for the happiness of all, in addition to science and arts, development and success. Anything else, opposite to goodness, would destroy and cause suffering both to the world and to Him, Who would have to see the things He created suffer and agonize, how they die, how the talents and jewels of the spirit are destroyed. That is why, in order to permanently and completely solve the problem of evil, which is the question of whether evil is anything better than His plans for the world, whether the "short way" is not better than the "long way," but safe, He allowed evil to exist and reveal itself perfectly, so He gave Lucifer the freedom and opportunity to do as he said, which is what enticed his supporters. If He had been different, He would have eliminated Lucifer long before the first lying words were uttered from his tongue. But how would He explain Lucifer's disappearance to the others? It might have been acceptable to a tyrant, but the disappearance of one would have created doubt in many. And how many would He have to eliminate then, until all would turn away from Him with curses and He would have to create a new world, having destroyed the old one? And if the new world would be on the same principles, then in time everything would go the same way again... He who sees the end from the beginning, who puts the finest abilities into living things, cannot be a tyrant. Love for all living things alone can resolve all the knots that can arise in the fabric of life. Evil is often a shortcut to some intermediate goal, but it comes at the cost of destroying whatever happens to be on the trajectory of that cut. A master will consider it an honor to find however long a path to a goal that leads to the goal without loss, but a path where anything is destroyed would be a disgrace to him because he could not find a conflict-free solution. Evil, solving one knot radically, creates many problems in the long term (and in the short term no less), and vice versa, good, going for a long consideration of the problem, has problems in the course of the solution, but in the end solves the issue radically and without destructive aftereffects.
The first circumstance of the need for Sacrifice is the very difficult situation of the experience of breaking the rules. Those who have once allowed themselves to cross the line have an experience which will sit in their memory, and sooner or later the expectation of a shorter path and an easy solution will tempt them again, and even the very rut of the habit begun will awaken the desire to repeat the experience. In time, what was once frightening may seem appealing. The experience of life is wrapped up in a person's feelings, urges, thoughts, and the tangle gets tangled up more and more, soaking in the substance of what has been done. One can swear to oneself that one will never do it again, but people often know themselves very poorly, and from the depths of the psyche the lived experience will appear as one more tempting option, and the thoughts about payback or wrongfulness of the deed may not come to one's mind, or may come separately, at another time. Not everyone sees the connection of things, especially when they live by emotions and sensations, when the mind does not connect a single sense of feeling, emotion, thought, word and deed. And it can be anything. Look at the experience of maniacs, think about whether you yourself have not had the opportunity to take such a path... You rejected the temptation, and someone not so much... In general, it was not enough to forgive a person purely legally, which is also not easy, it is necessary to somehow free him from this experience of violation, no matter how big or small.
This freedom from the power of temptation is gained by denying oneself, or rather one's false interests, sometimes a very difficult choice when a certain part of us desires otherwise. God does a great deal on His part to enable man to have this ability to overcome himself. However, until man discovers that many of his interests are not real, realizes that his nature is sometimes capricious, in general, to understand himself, a long time passes in which he will have to limit himself sometimes even in normal things. The Son of God incarnated into a human being, changed the nature of his body, and became related to mankind. He showed that for those who follow in His footsteps, everything will work out just as it did for Himself; no temptation can be too strong for man to overcome. His thirty years of life within the bounds of the commonest man shows that sinlessness is quite possible for any man. He, who was in the midst of the same temptations we all face, had to deny himself certain pleasures if they went beyond the law or goodness. In imitation of Him, in connection with Him, man receives the same opportunities that He received from the Father. Without Him, without His special help, man will find it impossible to keep the rules completely, which is why He called Himself - "I am the Way." Man himself cannot control more than two or three parameters in himself at the same time, and this is not enough to be righteous, while grace realizes the complete regulation of our whole being by all the required parameters in all the necessary places. In order to make everything that He did in our body available to everyone, to replace the experience of our sinful life with His experience of life in full harmony with Heaven, with the Father, with all the rules, it was necessary to go through death, which is inseparable from the fate of man. He said, "When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all to Myself," that is, after His death on the cross, He will become the center of mankind.
Another reason for the necessity of the Sacrifice is the problem of the conflict between justice and the desire to help, because according to justice the guilty must be punished, and it is impossible to release him from punishment (which is total destruction) without questions from the inhabitants of the Universe, it is necessary not only to explain it to them, but also to really solve the conflict between law and grace. And the Sacrifice is an ideal solution, or almost ideal if anyone wants to find inconsistencies in it, but sufficient. The Bible often uses the word "ransom" in reference to the saved and this leads many, some mockingly, others even seriously, to ask who pays the ransom to whom? The question is kind of legitimate, because this ransom relationship comes from a situation where an impoverished person is taken into the service, sometimes not far from slavery, of a richer person, but his relative must help him, pay the ransom amount for him so that he can be free again. But God does not pay the devil; there is nothing of the sort in biblical symbolism, much less reality. For the devil, the redemption of man is a threat, not a payment, and he is not given any privileges, any opportunities, except those he took Adam long ago. And is Lucifer the real owner of men? - God declares the earth to be his property with all its contents, so the devil can only dispose only among those who have chosen him as their god. Of course, few choose him consciously, but many live according to his rules, according to the principles of selfishness, serving themselves above all, and through this they fall under his rule. All men and fallen angels will one day give an account to the Master, so God does not need to pay the rebellious prince of heaven any retribution - Lucifer did not win the battle when he was expelled from the civilization of the universe, and only by deception he managed to take the formal place of the prince of the Earth, taking the title from Adam, who chose him instead of God. But where the conflict is really present is between the desire to pardon man and justice, which demands nothing less than the destruction of the transgressor, as it is written "the wages of sin is death." There should be no violation, and if a violation has appeared, there should be no violator. The judgment may be postponed, but its decision is unequivocally predetermined by the law - its "NOT" crosses out the violation along with the violator. And God takes measures to satisfy justice in advance by proposing this combination, when the person's place is taken by the Other, so that the demand of the law is satisfied, but the person remains alive. This Other must also become guilty, become a transgressor - but is not the One who created man responsible for him? I think He has the right to vouch for him and to be responsible for His vouching - that is what happened at Calvary. That is the essence of the idea of Redemption. The Surety, when a situation comes up in which His ward has violated something, is guilty along with him and is equally responsible with him. In general, if someone needs someone to pay a ransom for a person, it is Love who gives the required payment to Justice.
If we consider the Atonement apart from the understanding of surety, as if God had put Christ in our place under the penalty of the law for nothing, it seems unfair to some, that the innocent are punished for the guilty, that justice itself is violated. However, man's situation is also far from standard. What to do with the fact that a person was "helped" to get into the violators, especially with the influence on the consciousness, manipulating and deceiving, not giving time for reflection? Lucifer is a master at confusing situations and creating traps. Therefore, the answer to him is also unconventional. We can look at the details that make up this case.
First, God became a man, that is, capable and entitled both to be responsible for the human race and to influence it, pulling it out of trouble. Although He could influence from afar, this difference is still significant for people, for us His closeness is now more tangible and weighty. Christ's humanity has enabled Him as Man to stand before the judgment of retribution, and as Surety to take the wrath of the broken law upon Himself for all who will in turn agree to join His nature as He joined Himself to humanity. He provides this opportunity, we need only allow ourselves to do so, to accept His divine gifts.
Secondly, when Adam broke the law, he led all his descendants into a state of doom to a life of temptation and separation from God. It is really not fair - you are born, you have not broken anything yet, but somewhere in the genes or somewhere around there is already a tendency to go to the left. To balance such unfair state of things with something neutralizing this injustice is quite fair, and even Lucifer as if does not object, only laughs in the side that not everyone will want such protection from evil. In sum, God, through the inhumanization of his Son, has given men a protective influence, a kind of veil over the world, restoring man's oneness with God, with pristine harmony, an opportunity to "enter into his rest." Thus, as the Apostle Paul wrote[28] - "if by the offense of one many were put to death," there is no problem that life also came into the world through one Man.
Third, I don't know about you, but I had to feel guilty where the guilt attributed to me was not and could not even be. Whether it was hypnosis or the great faith of the accuser that he was right, that the accused truly intended what he was accused of, it worked, and the things my relatives accused me of made me feel as if I could actually do those things - could think, desire, plan and execute, and even as if I had already done them... Delusional, but I actually felt it. And realized that when God "made sin[29] " His Son, the latter actually felt Himself to be the Violator, guilty of every sin ever committed on earth. And in all this gravity - the consciousness of all the guilt of all men He had to die. Throughout life, every human being unconsciously uses this Sacrifice - it makes us carefree and joyful as children, enjoying being in all aspects of our lives, if conditions permit. The shadow of this most perfect Sacrifice overshadowed the planet from the beginning, but it is not automatically intended to give all people full redemption, only to delay the payment, giving the opportunity to accept the offered deliverance and stand on the Path. It is only by the choice of the person who has decided to walk this Path, who consciously fights against the inclination to evil, that the fullness of this gift is given to them. Only these people "have life in abundance". Everyone is given a reprieve from judgment, but not everyone takes full advantage of this opportunity.
Most importantly, rightly or wrongly, for those who accept this means of restoration designed by God, it works. Those who accept the gift of life transfer their guilt to the Son of God, receiving life and justification in return, along with other gifts - righteousness, sanctification, capacity for good, regeneration of soul and body. The substitution of the guilty for the One who could take away the guilt of anyone desiring to live is the means of salvation spoken of in Christianity. All this is eminently just. Many of us resent the fact that we had to be born into this imperfect world without being able to choose, so the Son of God, who created everything with His own hands, really feels responsible for this state of affairs, and so He Himself personally chose to enter into our skin, and moreover, to close the chain of all human guilt upon Himself. We cannot now say that He only looks down from heaven at our sufferings, and only sympathizes with us from afar. Thus we might speak of the Father, but not of the Son. Yet, according to the connection between them, the Father experienced no less, agreeing to this sacrifice of the Son at first, and then feeling with Him the shame of guilt, and the suffering of body and soul in that darkness when the Son hung on the cross, but He also had to pour out on the Son all the wrath reserved for evil and sin....
When a means of reconciliation became obvious to Adam and Eve, God made clothes for them out of the skins of those animals. Later they, too, had to offer sacrifices for themselves, and shuddered to see an innocent animal die by their hand for their guilt. The animal that replaced their death and punishment became also their covering, they were now clothed in it... It was innocent, and now they wore the signs of the Innocent, it was as if it had transferred its innocence to them by dying with their guilt. Illustration... These garments, accepted from the hands of God, covered their nakedness. It was only now that they felt normal and uninhibited. The subconscious mind, which had been suffering from the nakedness that had suddenly descended upon them, now calmed down. The fig leaves did not give them this peace and security, otherwise they would not have been hiding from God, for they had made their version of clothing before God came to them. The picture of the death of the animals was a shock to them, but at the end of the day they saw themselves and their situation as not hopeless. In this calmness there was no longer the arrogance that had been present in their mood at first.
The last thing they had to endure that day was leaving the Garden of Eden. They were probably sorry to leave, but someone had to repopulate the rest of the land, it was just a shame they had to leave early. In a normal state of affairs, it should have been their children leaving to repopulate the planet, but not them. All the edges of the planet were already habitable by now, though many of the trees might not be in full vigor yet, but that wasn't a problem. The rest of the land was hardly inferior to Eden in any way, it was only at the beginning of the days that it had been empty, but after a few years it had become quite suitable for providing animals and people with everything they needed.
In the conversation between the Father and the Son the words were spoken: "Behold, Adam has become like one of us, knowing good and evil. Now he can take from the fruit of the Tree of Life and eat, and he will live forever." Do you think that just knowing good and evil, or doing both together, makes God a god? Hardly anyone can seriously think that. The father of evil himself never achieved it, but he tried, that was his goal and he still pursues it. This "knowledge of evil" is only one of the traits of God, but He penetrated into the essence of different ways as the Wise Man and Creator of the universe, not as the bearer of evil together with good. The experience of breaking the law, of course, gave people the knowledge of evil, but in this there was a very weak resemblance to the gods, very distant, not equality. It should also be noted that having learned evil, they lost good... Yes, they did not become completely evil, but they were no longer completely righteous and could not be by any means except through the grace that came to their aid. This resemblance is too small, this property of God is not in the power sphere and not in the creative sphere, but in the sphere of knowledge, philosophy. The problem of knowledge of evil not in theory, but in practice, for creation is that the knowledge of evil through action and experience spoils something in the soul, dirties hands and conscience, destroys the life of man himself and his environment. Eternal life alone does not yet make a god, all of God's creation can live forever, living in harmony with Him. The problem with eternity was that those who choose to become wicked by eating from the tree of life would also be immortal, and forever then could be perfected in evil. It's hard to imagine what might have come of this if brilliant people dedicated to evil had lived on the planet - what kind of organization, with what goals, could they have created, and how many things could they have done? But God promised the transgressor a limited life span, so there is no immortality for men in their present fallen state.
God knows the essence of all things by His mind, through understanding things, penetrating into the essence of all things. The rest can also penetrate into all this, but gradually, in time gaining understanding of all that lies in the possibilities of evil, but some try to do evil, literally and immediately, jumping over steps, cutting corners, cutting knots, and spoiling themselves, their lives, and then others. In time, people would have realized evil and the difference between it and good, gaining wisdom, reaching higher levels of intelligence, for now they were still children at the beginning of their journey, but Lucifer plunged them into evil through participation in it. Evil is the way of destruction. God, knowing the meanings of both good and evil, bypassed these traps in His plans and their realization, but people, those who were involved in "cutting corners", which, in general, is the path of evil at first, in shortening and simplifying the path, they get entangled in them. Men, having been trapped by the devil through deception, came into contact with an alternative path and their moral nature was now not reliable. The contact with crime, the experience of transgression, remains in the memory, and in time this experience produces its effect. Habits arise from repeated experience. Why do living things repeat their experiences? - there is a learning mechanism in our informational nature, it is it that triggers the coiling of experience onto the fabric of life, this is how all things in us develop. Whatever the experience, our brain's analysis mechanism causes it to repeat itself, at least in thought. Some would think that a reasonable person, having experienced evil, would turn away from it, but this is true only in extreme cases, far from always. Involvement in evil is more likely to render one incapable of seeing it from the outside than to give a full comprehensive understanding of its results and properties. If the experience of violation has crept into the experience of a highly evolved being, it will tend to recur. In this somewhere lies the mechanism of the sinfulness of which Christianity speaks, ineradicable by human powers, since the former cannot be made non-existent. And there was a danger of making these people who knew evil eternal. If they were once given access to the Tree of Life after their crime, then they would claim it permanently, which would make men immortal, and perpetuate the sinner. Restricting access to the Tree of Life was actually fulfilling God's promise to "die a death", only in a delayed form. This is why there are no immortal sinners on the planet. It says that God placed at the entrance to the Garden an angel with a turning flaming sword - you wish, but it reminds me a lot of the idea of a homing laser... The further technology develops, even in science fiction (however, much of it today, if not developed, is close to it), the more interesting it is to read the Bible....
There is hardly any matter of evil, so we can understand some people who say that good and evil do not exist. I agree that there is no substance or substance of both, but as a way of realization of ideas, as a path or as a direction of action, it does exist. Human behavior contains good or evil, and they are more than tangible to any of us. For those who do not feel the pain of another or the interests of others, evil may not be noticeable, but it is perfectly visible, unmistakable in the actions towards them personally. There are, of course, those who love to obfuscate, the advocates of evil, but I have yet to encounter a flawless argument from them, there is always a pre-configured platform with already confused circumstances.
It should also be noted that evil and sin are not always synonymous. Sin is a violation of law, or more simply, a violation of justice, right, correctness. Sin is always evil, that is, pain and destruction or defilement, if not for the transgressor, then for someone else necessarily. Also, we are now speaking only of the Ten Commandments, which may be called the constitution of rightness for man. The rest of the laws, especially the laws of states, may in some cases even be a violation of divine laws, carrying with them the intention of keeping people under the hood or creating more guilty parties just in case. However, not every evil is a sin, such as the case of punishment for sin. In this sense, God also has to cause evil by punishing transgressors, but He or the instrument of punishment does not bear the guilt in this case, in these cases there is no sin, no violation of laws, and justice prevails. Those who have earned the punishment cannot blame the punishers, except for exceeding the measure of punishment. Of course, in the real world the doers of evil and the wicked are far advanced in shifting the blame to others, in avoiding punishment, in delaying it as long as possible, multiplying the suffering of others, but all this, with its accumulated interest, will also be brought to the judgment. Many people think that if punishment for sins does not happen immediately, it is ineffective or wrong, but when that time comes, no one will be hurt, and to punish evil instantly does not fit the paradigm of salvation, then no one would survive at all. Besides, a person always lives in "now", not "yesterday" and not "tomorrow", no matter how much some of us would like otherwise, and when the time of reckoning comes, it will not be late, it will be on time - the culprit will feel everything that is due and he will not be able to rejoice in all the previous delay, as it will remain in yesterday's day. Therefore, the justice of the Court and the Judge should not be doubted. But if anyone wants the transgressors to be reached sooner, they should become influential and strong in righteousness, so that they may be better able to persuade those who are too inclined to evil. No, not to destroy them personally, by no means, but only to be more persuasive in restraining evil by word, influence and example, and if it is possible also by action, it is good. After all, many are inclined to evil by the influence and example of others, without understanding the essence of what they do, and others only because someone conveyed to them the idea that righteousness is weakness and an ungodly occupation. No, that's not true at all, it's someone painting that kind of religion to the world and someone believing that picture, but it's not true. There are many possibilities to reduce the evil in the world, up to the level of hardly magic (I'm not talking about magic, but spellcasting). Man must evolve his nature to higher levels. There are religions that make and portray man as small, but there are also religions where man is obliged to conform to the highest expectations as a son or daughter of God, obliged to evolve and reach all possible heights.
The Tree of Life was one of the trees of the garden, they all belonged to them, and Lucifer could think that humans would still have access to everything, including the Tree of Life. The humans might have thought the same thing, but God, when he warned them of doom for violating the test, had this gift in mind as well. The guards placed at the tree made it impossible for those who fell under the curse of death to regain life and health from its fruit and leaves.
The high resilience and vitality of early humans ensured centuries of health for many generations. Before the Flood, although people went wild and abused food and all kinds of pleasures, there are no descriptions of disease or degeneration. But after the Flood, as mankind wallowed in pleasure, vice and evil, and as the weak were deprived of necessary resources in a world depleted by the Flood, degeneration increased. However, when somewhere people took up the mind and restricted harmful practices of at least eating and drinking, there was a revival of the general level of health, although the former pre-Flood level was far away. Of course, no good health in itself can cancel what God said to Adam, as well as to all his descendants - "From dust you were taken - to dust you shall return".
After Eden.
For a while after the migration outside the garden, life went on as it could have gone on in the best possible scenario - as if nothing bad had happened, children were born, growing and developing. Was sin noticeable then, in the early days? Only a little, and that only for a sensitive person, inclined to reflection, to tracing the paths of thoughts and desires in him. Visible evil, like violence, murder, open debauchery and the like, did not and could not exist at that time. Even if something was wrong, it did not come out. Rather, it was the sacrifices offered on various occasions that reminded us of sin. Ever since the first sacrifice was offered as a sign that a man was on the verge of death and another creature died in his place, it became a necessity and an obligation as a sign of following the Way of Salvation and also a sign of being a follower of God. There was only one Path that could deliver every person and all mankind from the problem of death. This Way had been pointed out to them from the beginning.
This way of substitutionary sacrifice will probably seem wrong, unfair, or even pointless to some people. If only because the perpetrator remains alive and, as if, can continue to sin as he likes, and then sacrifice again and escape punishment again. However, in this regard, I hasten to reassure - for such people, who do not respect the Sacrifice, do not have repentance and abuse pardon, for them there is no this Way (they go some other way), about them it is said that "there is no more sacrifice for sins[30] ". That is, if someone decides to go the way of "sin and repent" (i.e. deliberately doing sin, allowing it, counting on the subsequent pardon), then they are not the people of God, but at best this is foolishness from ignorance of Scripture, at worst such people were called "Nicolaitans" in Revelation, those who combined sin and righteousness together. And about the justice of the substitutionary system itself I will say only one thing for now - if it had not been for it, for this system, when the Son of God took the punishment of men upon Himself, and the animals were but a reflection of this His intention, men would have been doomed, there would not have been the slightest hope, and either they would soon have died out themselves, or God would have destroyed them in the same day, as, in fact, should have happened, if it had not been for the pardon. God did not want to destroy them so easily - not only were they dear to Him as His children, but they were also very meanly "helped" to fall, and it would not be fair to punish them for someone else's tripping. So God also had the right to help them, looking also "unfair" to help them get up just as they had been helped to fall.
When Cain was born, Eve said, "I have acquired a man from the Being," and this word "acquired" became his name. The first man born on Earth was realized by his mother as the acquisition of a new, something created, probably unique. A new being, not being her, but coming through her... The word "kanakh" means both acquisition and creation, so the first blacksmith or metalworker is called Tuval-Kain. He, Cain is the firstborn, and in his line of descendants are amazing masters of his craft. However, he has proven to be somewhat unworthy of his primacy. He was so demanding of his brother that he killed him when his brother was suddenly better at something than he was.
Little is said about Cain's lineage, but some conclusions can be drawn from Tuval-Cain's profession. Man is created with higher faculties than animals. He has at least one more dimension than they do. His hands are capable of creating things. This is a great and very important fact. There are other abilities that set him apart as the highest being among the living things on the planet, but man's labor and ability to create things reveal the purpose of man's nature. And also man needs INSTRUMENTS to create. Man, creating material or non-material objects, creates also technology, recipe of production. These things are not necessary for survival, at least they were not necessary at first, while there were favorable environmental conditions, but they reveal man's abilities, and therefore I conclude that tools and technologies are part of our nature. Without them, man is unrevealed, his potential will remain unrealized. And what does the need for tools, instruments and technology say about the very God who created such a Man?
Tools are by no means always like human hands, they are usually quite unlike anything in man, but nevertheless they are all extensions of man. But tools do not grow on trees, they require materials that are available in the body of the Earth to make them. All these metals and other elements, having very different properties, give the widest set of possibilities, originally were planned and laid down by the Creator. The mind of man gives the ability to design the right tools and calculate the procedures and handling of materials, creating technology - and all of this knowledge and effort is sacred because it is all originally part of the human project. Religion that wishes to conform to God's design must take this into account.
It is well known that Abel's sacrifice was accepted, but Cain's was not. In what way it was expressed, it is difficult to say. It could have been the fire descending on the sacrifice, it could have been the smoke from the sacrifice rising straight up to heaven or drifting to the earth. It doesn't matter what the acceptance was, they themselves were well aware of what had happened. What matters is what caused it to happen and how Cain behaved. It is clear that it is about the sacrifice itself, and this is directly related also to the way it was offered by each of them, with what meaning. The sacrifice of the animal meant, on the part of the offerer, a recognition of himself as one who needed help from God. The sacrifice of the fruit that Cain brought meant gratitude for the gifts, but there was no redemptive meaning in this type of sacrifice, it did not indicate that the one who brought it needed help. He wants to show that he is good enough on his own and does not need redemption or salvation. It is as if he is already fit for heaven or for restoration in the garden of Eden. He has not eaten from the tree of Knowledge, he has not violated anything of God's orders or laws. However, there is something not so lofty behind this. Yes, at that time man was not yet depraved and corrupt, had not yet developed weakness before all temptations, so it was possible for a long time not to notice in himself any inclination to sin, which for our time would seem absolute perfection and holiness. But he was not a saint, judging from the storm that broke out in him when his natural goodness was not accepted by God. Christ made it clear to His disciples that "unless your righteousness surpasses the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees (when people seem to be quite good in themselves, doing nothing wrong, especially in the eyes of people who do not see their inner state), you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. It is not just "goodness" that is needed, there must also be a heavenly component to this good character, and without it a person is sooner or later revealed as a transgressor. For God it is already evident that man lives "on his own yeast", without the heavenly component, and is a stranger to truly righteous qualities. Evil has not yet manifested itself or unfolded in him, but it is only a matter of time.
The fact that Cain did not see animal sacrifice as a necessity shows his disagreement with the Creator who had set this order of things. He may have been resentful of his father and mother because they had set the whole world, including him, up for temptation. Had it not been for their sin, he, Cain, would not have been born into this world that had lost its perfection, but into a perfect Eden. By refusing to offer the proper sacrifice, he rebels against God and His way. And the fact that he dares to openly disobey, to declare some alternative path, speaks volumes about what is going on in his soul. If he were simply in doubt, he would speak up, and then his parents or visitors from heaven or even God Himself could help him, but he does not.
Does anyone think that Abel had sheep and was greedy to give his brother one? There were plenty of animals around for sacrifice, and if he had been willing, even if his brother refused to exchange with him or just give him what he needed, he would have had no trouble finding what he needed. And Abel was only a shepherd of sheep, not their owner.
The kind of occupation they chose hardly has any influence on their relationship. In those paradisiacal conditions (and the pre-flood Earth was all close to paradisiacal conditions), doing anything was not a condition of survival or success. These occupations of theirs were more of a school for the development of ability than business or livelihood. If Cain's enmity had any other roots, such as the idea that the sheep trampled the field where Cain grew his plants, then it would have been at least somehow reflected in the Bible. However, there is none of that, the whole conflict is precisely in their beliefs. It was Cain's idea of self-sufficiency for himself or man in general that led him to offer a sacrifice of gratitude for what he already had, denying the need for anything he lacked, and as a result of this his sacrifice was not accepted.
Further developments made him from a rebel to a murderer. He could not forgive his brother for his success, for he was more righteous and successful than he was. If Abel had been the eldest, the problem might not have arisen, but he, Cain, was the eldest. In many communities, a difference of a couple years is enough for the older ones to view the younger ones as servants, whether in a family or in groups organized not by kinship but by yard or school. I am not ready to consider this topic, whether it is good or bad, I myself grew up in a society where for leadership or supremacy it was necessary to have a superiority of five years. Plus, the older ones were usually expected to take care of the younger ones in a parent-like manner in our society, and with that came more friendly bonds that precluded enslavement and excessive cruelty. Normally, of course - when they say "people are kind" they don't mean everyone in the crowd so addressed, but normal people... And that was good and right. It's hard to imagine what the norms are where the younger must serve the older unquestioningly. Perhaps it's a legacy of someone's particular influence, with whose hand such treatment of the younger has become entrenched and reproduced across generations, but in most cultures a small age difference between peers does not usually lead to superiority status. Groups with larger age differences tend to have their own social circles that interact in small ways that don't lead to large-scale problems. Cain here appears to have tyrannical tendencies. The younger one has gotten ahead of him and this is extremely, totally unacceptable to him. In one translation it looks like Cain said to Abel - "Let's go out into the field." And there, in the field, he killed him.
It seems to me that he had no original intention to kill his brother, but at first he tried to influence him, inclining him to his own way, demanding support for his ideas that people should not depend on the Messiah for their salvation, that all normal people should be allowed into life without additional obligations and conditions. He convinced Abel that he, as the older brother, was entitled to some authority and command over the younger. He spoke to him, but Abel does not appear to have agreed and yielded, for he was right in fulfilling the statutes of sacrifice given by God, and God approved his sacrifice in which he expressed his dependence on God for righteousness. He found himself killed, but he died unbroken and not even doubting. Would that Eve or Adam had shown similar steadfastness in their day! Now Cain pursued the work of the seducer, and failed. True, because the former tempted had been unfaithful, the pressure on the first winner was stronger than usual, incompatible with life... Sin manifested itself in everyday life and began to gain strength... Cain began to use force when words were not convincing, and could not stop his pressure, maddened by the refusal to submit. This is how bullies think - how dare he resist, he must, he must be afraid, just a little more, and he will give in, he can not disobey, just a little more to push! He only wakes up when Abel stops answering. And after that, he doesn't look remorseful in the slightest. Maybe he's still arguing with his living brother, he's not dead to him, he's still standing his ground. Cain did not hurry to realize what he had done, though from some of his words it was clear that he was aware of what he had done, but at the same time it was as if he could not even imagine how it could be otherwise, how he could accept his younger brother's rebellion, how dare he! Though he himself is much younger before his parents or God, but for some reason he does not consider himself indebted to them, but Abel was indebted to him personally - why should he be? Parents and God are distant and lofty matters, but in front of him there was his own peer, from the same group, to whom he had a special account, which, however, no one had ever charged to him. The toughest one, which was not to be. I don't know whether later in his life Cain realized what he had done to his brother, the wrongness of his demand, or whether he still kept it from him until the end. The return to God was not closed to him, but he closed it from himself.
God tried to stop him when Abel was still alive. When Cain was walking around in his frustration with God and life in general because of the non-acceptance of his sacrifice, God came to him (by the way, how great is His involvement in man's life, His condescension and interest), and spoke to him: "Wherefore art thou grieved, and why hast thou cast down thy face?" - He begins with him like a skillful psychologist. He speaks not to Abel, who seemed to be more suitable for Him, being more faithful than Cain. But He tries "not to reject the rejected one either," as it is written of Him. God gives Cain an excellent chance to stay on the good path by trying to reason. Cain, however, does not give any response to these attempts to appeal to his reason, apparently remaining deaf. Note - Cain's sacrifice is not accepted by God, but God speaks to Cain himself and wants to bring him back to his sensible beginnings. Hearing no response, God continues, "When you do good, you lift up your face, don't you?" leading him to believe that he is in sorrow because of a wrong idea in conflict with reality. Cain again answers nothing, though God's penetrating gaze shows him that he is seen through. Of course, these words were spoken in time, and Cain somewhere realized his wrongness. But perhaps he was too much absorbed in himself, in the feeling of himself, his complete perfection, and thought that everything connected with the Path to the divine original lost harmony was close at hand. It seemed to him that he had to go back through the same door through which he had come here, and he did not want to admit that the way back was much longer, and that he had to go forward, but not backward. Somehow he did not see how powerless human nature itself was to rid itself of the power of discord and decay that had penetrated mankind, which soon came out in horrible and ugly scenes of violence against those who were more righteous than he. And had it not been for the grace of God shown to his parents and all their children, they would have been long gone from the world. Sin, penetrating through one act into the nature of man, was not a simple matter, though it seemed very simple to Cain - after all, man is capable of controlling himself, and how is it that there is no shortcut back?
Yes, man was able to control himself then, and he is still able to control himself now, but it is not complete self-control - having lost the connection with God, man lost that control from God, which made him perfect in goodness and righteousness. Later man began to lose, as capriciousness developed, also what he had, losing with it his humanity in some degree of degradation. But our self-control in itself, even if complete, does not create holiness or perfection. This control can only control actions, but is that enough?
I've seen it in a movie, but the scene is real - in an acting college, students were divided into pairs and given the exercise of saying the phrase "I will love you" to each other. You should have seen their faces when, unable to avoid it, they had to say it in the eyes of the person standing opposite them. However, try this exercise yourself, and after that the task of clapping one palm will no longer seem so difficult... The impossibility lies in the fact that love cannot be started consciously (we are talking about erotic love, other kinds of love are free from this natural limitation) - if people are not compatible in their nature, then love between a man and a woman is impossible. One can be infatuated, but only for a while, one can live one's whole life, but without personal happiness. And those who assured the teacher standing across from them that they would (that is, they did not love him or her now, but would start soon) love him or her, realized the absurdity of the situation, that they were talking some great nonsense or a lie. The more they repeated it, the more doubts in their words appeared on their faces, and the more they tried to assure themselves and their partner in what they were saying. However, the teacher's task was (a movie from old times and about even older times) to make them feel the limitations of reality and try to break through it, to compose such an image that the audience, and maybe the artist himself, would believe in it. So, self-control has no power here - you can take care of a person without loving him, show humanity even hating him, you can make the life of another person devoid of problems and easy, but it is impossible to create for yourself a disposition of the heart towards someone who is not suitable for you (again, this is only about erotic feelings). Although you can try to deceive yourself, but if you ever get wise, you will realize that you were doing the wrong thing and your pretending to yourself will not make you or the other happy. No, happy we should try to make everyone around us happy, but within limits. If personal happiness is impossible because of choosing the wrong couple, we should still make the most of what is possible. Realistically that phrase should not have been "I will love" but "I will do my best to make you happy"... That would have been a realistic way of putting it. But the teacher knew what he was doing, it was probably an exercise in discovering the limits of what is possible for an artist, that there are some things that cannot be crossed.
It is not enough to do a good deed, it is not enough to keep oneself from temptation - who can make it so that these temptations do not exist at all? I mean not the circumstances of temptation, but the inner attraction to those things that are destructive? Usually a person is able to control two or three parameters of his state, but to control his state completely requires holding an order of magnitude more. That is the problem - it is beyond man's ability; you can have righteousness and hold it, but you cannot create it. That is why God has offered His help to mankind, grace, without which self-control has no final meaning, does not bring the problem to a solution. This is the essence of grace, God's help, which consists, among other things, in controlling the other parameters of the soul and spirit that are beyond our control. It is an extraneous influence and action, not ours, it is an external force that guides and keeps us on the path of goodness, truth, all that is just, pure and true. A righteous man is righteous not so much because he controls his actions and governs himself completely, but because he is under the influence of God, under His covering, which guides everything else in man. And his part is not to get out of this heavenly influence, and if he does, to get back in before it is too late. Cain was very much mistaken in all this, rejecting the gift of God, and it was not an inability to understand, but merely an emotional rejection of the gift offered.
And Cain also heard a warning and advice from God, very timely: "If you do not do good, sin lies at the door. It draws you to itself, but you have dominion over it." Don't let it take hold of you. In the position of choosing between the bad and the good ways, one does not stay long, it cannot last too long. The good Cain did not do good, and in regard to Abel he already had a plan to speak firmly to him, anger already clouding his eyes. He was ready to stumble over the obstacle lying under the door[31] , so God warns him and asks him not to do as his wickedness advises him, but to take control of the matter. How Cain took His warning is known.
Once again Cain was not left alone, God came to him again, not with advice, but with a question. Perhaps at this time Adam and Eve had not yet found Abel's body, or perhaps they did not yet know that he was gone. God asked Cain - "where is Abel your brother"? He portrays the matter as if He was looking for Abel and couldn't find him, or had just arrived and was looking for him, and was asking the first person he met where to find him. Perhaps Cain realized that God knows everything perfectly well. Or maybe he did not think so, because at that time angels and God were often among people and were familiar, and were perceived as if on a par with themselves. Now God appears to us in the light of all that is known about Him, omniscient and omnipotent. It is true, of course, but the way God presented Himself to the first people could make someone think that He might not know something, if He asks... He looks for them, "Adam, where are you", then he asks, as if guessing by some signs - "have you eaten from the forbidden tree", and now - "where is your brother". Cain apparently does not know the feeling of dying, weakness, defeat - from the outside it is very difficult to guess about it, when you yourself are full of strength and energy, and especially anger. So he has no sense of the significance and meaning of what he has done. He had not yet seen how his parents would react to Abel's death. He had seen the death of the sacrificial animals, and theoretically understood that something like that happens to them when the power goes out of them, he saw their fear and pain, but instead of realizing that it was his pain, fear and death they were taking on, experiencing it all instead of him, he wanted to undo their suffering. He wished they wouldn't die - kind of a great, wonderful wish, only what would save people then? To be worthy themselves, sinless, so that others would not have to die for their sins, so that there would be no need to save them? It's a little late, actually. I mean, one should live such a life, but it doesn't get rid of sinfulness. But wanting to save both the animals and the future Messiah from destruction, he himself became a murderer, and now he tried to avoid the realization of it, did not allow himself these thoughts.
That is why God approaches him, not to find out where Abel lies, but to help Cain understand the meaning of what he has done. What is God's condescension and care even for a murderer. Do not think that He is indifferent to Abel's death, but Abel cannot be brought back now, and Cain can still be tried to save, especially all those who will become victims of bandits, murderers and robbers, followers of Cain. But Cain is stubborn and stubborn, as if he had learned it long and successfully, although not so long ago he thought that he would never allow any evil to come into the world through him, so as not to make it difficult for the Messiah, so that no bloody sacrifice would have to be made for his, Cain's, sins. But the sacrifice was needed not only for the sins he had committed, but because of the very fact that the world was a rupture with God, and people needed to be rescued from this situation.
He mockingly replies "I don't know." He says, "Am I my brother's keeper?" In other words, as in "carries my brother around somewhere and I'm supposed to know all this"? Cain showed the worst traits of Lucifer, though perhaps even Lucifer would have shrugged it off, accusing his followers of profanation of his ideas, but in this the God's predestination was already realized, that Lucifer will not get anything good from his capture of the Earth, and only evil will come from him and his followers, no matter how hard they try to do something good. Only evil will turn out to be good, but good will turn out to be bad... And this is not God's will, not that He cursed Lucifer's deeds in this way on a whim, but it is only a revelation of the essence of what life without Source is, an inevitable consequence. He designed life, and it was impossible for Him to invent a reality in which evil would be good and vice versa, or righteousness would be unnecessary for a non-destructive universe. Lucifer and his followers had to be convinced of this by experience. They all felt intuitively that they were going into unkind, wrong, bad and evil, also they were warned about it from the side of God, but they brushed it off. Someone may not have understood, but Lucifer understood that God is right, but for a number of reasons, independent of reason, in addition to reason, he decided to achieve his own will. But this is a separate conversation.
Seeing that hints do not lead Cain to productive contact, because he avoids thinking in the right way, God directly tries to reason with him - "What have you done? Your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground[32] ". Maybe a direct "what have you done?" with all the emotionality of that question would make Cain feel that he had done something creepy and horrible? In a way it helped, Cain was not yet fully entrenched in his alternative path, in his self, his resistance held more on his unwillingness to realize what he had done than on his confidence that he was doing the right thing by defying God. But having begun to speak plainly, God no longer asks, and even if Cain had found something to say, it was no longer necessary, he had not seized the moment and lost an opportunity. Now God determines the punishment. However, this punishment is surprisingly not harsh, he is not asked as a murderer. There is something subtle here, not a brutal imprisonment or deprivation of life, but a message that by his action he has been placed in a semblance of an "out of the game" position. The earth, he is told, will not give him its power in her works-and this to him, a farmer! Such a lenient punishment is determined because he did not seek murder as a means to get his way and did it in a heat of passion, not calculating the consequences, for the first time facing such depths of his ego, which gave out unexpected scenarios of behavior. In his later life, Cain does not show any traits of a murderer or rapist, he simply continued on his path of independence from God's prescription for salvation, believing man to be capable of doing so. He may have later found the path he killed his brother for following to be the right one, but he clearly missed his children. Not only did they neglect the offered opportunity to return to righteousness, but they did not even follow their father, who tried to live a righteous life on his own terms, without redemption, without grace. I am, of course, here thinking of Cain perhaps too well, assuming that he was consistent in his ideas, but if he did lead a worse life of open disobedience, it would be as a consequence of his self-made way, refusing to follow God in all but part, and that hardly changes anything in his fate or in our attitude toward him.
His life was spared also because Cain had to see where his theory of the self-sufficiency of men, of the "sufficient goodness" of man, was leading. This is very similar to God's treatment of Lucifer, who brought evil into the world in the form of the desire for power and his lies, and who was also allowed to unfold all his proposals, with which he lured and deceived his supporters, so that all could clearly see their fragility.
Cain had ceased to be rude and to persist in deaf denial; now, without disputing the fact of the crime and the justice of the punishment as a whole, he only complained that it was too heavy, that it was "impossible to bear". And this after his precious life had been preserved! He had a sudden fear that anyone he met would now kill him. There was a recoil from the excitement and rage; now he was no longer sure of himself. Hitherto he had seemed to himself immaculate in every movement and action, everything on earth, animate and inanimate, smiled at him. It seemed to him that Paradise life had hardly ever disappeared, and the Garden of Eden was not far away, and they could look into its sacred territory. But after God's words that the earth had now cursed him for his brother's blood, that it would no longer give him strength. Something in him trembled, he realized and felt that all his beauty and strength in him did not come from himself, it was all the forces of the earth and the environment in him gathered in such a way that he lived and enjoyed, but his being was very much dependent on the world around him, and those bonds were not so hard to break. Now his stability faltered. Common sense finally got through to him, and death inflicted on another suddenly appeared to him from a different perspective. He remembered that justice exists, and that it requires retribution. God did not punish him with death, but he thought that others might not forgive him. And when he became weak without strength from food, anyone would be glad to do to him what he had done. Again sin showed its reverse side, destructive to the mind and soul - to lead the fear-deprived fool into the mire and there open another door of consciousness, through which terror and doubt burst in....
What does God do and say about this? Even though Cain is a murderer, people do not look at the circumstances of the case when judging him, judging only on the basis of one parameter of the situation, that he "killed" his brother. It is certainly true, he realized it himself, although not immediately, but it is worth thinking about all the components of the case. One should do so in any case when one has to understand, especially when it comes to the court and the verdict. In this even good people sometimes sin of total indiscretion. Am I now acting as Cain's lawyer? By no means, it is very good advice to anyone who, in religion or in life, tries to judge good and evil. With little or no effort, few people can get by, and when it comes to accomplishing anything, it's impossible to accomplish anything at all, and if you want to be right, you have to think. To say that someone is guilty without looking into the case - what would you call a judge who judges the people in his charge with such an approach? But when judging Cain or Judah, you must look into the matter fully, otherwise your judgment cannot be sound and correct. Some people are afraid of the justification of people already condemned by the Bible, thinking that if Cain is not as guilty as they thought before, then it is as if he begins to whitewash himself... False fears - both Cain and Judah are guilty, even if not as guilty and not as guilty as they were attributed to them, but to live with a false, with a knowingly incomplete judgment, which does not lift a finger to understand, is not a good thing.
Some, even many, believe that religiosity and righteousness consist in judging evil. That this is the main, if not the only, function of the righteous. And, accordingly, they are afraid of under-judging someone, thus losing righteousness... And that it is better to condemn too much than to condemn not enough. But this is, to put it mildly, superstition, not religion.
I think in reading this account of Cain you didn't find him whitewashed, he just turned out not to be the one who had premeditated murder, but does that excuse him? Instead we see how he came to it with his seemingly good idea going against the established order of things. And it's not a good or innocent path at all. How often do you yourself with a seemingly good idea do unwitting harm without noticing it? And his teachings and example for his descendants turned out to be even ruinous, leading to the Flood, to a global cleanup, extremely horrible, but it is worth thinking about the size of the problems that caused it!
So God reassures him, oddly enough. If Cain had been a premeditated murderer, the conversation would have been different. But a premeditated murderer does not instantly become a humanist (and Cain professed just that, that man can manage salvation without God, without grace, without redemption, that "everything is in man"), and the events between Abel and Cain developed quickly, except that for a while Cain "nurtured" a grudge. God tells him not to worry about his life, even giving him a sign to protect him from imaginary attacks, just as a man suffering from persecution mania can be given some objects by a doctor to "protect" him, and that he will be perfectly safe under this protection. Cain fears that someone will take revenge on him, but it will not be long before there are those among the living who are capable of killing for nothing. There will not soon be those among his children who will be able to kill for no reason at all... Already in this fear of Cain's future generations there is self-judgment - if he killed his brother for no reason at all, there will surely be those who will want to do the same for a sufficient reason. Is he so wrong? To reassure him, God said that if anyone wanted to kill Cain, he would be avenged more than twice as much as for just killing him. Did that reassure him, though? Does he seem to see someone who wants to avenge Abel, who will not be deterred by a greater punishment? After all, Cain himself did not pay for it with his life, so his murderer would not be punished with death either? A weak consolation God gave him, very weak... And that was Cain's lot in this life, unless he was willing to find rest in God, who seeks to restore man from every point of fall. Did he find that rest or did he eventually settle down without it? Did he become accustomed to living with guilt, did he invent "how to live a thousand years without peace in his soul" or "live life harmoniously outside of divine harmony"?
Cain could not live in these places where his parents lived, probably not so much because his lot was nomadic life (because the earth lost its power where he worked it?) as because he could not look his parents in the eye. He took one of his sisters, who sympathized with him and would not give up on him (life went on), and went somewhere to the east. This place is called the land of Nod, that is, "the land of Wandering," but it is hardly a place to be found today. The earth as it was before the flood has changed a lot since then. Especially after the rifting and massive continental plate shifting that raised the Caucasus and the Himalayas and many other mountains, has badly creased and distorted the face of the planet.
Lamech
For a long time nothing special happened, children were born, grew up, became parents in their turn. But here in the family of Cain there appeared a personality that drew the attention of the chronicler. Lamech took two wives. In those times, though not all people aspired to be faithful to God in all matters, but, on the other hand, possessing strong enough mind and good perception, were not in a hurry to leave the good way, seeing various bad consequences, and not being so lost that for the sake of pleasure to destroy the life of themselves and others, especially since the pleasures of forbidden ways did not exceed qualitatively normal ones (pre-flood perversions began later, and the example of Lamech was also a contribution to that piggy bank). Love and harmony of life was a great value for all living yet. And now this Lamech takes two wives at once. In the eyes of the people this is a clear violation of the good way, the statutes of life, on which so much depends. These are not empty rules invented by man, which people later learned to make up and abolish, but real rules of real life safety. However, Lamech clearly has some kind of justification for daring to do this, and for convincing these women to share his fate. It is very likely that he was thinking about Abel's death and the imbalance, since one of the women was always doomed to be alone. It is possible that in this way he wanted to restore the balance of men and women, taking upon himself the curse of the broken harmony, but the next generations would be free from the consequences of the murder and all women would have their man. The name of the second wife, Cilla, means "dark" or "twilight," perhaps an indication of her unenviable fate among men. The name of the first is Adah, "ornament" or "pattern." It is as if Lamech wants to use the pattern of the one to decorate the life of the other, balancing the injustice of what his forefather Cain once did.
However, even though the goal is good, the deed itself cannot be normal, and he realizes this himself in his speech called the Song of Lamech. He explains to his wives that although he is committing a crime, no one should punish him for it. In the usual translations his speech sounds like a confession of murder, although he is not seen as such, but if we understand his speech in a different way, it sounds quite different - "have I killed a man for my wound, a young man for his ulcer?". He as if says that if Cain killed, and the punishment for his murder was sevenfold, then for the murder of him, Lamech, who only took two women for himself, that is, who committed a rather small offense, incomparable to murder, the punishment should be seventy times stronger. That is, there is no point in punishing him with death for a minor offense compared to murder. Especially since he is just trying to live for Abel, for two, "for himself and for that guy". And interestingly, his firstborn son, Javal, becomes a professional shepherd, continuing the work of his murdered relative. Probably, many people fiddled with animals, but Lamech's children, all three mentioned in the chronicle, become masters of their craft, they far surpass the others, setting the standard of excellence for centuries.
Flood
In the Bible, suddenly there are "sons of God" who intermarry with "daughters of men". For many who consider the Bible to be a collection of myths and fairy tales, it is natural to think that this is a contact between the heavenly beings and mankind, but the picture is different if we see that this is not a fairy tale or a fabrication of the myth-driven mind. We have just said that Cain went to live in other places, and far away from possible avengers for Abel's blood, so that the distance between them was considerable. There was a significant difference between these groups in the area of upbringing, at least there should have been. Cain passed on to his children many things, but not the way of God, at least a limited version of it. This caused their character to differ significantly at first. Seth's children were trained to be God's people, and if one wanted to draw a distinction between them, it was self-evident - some followed God's Way, others their own, not bothering much with any rules. Therefore, the "sons of God" - in them it is easy to see the young men of the tribe of Seth, who in time, losing their spirituality, noticed some differences between the women of the tribe of Cain, when their borders began to touch in time. Though labeled "sons of God," the descendants of the camp of Seth were in practice little better or more spiritual than the Cainites after a time. The common inheritance of problems of sinfulness, or of something very important and subtle in man being damaged by the experience of evil, led to the same problems. And although sinfulness was tried to be resisted among the "sons of God," deviations from the Way accumulated and manifested themselves there as well.
It is possible that the development of human society would have proceeded at a normal pace without such a destructive rampage of willfulness that turned into debauchery, but marriages between different families that had lived apart for some time led to a surge of vitality and strength in the mixed offspring. When the isolation caused by territorial distance and different upbringing was over, the joining of the "pure lines" gave a marked increase in vitality, which was reflected in the birth of giants, taller and stronger than the parents. In those days, when men were much healthier and stronger than all subsequent generations, degeneration was not severe, it is not likely that the fifth or sixth generation from Adam was much weaker than Adam and Eve, but the joining of different lines, for some time kept in isolation, produced a marvelous effect. And these giants felt like gods, and the rest of us looked up to them in a similar way. It is difficult to say where it began, from the right of power and impunity or from spoiling because of admiration of their abilities, but they, brought up by mothers from not too faithful and obedient to the rules of life (it is said that it was the descendants of Seth who chose women from the family of Cain, not vice versa), went much further in satisfying their desires and passions. Looking at them, the others strove not to yield to them. And, as it is written, the earth became corrupt, "all flesh perverted its way"....
How much time elapsed before this explosion of moral decay is unknown. It is possible to estimate by the time of the Flood itself, because if the moral decay had occurred earlier, the Flood would have occurred earlier. It is possible to estimate that from seven hundred to one thousand initial years people lived calmly, almost righteous in comparison with the subsequent time. But if that righteousness had been true, there would not have been a decline in morals, but the lack of spirituality opened the door to spiritual degradation. Humans influence each other, imitation and copying is built into us, and it is the greatest mechanism of influence. It is powerful for both righteousness and unrighteousness. It's about the number of imitators, who the majority will follow and the number of people who set the tone. But it is also about the strength of character of those who set the tone in society. If there are many who consider themselves righteous, but they are not strong and not strong in spirit, then they do not want to imitate, and few people will follow them. And they are bound to be weak if within themselves they consider those who live for themselves and for pleasure to be happier. If they envy the lovers of pleasures, they are sure to fall into decadence.
Something like this happened to the children of Seth, called "sons of God", something like this happened to young people in the Soviet Union, when they thought that "over there" they lived happier only because of the availability of more pleasures. Who could then show people that happiness does not depend on the number of varieties of sausage... But even those who understood something decided that pleasure could at least somewhat replace happiness. Even the propagandists could not be convincing, apparently they thought the same as everyone else
At one time, Yaroslavsky-Gubelman convinced Stalin that religion must necessarily be shortened, that it could not be compatible with Soviet ideas, although this was a diversion that destroyed the future of the USSR - many people believed that one could not only believe in God, but also keep the commandments... But you can't blame him entirely, because a weak religion might not have kept the morals of the Soviet Union up to par either, and there would likely have been another decline of Christianity as happened in the West, another version of Babylon[33] , so God allowed religion in the Soviet Union to be suppressed, in the underground it was better preserved from distortion.
In that world, in the midst of great moral decay, there was one man who became a definite iconic figure by his impeccable life - Enoch. It is said of him that he "walked before God." This is usually said to imply purity, unspottedness, drawing from the experience of Adam, who, when he fell, began to hide from God. Apparently, just at his time there was a sharp decline in morals, the beginning of mass decay. When his son was born, he was able to learn important lessons from it. The child taught him the character of God himself through his experience of fatherhood, revealed to him the immense reliability of the Creator and His interest in man and mankind. It made him an order of magnitude stronger and more spiritual, and it reached such a point that God took him to Himself. Moses writes of his "migration," and it is not about his change of residence within the earth, because if he had lived on the earth, the Bible would have continued counting his years, but he stopped at 365 years. So this fact shows that Enoch is in a place where the counting of years does not have the same meaning as it does here with us... Many people talk about the impossibility of attaining holiness or the impossibility of living in harmony with God's commandments and rules in this sinful world. This seems like an insurmountable influence to many, but it is not true. Difficulties may be with survival, but not with moral perfection, not with holiness and spirituality. I am even inclined to say with my experience that the more sin is around, the clearer and more obvious and its unkind consequences, agitating louder than any sermon for the superiority of God's way. It is true that while people are young, it is not so obvious, but if we observe and draw conclusions, then much will be clear to them at once, and not twenty, forty or more years later.
When Noah was born, which was six hundred years before the Flood, the decline was already severe, as can be seen in the fact that he started a family when he was five hundred years old, while even the most moderate of his ancestors married at the latest at the age of one hundred. True, his father and grandfather had also spent nearly two hundred years looking for wives. This suggests that it was very difficult for him to find a woman suitable not only in character or appearance, but also in spirit, so that she would be close to the ideas of following the Way of God.
If there were no compatibility problem, that is, if one could take any woman and be happy with her (which is a prerequisite for marriage), they could have started a family much more easily, but such a long search indicates that the scope of the search was narrowed not only by the need to find the right person, but also the right one, which narrows the possibility of choice by an order of magnitude.
Also quite an interesting point - if we compare the length of life of a pre-flood man with the time of birth of his first child, we can see an almost unambiguous relationship between these values. That is, the time of the beginning of family life was directly reflected on the age of the first people - the later they created a family, the longer they lived. I don't think that this dependence has disappeared in our times. It may be invisible because people today are unequally healthy, but in the early centuries of mankind the problem of disease did not exist, so it was the only obvious factor affecting longevity. If a similar study were to be done today, all other things being equal, this factor would likely be found again.
The Bible says that before the Flood "all flesh perverted its ways", that is, it turns out that not only humans but also the animal world changed greatly under their influence, and these changes concerned the quality of their life and behavior. I am inclined to think that in those times the food pyramid also took its present form (though many changes may well have begun immediately after the departure of people from Eden), when many families of animals began to eat not only plant food, but also animal food. And the tone of all these tremendous changes in the orders and customs of life seems to have been set by people whose morals were increasingly degraded. The potential for sinfulness, acquired (or created?) by Adam and Eve in their single apostasy from God, was realized too fully and lavishly....
The very sinfulness and even perversity of fallen humanity is not a reason to destroy it, especially since there were still righteous people in the midst of the general decline in morals. But the extent of this decay... It had gone so far that God saw no other way out, and there were hardly any righteous people left. About the condition of God to Moses were given such words - "God repented that He created man", that is it is possible to say with certainty, that on a soul at Him was very and very bad. It is difficult to describe the extent of God's patience and how far things had gone, but it was really bad. People needed to be taught a lesson about the limits of His patience. One hundred and twenty years before the Flood, God made the decision to destroy people who strayed too far from the Way. Noah was the seventh from Adam, worthy of the best of his ancestors, the firstborn of a line of firstborns, the first not only by birthright but by many other qualities. From him it was possible to begin anew the generations of mankind and a new civilization that would be more restrained in its passions and desires. In many respects it succeeded, especially the fact that mankind as a result of the excesses in Babylon with the tower ceased to be united, and human sinfulness was sent through different channels, having lost the opportunity to develop in a single stream, and the competing groups that emerged as a result of the division of languages and the subsequent alienation limited each other, preventing each other, including in the development of evil. If someone was particularly evasive in bad deeds, the anger of others stopped those who had gotten cocky. Having divided, people lost the chance to act as a united front, and although it had negative sides, but still slowed down the evil from excessive development.
Many critics of religion latch on to the words about God's repentance for creating man and wonder - did God not foresee this turn of events? But foreseeing does not mean that it was inevitable, things could well have developed otherwise, and that is the reason for God's bad mood. So the teachers failed in the task of educating new generations, failed to instill resistance to temptations to all kinds of pleasures. They could have, but they failed their test. Did they fail to recognize the dangers? Or did they get carried away? Did the broad way look more attractive than the narrow way, even to themselves? All this is quite possible, and it could not have been otherwise. Strong temptations cannot be resisted by weak efforts, or by weak instruction and weak example. The lesson was this-if you want to live, learn to restrain yourself. Just because God has left life to the sinner does not mean that one can do the worst or whatever one wants without restraint, otherwise the purpose for which God left life to the sinner loses meaning. A weak church destroys the whole world by its weakness, it must set a sufficient example, otherwise it is worthless ("salt that has lost its strength" in the example of Christ, fit only to be trampled under the feet of the enemy) and will suffer with all.
It is true that today's world has been able to unite again in many respects, but we are already living near the end, about which it is said that "the present earth is being saved for fire", not for the water flood. Humanity cannot become united, no group of people and no nation has the right and opportunity to unite the world. That is what Russia and China are doing today, helped by God, who is limiting the English-speaking globalization through them. Many say that the perversion of our world today has reached the level of the pre-flood world - it may well be.
Preparing for the Flood
So, relying on Noah, God made the decision to stop evil on the planet, or rather to limit it, since human nature could not be improved or changed by this means. True, to limit very radically, but it clearly deserved it. Most importantly, it was not sudden, without warning. On the contrary, for a whole hundred and twenty years people had time to come to their senses. They had been warned for a very long time. And at that time, although people did what they wanted, no one thought to deny the existence of God, atheism simply could not exist, too obvious were the experiences and stories of eyewitnesses and direct witnesses, starting from Adam. But all this knowledge about God could not help the falling morality, you can get used to everything, including religion and miracles, why in the most fanatical religious environment can hide any sins. Righteousness comes from a willful decision to follow the Way, not directly from professed ideas, not from emotions related to religion or God. No matter how zealous one may be in religiosity, without a meaningful decision to do what your faith pushes you to do, your deeds will not match your faith. It is a mistake for those who think that it is for nothing that God has withdrawn so far from men, without showing Himself to them or giving them miracles or any signs, that His distance from the world allows evil to flourish. No, knowledge has little influence on a person's choices. That is, for some, the knowledge that there really is a God might play a role, but only until one gets used to this reality, which now includes God. Once they get used to it, this knowledge often ceases to be decisive in matters of morality. It may help the individual person, but on a world-wide scale the statistics will not change. Just as it did before the Flood, and as it did with Lucifer and his followers. People who have been in church or religion for many years have their temptations, sometimes stronger than those of newcomers who have only just become acquainted with the fear of God, because for the newcomer there is only a bifurcation between temptation and fear of punishment, but for the long-time believer the fear can be forgotten, or the definitions of sin become blurred, so that he is tempted to think that many of the sins he used to consider as such are almost not sins (or even not sins at all, just don't tell others about it). And he now sees his former fear of sins as fanaticism, as excessive youthful impressionability. Especially after familiarizing himself with liberal theories that blur the concepts of good and evil.
By saying "let their days be a hundred and twenty years", God marked the date of the catastrophe (although some people think that here was set the limit of human life, but it can not be true, because people still lived for a long time and five hundred and four hundred and two hundred years, the term of life decreased gradually, as the loss of vitality), which will sweep away from the planet all the evil that had accumulated on it. From that time Noah was given the task to warn people, and then to build an ark-ship, in which he, his family, and those who wanted to and representatives of the terrestrial biosphere should survive the Flood.
Noah was given detailed instructions about the size of the ark and the materials with which to build it. In such cases God usually shows how things should look, a kind of "handing over of documentation" in blueprints, so Moses and David were shown all the details of the temple they were to build each in their own time. And Noah began construction, moving at a leisurely pace. Probably the ark could have been built much more quickly, but here it was necessary, by the demonstration of the ship being built on land, to make the multitude realize what it meant. Noah accompanied his work with explanations as well, so that through rumors and news people heard what they should have heard - prophecies of the impending doom of civilization.
Disaster and survival
The ark had been under construction for a hundred years (so it began twenty years after the announcement of the Flood, which took twenty years for materials and preparatory work) and at last it was ready. Many words were said about its purpose, that those who wished could preserve their lives in it if they wished. It is not said whether anyone could enter it unconditionally, there were demands that all the bad customs of this world should be left beyond its threshold, because of which it was to be destroyed. If God had wanted to simply destroy the wicked, the building of the ark could have proceeded much more quickly and without any preaching. So we can infer from the long construction period that God wanted to give the people a chance and time to think things through. Also about the renunciation of the customs of the time, we can confidently think that those who simply wanted to preserve their lives without returning to the Way could not expect to be welcomed in the ark - the wrath of God falls on the Earth precisely because of their sins. Without this quality, or at least the desire for it, a place in the ark could not, of course, be granted. But there was a chance for anyone who wished to do so, simple and reliable.
In the modernist view of evangelism, "having a relationship with God" is enough, and that's it. It seems as if there is no need to change your life to conform to the divine will, unless you want to. God appreciates your precious unique and unrepeatable personality. And your deeds - maybe He doesn't like something, but you are dearer to Him, so He will bear with you and will wait for your correction, which will happen once (in the distant future, most likely very distant, when you suddenly get tired of doing evil) and then the kingdom of love and goodness will come. Sometimes some representatives of the Orthodox world present such views as all-Protestant, but it is not true - in Protestantism there are not only modernist liberal churches and movements, but also fundamentally oriented. Sometimes liberalism and fundamentalism divides one church or another, tearing it apart and causing many problems, but it is not fair to attribute the judgment of liberals to all of Protestantism. The opinions and representatives of liberalism and the fundamental, old gospel are struggling everywhere, even if these waves do not always reach outside observers. Churches with strong traditions are less susceptible to the changes brought about by the liberal approach to the Bible and salvation, but liberalism has been around for a long time and has established itself everywhere, so that a different orthodox priest or theologian may express personal views contrary to the officially expressed position of the church. In the eighties of the last century, the overwhelming (and I have not heard the opposite approach at all) majority of Orthodox priests rejected the idea of creation in seven literal days and promoted the idea of evolution - which is exactly what liberal teaching is, so Orthodoxy itself has a lot to work with in itself.
The tale of the abnormal ship was probably known to the whole world, but hardly anyone took Noah's words seriously. Perhaps it was the Titanic in reverse... They were built according to the best designs, although in one case professionals built them, and in the other case an amateur, as some people noted, but their fate was different. There is also a direct parallel with the Tower of Babel, which according to the builders' plan was to be a guarantee of salvation of at least some people, safety without God. But in this case God himself personally guaranteed the success of this project and launched it. Titanic was only an intention and attempt of people to create a safe shelter, but they did not and probably could not take into account everything. And even if they did, how could it be realized? God is one of the key conditions of safety, it is unreasonable to ignore Him. All other variants cannot be considered to have been worked out and calculated to the end. Man, due to some limitations (he is unlimited, but this is in the long term, but in reality he develops gradually, step by step, and at each particular moment of time he is limited, sometimes just terribly limited) cannot take everything into account. But if God is on his side, He takes upon Himself things that cannot be taken into account by man at his stage of development. Of course, one should count and calculate to the maximum and be on the same side with Him, it is an axiom - God puts knowledge very high, education is a basic factor in His system of life. In the process of reading the Bible we will be convinced of it many times.
And so the ark is built. The next part of the instructions is to fill the pantries with the food needed to feed people and animals. It is unlikely that any special products were prepared, for most species there were enough universal products suitable for almost all, in the crisis conditions of the voyage, in unusual and abnormal conditions of life hardly anyone could not live without pickles. Animals could be fed not at all as they were fed in normal conditions, but much less often, especially since the stressful conditions of sailing through rather turbulent waters were probably not conducive to appetite. Also, even if there were carnivores in those times, and it is likely to have been so for a long time, they could eat plant food in critical conditions, so it was not necessary to prepare perishable meat for them. Some representatives of cats show excellent omnivorousness, also God Himself selected animals for the ark, more calm and reasonable, and also strong.
After that, all that was left was to wait for the signal to enter the ship. There was plenty of space on this ship, and not all species had to be taken on board to preserve the biosphere, only the key species necessary to fill the eco-niche and create sufficient communities for the normal development of the living world. That is, it was enough to take one breed of dogs, and the same was the case with any other species. Variability[34] of living things, provided by the Creator for adaptation of animals and people to the habitat, worked out with great reserve, will provide later on, as the habitats spread, new breeds and varieties up to species isolation. With the dimensions of the ark of 150 by 25 meters and the arrangement of three floors, we can estimate its area of about 10000 square meters. If roughly to estimate a place for large animals and people on 20-25 m2, it will be three hundred separate rooms-cabins for passengers (with deduction from a quarter to a third of the area for storerooms), in which a conditional family can be placed. But such large animals were few, and dinosaur giants were not taken (why they did not survive the Flood), and about fish and animals living in water, it was not a question, they had no need to save themselves, being in their element. Besides, a year-long voyage was not a lifelong one, so that the cramped conditions would have such an impact on the health of those who inhabited the ark. Therefore, 300-500 rooms could accommodate 300-500 major species (and perhaps more, many birds and small animals could be placed together), sufficient for the equilibrium recovery of the biosphere after the catastrophe.
It is not written that Noah foretold the exact day of the catastrophe or even knew it. The year was known, but the building itself, its completion, seemed to be a definite signal of readiness. And so, after the storehouses were filled with food and tools, Noah was ordered to receive guests and to take up residence on the ship. Animals and birds came from the forests and fields, guided by the commands of the angels who gathered those who were destined to survive. Alas, it was impossible to save everyone. The animal world is subordinate and dependent on man, which is why Paul wrote about the sufferings of the living, waiting for the generation of special people in whom the glory of God is revealed - "the revelation of the sons of God". Even they understand something of this... The hope of the living world for the revelation of the "sons of God" is actually peculiar to humanity - how many times, when introducing myself to people as a follower of God, have I caught an involuntary impulse from them containing something like, "so are we going to see something real or will there be excuses about human weakness again?" But so far the tendency to follow the majority has prevailed, so that the world lives as it has lived, and the animals cannot choose a different fate - humans set the tone, they are the gods of this planet (as far as the animal world, and the entire biosphere is concerned). The guilt for their death falls on those who brought evil into the world by their deeds, their choice, behavior and example, and the final punishment of the Last Judgment will contain a share for the fate of the animal world and the whole planet. Yes, it will be asked for them too, and even for the ecology[35] will be asked. Freedom of choice means responsibility for choices, and the treatment of animals is not a matter where you can do as you please and still be outside the law; there are places in the Bible where it says that "the righteous man cares for the lives of his animals, but the heart of the wicked is cruel." .[36]
When wild animals run together without distinguishing between predators and herbivores, people know without a doubt that there is trouble nearby. When those living near the ark site saw the birds flying and the animals coming from different directions, they felt alarmed. Most likely few of them believed Noah, not because they thought he was lying, but because they were careless and unwilling to change their lives. Atheism had not yet developed in those days, living history and witnesses were too close at hand. Perhaps his tidings of impending disaster were taken seriously by many, but the conditions of salvation from the impending end were totally unacceptable to them. Therefore, none of them thought of giving up their usual willfulness in pleasures, formed in an extremely friendly and comfortable environment of almost paradisiacal (still) abundance with full provision without much, if any, effort on their part. Therefore, none of them could enter and were not going to go to the rescue ship. But at this time, when the animals went into the ark, many wanted to do so as well, because what was happening to the animals was not the normal course of things. "Here comes the end that this Noah has been talking about for so long," they couldn't help but think. But to have the right to go in there, you had to have a different way of thinking and intention. And that is too hard to do in a short time, and almost impossible if one delays to the last the change and realization of one's path. Real change cannot happen without a serious realization of the unrighteousness of one's deeds. But when day after day the habit of self-indulgence is only strengthened, and every call to change the principles of life is neglected and ridiculed, then it turns out that it is impossible to repent and change in one moment. God was not in a hurry to bring His intentions to fulfillment.
After all who were to enter the ark had entered, and God had personally closed the door so that it could not be opened from the inside, or from the outside, nothing happened for a week. It is written that it did not begin to rain until seven days later, and before that Noah could hear the voices of those who, during those days, had gotten over the initial doubts that arose from the sight of the animals coming toward the ark. I think he could hear mocking comments about his current situation, about what all normal people thought of his scheme. Indeed, no one had heard what God had said to Noah alone, everyone knew of the threat to the world only from his words....
Noah hardly had any doubts, but his family - his sons and their wives - might still glance at their father with a mute question - did we really do it right? How long are we going to sit here? And listen to those derisive comments about our "sitting in the ark"? But their trials in this period of great change and crisis can hardly be compared to the challenges of similar changes in future times. It is said that the problems of the last crisis, which is greater in scale than the Flood, will be much greater, though it is not impossible that many will be protected by something like the ark. This moment so far was the calm before the storm, the solemn silence before the face of the world was to change very much irrevocably. God was bidding farewell, paying tribute to this world with its complete beautification before destroying something in this most beautiful home because of the utterly delusional inhabitants. Noah and his family would never see the old world as it was, but they could hardly realize now what they were missing and what the next world would be like. That would come later.
And so on the seventeenth day of the second month in the six hundredth year of Noah's life[37] it began to rain. It rained for forty days. And most likely it came not only from the clouds, but also from that atmospheric or extra-atmospheric envelope that I mentioned in the description of the second day of creation. But the water did not only come to the earth from above, it also came from beneath the earth, and many parts of the land subsided. The rain was exhausted after forty days, but the water level continued to rise due to the water coming from underground springs. By the end of this time, the water covered the highest mountains by seven to eight meters. It must be said that at that blissful time, before the Flood, there were no high mountains on Earth, which are geologically new mountains. All the mountains that were before the Flood were old mountains, which had long ago, before the Creation, smoothed and leveled by weathering processes, from temperature differences and other geological factors. They were all similar to the mountains of the Urals and other old mountains on the planet. The Caucasus, Pamir, Andes, Sierra Nevada and other high mountains rose after the Flood, about a hundred years later, when in the days of Phalek-Pelegus "the earth was divided". Some people perceive these words as a division of territory between peoples, but the nations had not yet been formed by that time, as the Bible says, it is a division of continents. During the Flood itself there were also some strong processes, but they were more vertical shifts due to the water going from under the surface to the outside, not horizontal as it was later. The Bible says one remarkable thing that "in the beginning...the earth was made up of water and by water"[38] , which is why the Flood was possible, but now the same volume of water is in the oceans, not distributed in underground storage or above the planet.
Some time after the rain began, the ark was picked up by the waters and began its voyage. It was hardly a smooth voyage; there must have been wind and waves, especially in places where there were sinkholes where the underground waters came out. Some say the cataclysm was such that even Lucifer feared for his life. At that time, vast areas with forests were swept away and buried under sediment, from which formed deposits of coal, a fossil that had not been there before - previous rocks formed in the absence of higher life forms.
For five months the water was coming in, and only after that time did it start to go out. Where to? I think to the oceans, the bottom of which was lowered, or continental plates surfaced. In my geology class I once heard the interesting information that continents float (not in water, of course), and the balance of this floating depends on the water level. Those who prophesize about flooding of territories from melting of polar ice do not take into account that the rise in the ocean level will cause the continental plates to float. It may not be as massive as it was then, but the continents will not stay at the same level as the ocean rises. So real flooding can only happen when a particular section of land sinks. And the whole land is unlikely to be threatened. True, there may be other surprises, such as the rapid movement of continents due to the detachment from the upper layer of the mantle (more precisely, the decrease in pressure when the plate rises makes the semi-liquid layer under the continental crust more liquid, which seems to be the reason for the catastrophically rapid movement of continental plates about 4300 years ago, when the Earth split a hundred years after the Flood).
The Ark, as soon as its massive stone anchors[39] caught the rocks of the Ararat Mountains, where it was sailing at that moment, stopped and soon found itself on solid ground. This happened on the seventeenth day of the seventh month, exactly five months after the Flood began. After another two and a half months the tops of the surrounding mountains showed themselves. At this time there was no thought of leaving the shelter, for the situation was not favorable. After another forty days, in the eleventh month, which is about January or at the turn of December-January, Noah opened the window and let the raven out for reconnaissance. The raven flew back more than once, which made it clear that there was nothing interesting around. After the raven did not come, Noah let out a pigeon, a more demanding bird, and the pigeon flew back, signaling that the ground had not yet dried enough. But the next time, a week later, the dove returned with an olive leaf in its beak. And somehow he guessed that he had to do it to bring a signal to people that the time of great distress was over, that the planet was ready to bloom and bear fruit again. They may say that it was an angel who gave him the command to do it, but in any case he himself felt something that people would be happy about this message, that it was important, that it was necessary to share the joy of life and the hope for a new life. For this he was honored to become a symbol of peace, a messenger of goodness. After another week the dove was released again and never returned to them. Those who remained in the ark felt that life was getting better.
The beginning of a new civilization
On the first day of the first month (in fact, many people celebrated the new year in the fall, but later, since the time of leaving Egypt, the Jews had received a command to count the beginning of the months from spring, the new year remained in the seventh month) Noah opened the roof and went upstairs to look around. They had not received the command to go out yet, so they did not try to do it, but there was nothing to prevent them from looking around, and they had long wanted to see more space. And as soon as it started to warm up in these parts, and it was about March, there was nothing to keep them from it. There was already land around, there was no water nearby, except maybe lakes, but they were not boundless waters. There was green all around, not the gray and brown or black surface when the water had just started to release the surface. It was grass beginning to grow, new plant life beginning to be again after a year's hiatus. From most of the land, the water had gone into the oceans, remaining only in low-lying areas in the form of swamps and lakes. But it was not until another two months later, it is written, that the land dried up, that is, came to a normal state, when it was possible to walk on it, to cultivate it and to sow. It was only then, a year and ten days after the beginning of the Flood, or a year and seventeen days after entering the floating shelter, that God spoke to Noah and gave the command to leave.
Noah's exploratory spirit - he could have sat in the ark and done nothing, but he measured and investigated what was going on around him to the best of his ability. Nowhere does it say that God gave him the command to measure the surroundings with a raven and a dove, it is purely his initiative. And this is a lesson in what the way of life of the righteous should be... Also much later the apostle Paul noticed the peculiarity of the prophets who investigated the questions of the time of the coming of the Messiah. Instead of only asking the One who sent them information for ready answers, which they also did, they investigated the question by comparing the data already available to them from various sources, including those revealed to them from above. Paul himself also had the same spirit, and so he enriched the theory of Christianity not only with the information revealed to him from above in response to his inquiries, but also with what he found as a result of comprehending what he had received.
In general, the "lack of knowledge", knowledge and a certain lack of initiative is the problem of those who call themselves followers of God, as noted by God Himself - "who is so blind as My chosen one!"? But these are the properties of the masses, not of those who are the core and the heart. The latter are distinguished by search and initiative. Thoughtlessness was rather planted by a hostile force, which led to the degeneration of Christianity. In the Old Testament period, indifference and a certain "swampiness" of the soul come from the fact that the initiative and search of the majority was directed toward evil rather than toward good.
It is not written that God opened the door for them, but it was said that He closed it behind them when they went in. Rather it was He who opened the door, which they could not possibly have opened themselves, and called them out of the entrance. Had it been otherwise, they would have come out on their own much sooner. They had been told to let the animals out, and it had to be done sensibly, avoiding conflict between them, species by species, isolating the carnivores from the herbivores. "Let them spread out over the land and multiply," came the admonition and blessing for them all. It was a feast for all, and for the animals too, from dark and cramped quarters they were getting out into the fresh air, into the grassy expanse. It would not have been wise to let them out earlier and go out on their own, as there was not enough grass yet, and the soil could be viscous in many places.
First things first, a thank you
Noah took one of each of the clean animals and birds and made a sacrifice. In those days, before the Messiah came into the world and accomplished what the sacrifices symbolized, a lot of things were done through sacrifices. There was nothing without them - what now people can express simply by words to God, in those days, in addition to words, there were certain ritual actions that expressed what they believed in. And these sacrifices expressed their faith and their circumstances, everything connected with their salvation from guilt and other problems. Just as in New Testament times it became necessary to give thanks and ask for everything in the name of Christ and through Christ, so in former times it was done visibly - in the name of sacrifice, through sacrifice. Yes, for this purpose the lives of animals were taken, but even today they are taken for food, but then people could see the essence of the problem of sin, and the price of liberation from it, and that there is no other way. So Noah, wanting to express gratitude for deliverance from the Flood and for the new possibility of life, for nature continuing to bloom expresses gratitude out of what he has. The clean animals are the ones that could be sacrificed, these are herbivorous parnopods, birds don't seem to have a system in this. Animals were not yet allowed to be eaten, but the distinction between clean and unclean was known long ago, from the beginning of time. When it was permitted to eat meat (from this very day), it was, of course, only those animals that were used for sacrifice. It is only necessary to compare the two instructions, not only that one may eat "everything that moves," but also that among these moving things there is clean and unclean. This is not the Mosaic Law, and although there is a section on this in the Mosaic Law, the concept of clean and unclean has been known since the original times. I don't think it would have occurred to the people of those times to eat unclean things, it was excluded by the very order of things. It was later, when some tribes allowed themselves to forget many orders and statutes, that people tasted other kinds of meat. Many tribes went through a certain feralization (some, apparently outcasts, lost all shores), for the same reason of forgetting orders and knowledge, rebelling against the old rules, and began to eat "anything that moves" indiscriminately.
So Noah built an altar and offered on it a sacrifice of dedication and thanksgiving. In later times, when meat could be eaten, thanksgiving was expressed by so-called peace offerings, the meat of which was used for a sacred feast by the one or ones who offered the sacrifice. Those sacrifices which were burned completely, in later times, expressed only consecration, but, at this time, the new dietary regulations had not yet been sounded, and meat seems to have been still forbidden. God pronounced His blessings and instructions, including the new dietary regulations, after this sacrifice. Therefore, there seem to have been only two kinds of sacrifices at that time - sin offerings and burnt offerings. The difference between them was only in the intention of the offerer, outwardly they were the same, and there and there the whole sacrifice was burnt[40] . Later the sacrificial statutes became more complicated, and peace offerings were introduced, and the sin offerings also began to differ significantly from the burnt offerings. The permission to eat meat changed something in the order of sacrifices.
What follows is a rather unusual narrative. First it speaks of God "smelling the fragrance of the sacrifice" and then the Bible voices God's thoughts, what He says to Himself, talking to Himself, not even a conversation between Father and Son, which would be normal, but God's thoughts in Himself. It is quite rare in the Bible for man, in this case Moses, to penetrate the thoughts of God. However, it is done - God has revealed this to man as well. And here's what He thinks - "man unraveled because of the novelty of experience, unsophistication, youth. After the lesson learned, such shocks will no longer be needed, and it will be possible to "curse the earth no more for man."
In principle, man himself did not become better or more reliable after the punishment, but in the post-flood world order people quickly divided into nations, and in this divided humanity people themselves began to limit each other, the evil of some people limits the evil of others. This is for an extreme case, as a last resort and, of course, it would be better if there were powerful enough forces of good on the Earth, but for limiting evil in many cases this simple limiter, working unconsciously, "automatically", when "evil destroys evil", is enough. Moreover, the forces of good can also be subjected to distortions, up to the transition to the dark side, because they are always people, not mechanisms. Therefore, we can say that God foresees that He will not have to resort to radical measures anymore, also because humanity will no longer be so childishly enthusiastic in experimenting with evil, will always take into account and remember the experience of the Flood, even if it forgets... The memory of the past will manifest itself and the voice that limits evil will sound from where it is not expected.
Then it is said that "sowing and reaping, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night" will no longer cease on earth. This is a new reality, never before has heat and cold or the changing of the seasons been mentioned. There is a lot of speculation that before the Flood, the axis of rotation of the planet coincided with its orbit, which got rid of temperature and climate variations and winters, the entire planet had an even climate. Indeed, the history of fossils confirms this - wherever ancient plants are found, they are tropical plants. It was the Flood that changed the tilt of the planet's orbit, creating additional problems to those already present. Whether this was accomplished by a directed strike from an Arizona (or other) meteorite or something else is hard to judge. But post-flood reality is quite different from pre-flood reality. And at the same time not so much that it significantly affected the ecology of the environment, the survival rate of humans and animals, although many things had to change. A lot of things changed following the environmental conditions, but we cannot say that the life expectancy of post-flood man decreased because of this. It did not decrease at once, Noah lived the usual years for pre-flood people, his immediate descendants lived not much less, and only from the fifth generation from Noah the terms of life began to shorten sharply. If it were only a matter of living conditions, this would have been noticeable immediately, in the first post-Flood generation, but it was not. However, this factor could also influence, but it was not the first in strength. Much more influential was nutrition, about which we shall soon speak.
Instructions to the new progenitors of mankind
The greater half of Genesis chapter 9 relates God's speech to the people who are destined to become the leaders of the new humanity - tribes and nations. It is a solemn moment, rare and few in number. This meeting took place at Noah's sacrifice, God appeared before the people, and it was an important conversation, an important meeting. The future depends on the quality of fathers and mothers. God does not require them to be righteous and responsible - they themselves are well aware of the difference between an orderly life and promiscuity. They themselves have witnessed pre-flood evil, perversion and sin, and how it ended. Besides, they are from a righteous family, where the issues of upbringing were traditionally placed on the highest level, so they know perfectly well all the requirements of God, which were repeated from the forefathers. God acts here rather as a comforter and tries in every possible way to calm down, to remove any possibility of post-stress consequences, when He says that such punishments will not be applied to the inhabitants of the Earth anymore, that people can calmly fruit and multiply, and are even obliged to do it without fearing the elements. When it rains, a rainbow will appear, and this rainbow will remind them and Himself at least that it must stop raining. On such a mundane level, He connects people and Himself with such meaningful symbolism of peace, calm, stability, signifying His favor with the living. This is important so that people understand God not as a critic and strict judge, but as a loving Father. Yes, He can be horrible, but His exceptional patience shows how much effort it takes to bring Him to that state. Yet many people, both good and bad, see His justice apart from Him, in an exaggerated way, or as the only attribute of His character. That is, they do not see the rest, the whole picture, and in their eyes God appears to rejoice in the punishment, the ruin of sinners; in their eyes the figure of the Judge is as it were much more significant and powerful than that of the Friend and Father. Many people direct all claims to Him for any evil they have suffered in life, probably really believing that He could protect them all from their own deeds and all the consequences of those deeds... However, if He gave people freedom of choice, it would be wrong to take it away.
I hope that no one associates the idea of freedom with impunity or lack of responsibility? Because there is one text with these words, which was considered funny for the one who launched it: "... God gives people free will and then kills them with a flood for not behaving as He wants". The claim here is that God has given such freedom that there is no responsibility for it, and then punishes for something by violating the agreement. But alas, this maxim makes no sense, though many apparently rely on it when they say that they don't want to deal with such an inconsistent God because of it. Are they serious? Everyone is free to do what they want, but if those desires and actions have proven destructive, the consequences can't help but come.
It's just life
For some reason, when a person pays attention to the way he lives, something is often disturbed in his life, at least in its perception. So a person who started to take care of health, if he started to do it not because of illness, but being carried away by someone else's example, sometimes starts to get sick, indeed, it has happened and such (and someone from this then gives up "don't worry, live peacefully"). There are testimonies of some people who, having started to conceptualize life, lost the feeling of life and its joy. This is all because the process of cognition is analytical by nature, i.e. separating the whole into parts, that's how it works. But what to do - to remain ignorant, so as not to lose the childlike, whole sense of life? And to remain an infant in the body of an adult is not too great a price to pay for pleasure? This is an inevitable stage of human life, it is necessary for the formation of a human being. As the body grows, the mind must also grow. Solomon said that knowledge multiplies sorrow, and the main cause of this sorrow is just this consequence or by-product of the process of knowledge - departure from simple pleasures.
However, knowledge itself is a highly valuable object; in the process of acquiring it, wisdom emerges, which is even more valuable than knowledge itself. And then the lost wholeness of life and sensations returns, and on a new level a person looks, and feels himself, much stronger and happier. We grow from simple joys to more complex ones. The only problem is that many people grow old by this time.....
Many criticize the image of the kingdom of God because of the immature ideas of many of its adherents, who say that there will be eternal rest and eternal joy. This would be true, but how different the ideas of these subjects can be as one goes deeper into the subject... Many are not inspired at all by the primitive pictures of a primitive mind, and others who like this, expecting it to be about work that will never be there, serve as an even worse anti-advertisement for the kingdom. But what will be there is what is inherent in the human being - this search for self and the expansion of self to the limits of what is possible. And there will be many classes in which this development will take place. And these problems of searching and losing oneself in acquiring the present self (from glory to glory) will accompany man, as it happened even today on the Earth. However, it is not worth calling this development and change of feeling of oneself a problem or pain, it is only a tribute to the ideas about it. I would not even use such words, "search", "overcoming of a step" are suitable enough, they contain enough of what can be called "pain" with a stretch - they will be enough there, and this is enough about suffering in the realm of God, in the life that does not end, in which these searches and findings create sufficient interest in life and knowledge for all eternity. And it is the interest in life that constitutes the attraction of it and the assurance of it. Not life itself, but the guarantee that it will never get boring. And yes, health, of course. And it is provided not by medicines, but by a good taste for sensible things that do not damage the liver and kidneys, do not clog blood vessels, do not lead the body out of optimal modes of operation.
But evil, or rather the fall of man, has done something to man such that he has begun to follow his sensations spontaneously, without controlling this side of his nature. And he fell under the power of pleasures, and the more tangible they are, the stronger the attachment. Even with an unadulterated taste, a person often becomes too attached to simplistic pleasures, avoiding complex ones... Growing the fruits of the earth and tasting them, I think, is as much pleasure as solving mathematical problems, but not everyone reaches this level. And it's even easier just to savor it, and instead of cultivating it, to have fun. Of course, there were and are people to whom non-simple pleasures are closer to simple ones, but they are so few. But these stimuli should be equal, distributed more evenly.
It's all right with an individual person, his personal choice, though not always conscious, but a system of relations between people, of their preferences, of their conversations and gestures - a system of influences that inclines everyone in society to the side of simple preferences, to the side of the majority. It is a system of life pollination, imperceptible at first, but over time it has gained strength and inertia, when through the genetics of behavior and speech the attitudes to "stay away from everyone else", "don't dream too much", "live in your own pleasure", "do you need more than everyone else?" and other similar attitudes are passed on from generation to generation. Any school, any education should create a counterbalance to this attitude that lowers the value of a human being, should teach to overcome oneself, to refuse to primitivize life. In general, there is such opposition, but not everyone goes to those schools, or not for too long, or the extracurricular influence is stronger. Or preferable. Many people understand the value of discipline, but it is so unromantic, but to violate at least something, at least somewhere, is something worthy, giving rise to the following: "and everyone knew that it was time to take a seat, but in the code of honor it was considered essential not to come to class"[41] ... Not everyone has time to get into it, and teachers are sometimes just people who teach to lower standards. It's hard to counteract. Many people will think that I am not talking about the kingdom of God, not about the main thing in the work of God, the salvation of souls, but it is a key topic, even if hidden from the eyes of many people.
This relaxation is characteristic of all people, except for those who occupy "responsible positions", many of them feel the pressure of "position obliges" in one way or another, but they are not an exception. Even if not in all spheres, but it is not necessary in all spheres, it is enough that this "it will do" is present in life in general. It serves as a reason or a path through which temptations and deviations from the highest standards of being come into society, and first of all into the society of those who have taken the Path and want to proclaim it to others. A heavy question arises - can this be inescapable, inherent in the nature of man? Can a man be worthy of his title in everything, not in his individual achievements? The answer is yes, but will everyone like the details of it? The first thing to remember is that man was not created this way. But he was not originally disconnected from the one who created him, and now he is in this state. Because of this there has been a change in him, the familiarity of the violation of the rules has broken a certain wholeness and coherence of the nature of things in man, a connection with the Source. From this comes the contradiction, when certain traits of man come into conflict with his other traits. Maybe it all sounds too abstruse, but the essence is simple - in contact with the Source of one's nature is the means of gaining the lost wholeness or, in other words, sinlessness or purity. There is a selection of those who will be able to give up their limitation and separation from the whole, from separation in themselves for the sake of unity with the source. It is difficult because the state of simplicity has become too familiar, but it is only in the restored union with heaven that we find everything real. The self with its "I", peace and harmony.
There is a beginning in a person opposite to relaxation - interest and desire to act, activity, but this beginning does not always work exactly where it is needed, turning on spontaneously and also turning off. The way out of this problem lies in the same place.
One more point - although man with the experience of evil has lost his reliability with regard to following the rules, the problem is still no longer with man, but with what I tend to call "dark grace", although that word should not be associated with good, "evil" would be spot on. There are words in the Bible about the influence of "evil spirits" and the hard work of the devil in arranging all sorts of influences to divert man from the Way, so that all men subject to him participate in spreading it. Without these efforts, however, man would also remain in a hopeless state as to salvation, fitness for Heaven, and still need help in re-establishing his connection with God. But just as there is an influence and pull from God toward the best, so there is also the opposite force pulling downward into chaos and disintegration. It takes will to choose to be influenced for the good, and it takes doing nothing to fall under the destructive influence.
From Shem, Ham and Japheth the Earth was inhabited, and from them all the tribes of the new history of mankind descended. Though it is hard to say that it was so completely different, except that natural conditions differed noticeably and people lived simpler and poorer. Those who survived the Flood, perfectly remembered the structure of the former civilization, and being people trained enough even then, they could reproduce a lot of things - tools, dwellings and decorations. Though the earliest generations were clearly not eager for luxury, remembering what a corrupting influence it could have. And the later ones were not in a hurry to learn all the wisdom of their ancestors and did not strive for achievements in knowledge like the original people.
The Case of Noah
People continued to farm, to grow the plants and animals they needed, to obtain the materials they needed for all kinds of purposes and products, and to build dwellings, villages, and whole cities. Now nature was not so generous to them as before, and they depended on the results of their work much more strongly. However, if one does not strive for special refinements or does not rush to become stronger than others, one can live quite peacefully. At first, people lived in one group without divisions and disputes, being all determined to follow the path of the righteous, remembering the cataclysm they had just experienced. The seeds of evil did not disappear from human nature, but as long as people remembered the scale of the Flood and passed it on to their children, evil sat quietly and did not remind of itself
Noah grew a crop of grapes, and drank the juice, which, after spending some time in the vessel, fermented. That he became highly intoxicated to the point of losing control indicates that this was a surprise to him. Simply because if he had known the properties of what he was drinking, he would have at least done so under comfortable conditions and taken care not to slap his face in the dirt. Had drunkenness been familiar to them, Noah would not have been the only one tempted to do it... Besides, if he had known the properties of wine under new conditions, he would not have drunk it. However, the intoxication was unexpected, since he could not take care of himself. From this fact many conjectures about the difference of physical conditions on the planet before and after the Flood follow, some say about the difference in the activity of bacteria, others about the changed pressure. The version about pressure looks the simplest - I have read about valley dwellers getting drunk at high altitudes unexpectedly strong, because at lower pressure the body is more vulnerable to alcohol, and intoxication is stronger than a person expects. Even if Noah made wine as before, stockpiling fermented juice as he did before the flood, the effects were more potent than people had experienced before.
In this case, the characters of the sons showed up differently. It's like we're all good in a familiar non-extreme environment, but our dispositions can show vulnerabilities in new circumstances, so that those around us see a less-than-pleasing image. Or vice versa. This is how Ham showed not his best traits at all. When he saw his father fall asleep from the unexpected effects of wine, he laughed at him. Whether it was satire or mockery, whether he expressed his indignation at his nakedness, despising it, or whether he was humored by it, is not clear, but he went and told his brothers what he had seen. Yet somehow they did not share his emotion, whether it was mockery, contempt, or amusement. He could have gone to them expecting them to share his feelings, but they did not. Similarly, he himself would have to do the same, so that what he saw would stay only with him, and not go any further. But Japheth and Shem took care of their father, so that he would not be harmed by the unexpected, and preserved his authority as father and head of mankind. They remedied the situation as best they could by covering him with their clothes, trying not even to look at his nakedness, for which purpose they went back to front into his tent, only trying to see where he was.
When Noah came to his senses, he learned what had happened and how his youngest son had treated him[42] . And under inspiration from above he cursed Ham, whose name became a noun, though, it seems, only in Russian. The very word "Ham" in Hebrew means "hot", i.e. quick temperament, emotionality. Since names were given, and in some places are still given, reflecting the essence of a person's character, which is visible from birth, it is clear that Ham was indeed such, more emotional than the other brothers. This in itself is no better or worse than other characters, every trait has its weaknesses and advantages. What played a role here, however, was not so much his nature as his ethical leanings, his choice toward good or evil. He was well aware of respect for his elders, grew up in a sensible atmosphere, but was contaminated by pre-modern permissiveness. These seeds were not destroyed by the Flood, and if man made no effort on his part, how could they not germinate? Maybe later he realized how he should have behaved and what he should have done, but at that time he did what he did. And by doing so, he brought some consequences on his descendant. It seems strange that Noah's words are directed not to Ham himself, but to his son Canaan, who probably did not even exist at that time. Maybe it was a version of the name "Ham", as there is a version of "Lyosha" for "Alexei", "Sasha" and "Shura" for "Alexander", but rather Noah sees ahead of time that Ham's not-so-great traits will be amplified or concentrated in his grandson, who will be called by this name. It is possible that this is because they all received a blessing from God, including Ham, and Noah did not risk pronouncing a curse on his son.
Did Noah cast a fate upon his grandson? What share did he prepare for him, who did not participate in his father's affairs? He may not have participated, but his character was still not that of his grandfather or other relatives, judging from his descendants. Despite the curse, the Canaanites got one of the best lands on the planet, which God calls holy - Canaan[43] , which he gave later to the Jews, who were to be a holy nation. That is, God entrusted the Canaanites with the sacred land, but they did not live up to expectations, showed the very character that Noah warned about, as a result of which they lost the right to live on this land. However, the Jews also failed, not trying hard enough.
"Slaves of slaves" - many attribute slavery to God and the Bible, though did He invent it? He uses the image, but does He justify slavery by it? - Absolutely not. The position in which man finds himself as a result of evil and violation of the laws of life, as a result of yielding to the prince of lies - is it exalted? When the destroyer of the foundations took the place of God and deceitfully seized what was given to man, then instead of sonship with God people became servants and slaves (it is all slavery) of the prince of darkness, who was not a benefactor of the human race at all. The original relationship of God and man is not master and slaves, but Father with sons and daughters. This order of things will return again after the end of the dominion of evil in our world. As long as man is looking for an opportunity to use his neighbor to his advantage in one way or another, slavery of one kind or another will arise again and again, no matter what progress society makes. As long as this world exists, well, Paul writes that "as long as the son is in childhood, he is no different from a servant, though he is master of all things," but that is until he matures, because his educators must bring him to the point where he can accept his rights and responsibilities.
And, then, slavery should not be considered an unambiguous concept. The Hebrew word rendered "slavery" also means the position of a servant. Those who hate slavery and everything connected with it, put in this word the extreme, the worst meaning, which comes from captivity to the enemy, when they can humiliate the captive in every possible way. But what do you call the relationship between peasants, some of whom, because of one circumstance or another, have fallen into poverty and are forced to ask for help from the more fortunate? There is no smell of slavery or great dependence here - it is service, mercenarism, work for the sake of some payment, even if it is not money. However, both are denoted in Hebrew by one word "ebed", which in the Russian Synodal translation is rendered by the word "slave", while Western translations use "servant" (isn't it because of this trifle of translation that respect for the individual in the West is in a better position than in Russia?). English-speaking biblical scholars have done well by removing the word "slave" from almost all translations, using "servant" instead, which is quite correct according to the meaning of the Hebrew original. But the Russian Synodal translation is on the other edge, almost everywhere using the word "slave", even when the meaning does not require it. But this is correctable, at least I hope that such a variant of the Russian translation will still appear.
By the way, about "servant" and "slave" in biblical translations and the use of this word in common expressions - "your humble servant" was said to each other by quite respectable people. Is the humiliation of one before the other noticeable here? Not noticeable? But now imagine that their speech is translated into another language, where there is only one word for both variants, and then it will sound "your humble servant"....
The topic of human dependency is too broad, so if someone wants to speculate on it, they will always find a reason and an opportunity to play on emotions. Many people portray even the slightest dependence of people on each other as slavery, for example, the dependence of hired workers nowadays is compared by some to slavery, when "the slave is even happy and considers himself free", but this is an unscrupulous manipulation, a means of setting some groups of people against others, a destructive work. And those who fall for it will always be cannon fodder for the manipulators. Even with the most perfect people and smooth relations between them it is possible to sharpen the superiority of one or a few over the rest, while even between equals some permanent or temporary inequality of position will always arise, and the enemy of the human race will try to exploit this. In the conditions of the divine kingdom, when all take care of all, no one will be harmed because of the inequality of positions. However, even there Lucifer managed to instill in individuals a picture of damage to their freedom. What to speak about life on Earth, where not all living people are well-meaning. But even here one should not see everything as an infringement on one's freedom and independence. People are doomed to cooperate on anything, whether for the survival or the achievement of the highest results of their group or humanity. We depend on each other and in cooperation we have to give up some of our rights to someone else. There are always focal figures with some level of power, and this is a necessity that must be recognized and supported, because alone a person cannot and does not have the ability to give out the potential that is inherent in him. What is really worth caring about is that human freedom should not be reduced below a certain level, not that it should not be limited at all.
Noah's curse does not condemn certain nations to slavery, but it shows the inevitable consequences of the character that Ham displayed if any of his descendants were to display the same character. Where disrespect is shown, where honor, profanity, right and wrong lose their meaning, there are consequences, and someone is humiliated, loses his freedom, or suffers other damage. Those who are boorish deserve such a fate.
We should not conclude from the biblical story that every Canaanite had such a fate hanging over him, by no means. God rarely inflicts punishment that He does not warn of in advance; there is always a "time of grace" when one can escape punishment by reforming oneself. This was more a threat than a real fate for the Canaanite peoples, because very little of this threat came true. They lived as freely as they wanted until the time came for them to leave their original land, when God's patience came to an end, when God gave their land to another nation. Many left Palestine, it was the easy way out. Some of those who did not want to leave were destroyed in wars, and some remained to live, being for a time really in a dependent position, as servants and slaves, upon whom this prophecy was fulfilled. But when the Jews were punished by God for their unfaithfulness, the Canaanites became for a time masters of the situation. So their actual fate was no better or worse than many other nations, and to blame Noah or God for this curse makes no sense, it is the same as blaming the punishment following the crime, making the punisher extreme. It is also known, and we will be able to see this in later biblical history, that God rarely follows through with His curses and punishments, very reluctant to fulfill them in most cases. The other children of Ham were generally free from the consequences of his deed, that is, all the other nations of the earth do not fall under Noah's curse. Today in Israel, if there are those in Israel who have lineage from the Canaanite peoples, many of them are probably considered Jews and have Israeli citizenship, and many of those who disobeyed Israel in biblical times have lived north of Israel, in Lebanon, ever since.
Settlement of the Earth - peoples and individuals
The Bible tells us about the sons of Noah, what initial groups came from them, from which different nations came later. Judging from some of the expressions in[44] the Bible, God had something to do with what territory each of them got. Whether there was a prescription as to who went where or whether He assigned to each one the lands they liked is not known, personally I think the latter. We can say that it was a process that continued as new tribes appeared, it was not a one-time action. However, He was watching over the rights of the nations and it was a crime to take over land where a nation already lived, even if they forgot the One, went pagan or were guilty of something else before Him.
Therefore, it is not a sin before God to defend one's land and those who live in it from any claimants to it, but a responsibility and an obligation. The Jews did this just like any other people. Tolstoy's doctrine of non-resistance to evil by violence, while not bad in its idea, is not a balanced and correctly understood principle, nor is it intended to take away the protection of nations and peoples (did Tolstoy himself understand his idea in this way?). But quite a number of believers of non-Orthodox confession took this idea too close to their hearts, putting it on the words of Christ "turn the cheek to evil", from which Tolstoy himself took it. However, personal communication with a person who treats you badly should not be transferred to the public and state level, nor should it lead to concessions to a foreign army that has come to your land. The right of the people to their own land has existed since ancient times and has not been abolished by Christ either then or now.
There is a very interesting work by Bill Cooper, "After the Flood", he did a very good job of establishing the truth of the genealogical lists from the tenth and eleventh chapters of Genesis. A comparison with Schliemann's discovery of Troy is apt. He examined the records kept by European peoples (Angles, Saxons, Irish, and others) to find matches with the Biblical data. And he found an almost 99% match! And, most interestingly, these chronicles originate from pagan times, excluding the "pious" forgery of Christian monks. I think it will be useful to give some excerpts from it, let the author of this book himself tell a little about his work.
"... In other words, in the spotlight of modern science, we have been solemnly assured that, from a historical point of view, the book of Genesis is simply not even worth the paper on which it is written.
... I was confused. On the one hand - the Bible, which calls itself the Word of God Himself; on the other hand - numerous commentaries, which convince me with one voice that the Bible is just a "vinaigrette" of Middle Eastern myths and legends ... and that it has nothing to do with modern science.
It is obvious that of these two approaches to the Bible, only one can be true. And I felt it was my duty ... to find out which one it was. It was then that I came to the decision to select certain episodes from the book of Genesis and put them to the test, and when applied to any other historical document, such a test would seem unduly harsh. ...
When an error, or even a series of errors, is found in a historical document, it does not mean that the text cannot be considered historical evidence and used in scholarly work. However, the Bible is no ordinary chronicle. After all, no other historical text declares its own infallibility. If it did, scholars would leave no stone unturned! But if the Book of Genesis is indeed a chronicle of the events of ancient times, if it really is what it proclaims itself to be, then no amount of checking and testing will disprove its truth, but will only confirm it. ...
But at that time I had no idea that this work would absorb my attention and energy for more than a quarter of a century! Moreover, I had no idea of the amazing accuracy with which the truth of the book of Genesis, especially chapters ten and eleven, would be confirmed. Researchers ... commonly refer to these chapters as the Table of Nations. The abundance and depth of historical evidence simply stunned me! As I began this work, I could not have imagined such a thing!
... If the names of individuals, families, nations and tribes ... are not fictitious ..., then the same names must also be found in the annals of other nations ... ... I have assumed that a large proportion of these names are not found elsewhere, because the annals containing them have long since disappeared, or the names themselves have changed beyond recognition because of language and dialectal differences. ... It would be pure madness to expect that all the names found in the book of Genesis would be found in ancient ... annals that have survived to this day! If confirmation of even 40% of the names were found, that would be excellent, especially considering the age of the table of nations and the paucity of extra-biblical sources that match it in antiquity.
But when, during my twenty-five years of research, 40% of the confirmed information grew to 50%, and then to 60% and more, it became obvious that the "wisdom of this age" was far from the truth. ... Today I can say that evidence has been found for the truth of up to 99% of the names in the Table of Nations. ...
This was not the end of my research. ... I wanted to find out if the same patriarchs as in the book of Genesis are found in the oldest genealogies and chronicles of the European nations. In addition, I decided to find out to what extent the European peoples were familiar with the events described in this book. It is very important that I was authorized to use only documents and chronicles that appeared before the conversion of the people concerned to Christianity. ... It was this, the second part of the test, which was decisive, and which gave as voluminous and convincing proofs of the truth of the tenth and eleventh chapters of the book of Genesis as the first part." ...
Babylonian confusion and the emergence of nations
Many people consider kinship ties, the purity of the original family lines to be important in the origin of nations, but in addition to the family a person is bound to have friends and other contacts outside the family, which sometimes turn out to be stronger than kinship ties. The same, albeit on a smaller scale, is repeated when families become large tribes, tribes become nations, and nations intertwine with territory, becoming countries. It was the same before the division of languages, then everyone felt like one big family. In the first hundred years they lived as if in one place, where they came out of the ark. Perhaps it is not so, but in some researches[45] of those places where the ark of Noah can be located, it is noted that those who came out of the ark lived in this place for a long time, leaving behind the names of places and settlements. Unfortunately, the population of those places is not indigenous, the Armenians who used to live there left those places during the events of 1915, taking with them many legends and stories about many objects of the area, which was noted by the new inhabitants of those places, who told only vague fragments of lost information and that those who lived before them could tell much more.
When the emergence of languages took place, it is quite likely that the boundaries of languages passed not only through the families of closely related groups and tribes, but also included those who were related to them by activity or occupation. That is, languages may well have divided relatives, people with common features of appearance into groups that did not understand each other. But first we should look at the conditions under which different languages emerged.
The division in Noah's family first appeared when the second generation of those born after the Flood grew up. Noah's sons are better considered as generation zero, since their roots lay in the previous, pre-Flood life. Ham had a firstborn son, Hush, who had among his sons, and most likely one of his last children[46] , Nimrod. While Nimrod grew up and discovered the striking qualities of a leader, accompanied most probably also by the theory of government which he realized and developed, years from seventy to one hundred after the Flood passed. At that time the population of this family reached (in the second generation) about 110 (together with the female half) only of the mentioned descendants, with the unmentioned it could be from 200 to 250 people (they did not count the daughters). Nimrod himself with his ideas, probably, did not immediately attract his followers, and therefore by the time when his supporters left with him to build a new life, the population of the settlement could be up to 300-600-1000 and more people (depends on the rate of growth, but there was probably enough enthusiasm). What was Nimrod's idea, what did he want from life and from people? The Bible says very simply and not very definitively that he was "strong", which can be understood as both "hero" and "leader". He was an excellent hunter, yet in his later life we see him as a king. He seems to have offered his supporters some sort of division of labor, which gave a marked increase in productivity in the production of anything. He proposed cooperation, where, according to aptitude and ability, one does one thing, another another, and all within a common purpose. At that time mankind had no enemies yet, thanks to good religious and moral education (Noah and his sons most likely had a firm grip on the matter) people did not think of enmity and any claims to each other.
Most likely Nimrod, knowing the nature of man and his tendency to evil, and noticing here and there small sprouts of it, quite reasonably assumed that it would sprout again one way or another, in which he was not mistaken. And he decided in advance (or maybe not even in advance, but the need was appearing before his eyes) to take measures to contain it. And he saw these measures, among others, in the introduction of power in society. The worst thing in his developments was that he did not plan and did not count on the righteousness and conscience of people. This lowered the society itself spiritually, but still spirituality had to be dealt with by individual people, and the authorities did their job using what they had, not counting on the best human material. Or maybe he did not include priests in his calculations at all, leaving it to the choice of people themselves? That would have been even worse. He could have been a statesman, or he could have leaned toward tyranny, though he was unlikely to entice others to follow him, especially when the human population was completely insufficient for experimentation. He was born too early... He saw in the coming together of men and their cooperation, the concentration of effort, a means of protecting society from the negative aspects of human nature. He saw it in the way that a system of regulation of society was arranged. I don't think he wanted to suppress other people, it wasn't for the sake of power that was his idea, although it could easily have been used in that direction. As a man he might have been keen to be at the top of society, but you can't have a king without a retinue, so the people who followed him were not forced to do so, otherwise he would hardly have succeeded. On the contrary, they saw in the cooperation of the people a great opportunity to achieve great success for themselves and posterity, so they took part in his designs. However, the absence of God was conspicuous in all his constructions, and in general his ideas of government were calculated only on human powers and abilities. This was a weakness, which made Noah and many other more spiritual people unable to accept his science and agree with it, although they also realized that the negative aspects of man had to be taken into account in one way or another.
Nimrod and his supporters could not get along with Noah and those who adhered to the Way, so he had to go down to the plains of the Middle Ages, where he founded his civilization. Nimrod's ideas were good for large-scale affairs, for building anything, for organizing science and production, but they could not correct human nature, such a task was probably not set, he considered the system of punishment for misdeeds sufficient. Nimrod must have seen this limitation, but he could hope for future successes in the organization of life. On the other hand, it is possible that Noah himself suggested, as a way out, that a certain nucleus of the population should be left as a reserve of humanity, and that experiments or individual ideas about life should be carried out with willing and enthusiastic people. In this way there would be more success, and in case something goes wrong, there would be a reserve, not subject to fashion and winds of fickle "modernity", where the fundamental values of man and God-knowledge would be kept intact. Although this seems to be my personal assumption, Nimrod was not alone in seeing the coming difficulties of population multiplication, and the refusal of Noah and his sons to join any projects of a social nature seems to be a wise decision. And the fact that Nimrod led the volunteer-passionaries who were enthusiastic about his ideas is very clear from the scanty lines of the biblical chronicles. And there were many young people influenced by the successful, successful in everything and as if wise Nimrod. Another aspect of this case is that Nimrod laid the foundation of the modern world order - civilization of cities, division of labor, allocation of power structure to support order and order in society, in general, everything where people are needed to make up some mechanism. It is not that it is necessarily bad, but this world order brings limitations to human existence. Those who remained in the mountains under the leadership of Noah and the patriarchs preserved the highest values and spirituality, freedom from the limitations of civilization, which Nimrod began to build. Where people keep and follow the highest standards of morality, there is little need for restraining structures, for guards, at the same time everyone can rise up to join the battle in a moment of danger, and people can be free for higher tasks. Sort of like a reserve of humanity just in case. This can even be correlated to some extent with Shambhala, although these things hardly stand side by side, I am only proceeding from the idea, which is attributed to Shambhala by hobbyist minds.
Big things usually require people, as many people as possible. And Nimrod encouraged early marriage and large numbers of children. This on the other hand put a strain on supply, a dependence on food production. And it also led to the shallowness of humanity. It was there, in the center of his civilization, that people began to eat mostly cereals and at the same time became shallow as a result of a combination of factors, far from nutrition alone. Life expectancy decreased, the ability to learn also decreased due to "unnecessary" education for the lower levels of production. "Magnetization" of a person, his spirituality decreased and there were people (after a couple of centuries) not causing respect by virtue of undeveloped higher qualities. It is difficult to enumerate what abuses and what evil it led to. Including slavery and wars, loss of human form. People of the next generations, who were already from birth in the disadvantageous position of a "cog" in a soulless machine, seduced the more successful ones by the possibility of domination and enrichment at their expense. Many evils were born from this state of affairs, many weak people appeared, but God did not create them weak, and Colonel Colt should have rested, his invention could remain unclaimed... Many people will have to answer for it. And the movement for human rights, for opportunities for the poor and weak to get education and some initial opportunities should be understood as a cause of restoring the image of God in man and a cause pleasing to Him, both in principle and in particulars.
The people who left for the Middle East built several cities, in which Nimrod established a certain way of life and orders, in which he "tested" the ideas of the future organization of mankind. It is true that after his departure from life many things fell into decay, and excavations at those places often show primitive economy, although people have made many improvements of the area itself, which from some time suddenly became not friendly to people (because of the catastrophe with the continents, which caused changes in weather conditions and fertility of the land). Nimrod's success can be considered the cuneiform writing, which developed so much that it was very useful when the languages were divided. It served both Akkadians and Sumerians with equal success, helping them to understand each other. Whether people did well under Nimrod's rule and laws is hard to say. However, there were people who became disenfranchised or had their rights reduced as the number of people increased, there were feuds and wars where captives were enslaved and used in hard labor. Debtors appeared whose rights were not full either. We should also take into account that during the lifetime of[47] Nimrod there was a catastrophe mentioned in the record of Phalek (Peleg in the original), in the days of which the continents were divided and the climate of the Earth underwent strong changes. When they came to the plains of Sumer, there were milder weather conditions, but after the catastrophe the climate became drier and hotter, so that only a narrow strip along the Tigris and Ephrates, where irrigation canals could reach, had suitable conditions for farming.
It was enough for them to organize some production to ensure not only their survival but also their comforts. Decadence and feralization, together with slavery and chattel, came later, when human degeneration began because of nutrition, which in the new generations had changed in many ways. It is difficult to say whether this developed independently of each other or was interdependent and which problem came first and which later. It could have been different, new problems were intertwined with old ones... A man of those times, sufficiently developed in all respects, could well provide a certain technological breakthrough, but it did not happen, at least not on a noticeable, leaving traces. Probably, it was limited by the understanding that high technologies can be and will be used in further decline for evil, and they themselves can become an object of envy, so people were allowed to develop technologies only on the most minimal scale. In addition, it seems that there soon came a time when few people were eager to develop anything. Without Nimrod, cooperation and division into groups degenerated into inequality... So technology was developed only as it was needed - for the sake of competition between tribes, for the sake of protecting themselves from those who wanted to settle at the expense of others, starting a life of plunder. The Assyrians were particularly successful in this.
Although I should be a pacifist, and to a certain extent I am, I cannot understand those who cry "if no one takes up arms, wars will stop". Alas, wars did not start because everyone started "defending themselves", they started defending themselves because someone started attacking to solve their problems at the expense of others, and more often just for the sake of lucre. And someone already then began to live almost exclusively at the expense of others, by robbery and plunder. The psychology of piracy has not disappeared from this world, and although in the Western world too many ordinary citizens may have forgotten about it because of the long prosperity, but if the West weakens a little more, it will be plucked by those who live by other principles. And is the West so pure? Life has shown that a lot of problems are only smoothed out by civilization, but underneath there is a lot of smoldering... Alas, guns are still necessary, and not only for the police. It can not be used by the church, having a fundamentally different mission and tasks, but the state is not guilty of using weapons, because it should and must, it is its task and service. Therefore, it is a mistake to accuse the authorities of maintaining an army. This world has not yet been able (and in principle is unlikely to be able) to reach a time when weapons will no longer be necessary. Paying taxes to a government that maintains an army with those taxes is not a sin for Christians. "Arms are criminal" in the hands of a criminal, but arms for the state cannot be seen as instruments of murder, because, as the apostle Paul writes[48] , they are "a sword for your own defense," for the curbing of evil.
If pacifists are to achieve their goal, their efforts must be directed not at governments, but at the masses. They will have to develop such an influence on the minds, such an influence on the masses, that violent individuals and criminal networks will be neutralized throughout the world, in every country and corner of the world. Sometimes whole sections of society living with predatory attitudes. If they can instill the principles of peaceful coexistence in aggressors, so that hooligans and robbers do not reproduce, provide conflict-free development of childhood - then we will get a world more or less free of threats, where the state can safely disarm to some minimum level. There should be educational work aimed at improving the psyche and perception at the level of "grass and roots", the ordinary population - skillful, talented work of conflict resolution in childhood to eradicate aggressiveness, the tendency to offend anyone, because children are still savages, even in the most civilized countries - only in this way you can achieve something. Not everyone comes out of childhood without losses, without offenses or damaged attitude to people and the world. Only in the way war came into being - out of human nature - only in this way can it be eliminated. Only after such work can we disarm the state and talk about the immorality of weapons. Only it seems to me that "not in this life". They will have to work with the same things the Church is working with. And the problems will be the same. But the Church at least works with those who want to (today even Catholics and Orthodox are forced to agree with freedom of conscience and religion, although it is alien to them...), while those will have to work with those who disagree.
Nimrod was followed by representatives of all the tribes, all the sons of Noah, and they were still one big family speaking the same language. However, after the division of languages people began to divide into nations, and it is written that from this area, where Nimrod ruled, later "came Assur", who built his cities and established his kingdom north of the state of the Sumerians. Clearly, the Assyrians may have had tense relations and wars with the former kingdom, which provided captives for hard labor. But it is already when the people became a lot, and thus people, beginning somewhere from the fifth generation, began to be noticeably inferior to the ancestors, were weaker in body and spirit. It should also be noted that the data in the Bible about life expectancy and health are given for the patriarchs, but the others, who are always much more numerous, can easily afford a somewhat freer and more relaxed life, allowing themselves to obey the patriarchs only partially. Thus the degeneration of the rest could have begun earlier and on a much larger scale.
On the causes of degeneration
The role of nutrition in the degeneration of man is worthy of special mention. The original pre-Flood conditions of life were optimal for man, giving excellent full health, so that men were giants compared to later times. It is true that in the post-Flood times giants-Anaki had a place on the Earth, but with the majority of people after the Flood degeneration occurred, expressed in the decrease of vitality and other qualities, up to the mind and height, the appearance of diseases. What happened that led to this great change? - The answer can be seen in the change in diet. There were two fundamentally important changes in the diet of people after the Flood, the first was made by God, giving people permission to eat meat, which was not in the pre-Flood period. Either the earth through plants provided man with everything necessary then and stopped doing it after, or something else important changed in nature, but meat was allowed. The second change was made by people themselves.
For the unspoiled healthy person, almost everything that plants provide is delicious and healthy. But meat has a stronger effect on the sense of taste. In this permission to eat meat, however, God laid a trap, which the abstemious might not even notice or fall into, but which was more difficult for the self-loving to avoid. This could be regarded as a kind of test, a selection on the basis of the propensity to pleasure, temperance, where the weak-minded and capricious degenerate, and the temperate strengthen and dominate. To some extent it worked at first, but too many turned out to be weak of appetite.....
However, it was not meat alone that contributed to the creation of the modern sick pleasure-lover. There was another problem - the pre-flood food was raw (according to some sources, cereals still need to be processed at high temperatures when it comes to bread products). That raw food gave not only high taste sensations but also the highest health, because enzymes, vitamins and mineral complexes were not destroyed by high temperature. In post-flood times meat appeared in the diet of people, and sacred meals took place at the altars of sacrifice. These sacrificial feasts were also accompanied by dishes of cereals, which, like the sacrifice, were also cooked on fire. It could be bread, unleavened and leavened, the likeness of pancakes or fritters and other kinds of bread products. The usual diet should have remained the same, mostly raw vegetables and fruits (dried fruits also store a lot of necessary for health), but it happened that the festive cuisine penetrated into the cuisine of everyday life, too many people liked the taste of heat-processed foods - since many long molecules are already broken down, the food contains more flavoring substances. And those who loved pleasure in itself, in isolation, without considering the effects on health and morals, on body and spirit, who impatiently demanded pleasure now and at once, switched to a different diet. The next stage consisted of complicated dishes, where for the sake of some extravagance, especially in the royal cuisine, which was imitated by all others, products that do not combine well with each other were mixed in bizarre combinations. It is not a question of taste, but that the digestion of such mixtures is difficult, also these types of dishes reduce mental acuity. According to everything the last retreat has brought deterioration of health and degeneration. If people would eat simple food, without complex and contradictory mixtures[49] , I think, two hundred years of life would be instead of today's hundred years
The effects of this were not noticeable, because the human body has filter systems, and as long as they are strong, no health problems are manifested or noticed. Also, man's heritage was still thorough - the health and vitality of the human body was strong at first, yielding little to the pre-flood generations. Yet look at the longevity and number of generations. Here is the story of the family of Shem, who themselves were born before the Flood:
Sim - lived 600 years
Arfaxad - 438
Sala - 433
Ewer - 464
Falek - 239
Raghav - 239
Serukh - 230
Nahor - 148
Farrah - 205
Abraham - 175
The first three post-Flood generations lived much longer than all subsequent generations, and here we can see the boundary where human viability fell sharply. And it is not the change of climate and other conditions on the Earth because of the Flood, because in this case the life terms would have decreased immediately (or immediately after the division of continents), so the main factor is still nutrition, which in the new generations became different than in the previous ones, who still adhered to the old rules and orders. For the later ones their taste determined everything, they did not want to eat what seemed to them now bland or not so bright. This was a deviation (a violation not of the law, but of the original orders, "pokon" or statutes), but God hardly blamed them for this change in diet, it was in the eyes of many people a mere trifle, there were much more tangible and weighty violations.
For clarity, here is a table with years of life, birth and death dates. You can see that when Abraham was born, even Shem was alive, as was Arphaxad with Salah and Eber. Also the "younger" Ragab and Seruch were still living, but Nahor and Phalek were not. Even when Abraham died of old age, Eber was still alive!
The years are counted from the creation of the world. The column "Firstborn" means the age of birth of the first son, the next "Age" means the time of life. Except that the year of Abraham's birth is not 1948 (1878 + 70), as it may seem, should be according to the table, because he is not the firstborn, in that year his brother Aran was born, Abraham himself was born when his father was 130 years old.
When did the separation of languages take place? It is not directly stated, but we can assume that the destruction of the tower, which was built by those who went to the Intertribe, was caused by the separation of continents. The impact, at which the tower was damaged[50] , could have been the shock that started the mechanism of continental plate drift. However, even if it were two different events - the separation of languages and the separation of plates, these events are still not far from each other. The continental catastrophe occurred at the birth of Phalek, who was born a century after the Flood. By the time Nimrod left the Ararat lands (if the survivors of the Flood had not moved to some more convenient place), as already calculated above, the population was between 300 and 600 people. Most likely most of the people left with him, we can count from 200 to 400 people.
So, when those who came to the Intercourse looked around there, they saw that there was plenty of clay and asphalt tar, although there were no stones for building. However, this did not embarrass them; they knew how to get out of the situation. From their words it is clear that they were going to inhabit the Earth, but first they decided to build a tower that would "reach to the sky". This tower was to be, in their mind, a monument to them, the progenitors of a new civilization. Was it a bad idea to make a name for oneself? In the eyes of modern man, as if not, but for those who survived the catastrophe, and not at all due to their qualities and skills, but to the will of the Supreme, it was clearly not a good idea. It would have been more logical to dedicate the tower to the One who had preserved their parents, but they had not thought of such an idea. And even before dedicating it to God, they should have asked Him if He would approve of the idea. - Spending vast resources on vanity is unseemly and unnecessary. Probably, they wanted to get even in hindsight - the idea of the Flood is seen in this - if it happens again, they will have an opportunity to do without God, to save themselves without His help[51] , without obligations and debts to Him, though God promised that there will be no more Floods. It is as if they have a firm intention to sin and there is a feeling rooted in their subconscious mind that it will go far again and God will again, surely will punish mankind again, and this time they will have a chance to be saved against His will... This is one of the reasons why God could not like the idea of this construction.
Of course, there would have been people living in Babylon, who were presented to them as the inhabitants of the capital of the world, as the chief ones who administered from here all the inhabited parts of the world. And it might well have gone that way, even if Nimrod himself had not planned to establish a center here, the temptation to go that way would have arisen among those who followed. There was another language on earth at that time that did not even have dialects, as Moses specifically points out. God appreciated this design of theirs, coming personally to see their scheme, and concluded for Himself - "They will not cease to do what they have planned," too much enthusiasm. But to establish a single center in a sinful humanity, in a state that does not pursue the goal of righteousness and faithfulness to the principles of life - this could take the most unpleasant forms in the future, and even if the depravity of individual people would not reach the pre-flood level, controlled by the authorities, but it would be difficult to avoid organized crime, ingrown in the state administration ... - God did not want to destroy once again the Earth before time, it could not survive it. So He took measures that destroyed the unity of the people.
Most likely, almost everyone capable of working worked on its construction. And one can imagine how people began to perceive differently the same words, which suddenly acquired different meanings and senses. Or who knows, maybe unprecedented words that were not there before appeared at all? Or different pronunciation of the same words appeared, different word organization - instead of cases in endings, the control went to prepositions, or vice versa? Or all at once? I personally tend to think that only two languages appeared at that time, which today specialists call Sumerian and Akkadian (and which of them was closer to the original, it is hard to judge). They had completely different vocabularies, the same objects were called by different names, and completely differently, without the slightest similarity. True, the writing developed by Nimrod (or someone else) before that worked perfectly well in both languages, because it was not based on the transmission of sound, as it is today in most cases, but on signs, helping to understand each other somehow, but it was no longer the same unity.
We usually perceive language sensually, not with our minds alone. Therefore, the sensations of words and sounds and writing also have the opposite effect, that is, a group of people with common emotional inclinations will tend to choose a common pronunciation, sound and modes of expression, which with the slightest changes in social psychology will tend to change language over time. Linguists today say that the vocabulary of a language changes by 19% every century and that this is a constant value[52] . It is emotional perception that makes people in each generation slightly change the pronunciation and the words themselves, invent something different, while we stop using "funny" sounding words that sounded perfectly normal to previous generations. That is, the force that manifested itself during the construction of the Tower of Babel is still active in the mass of mankind. True, at that moment the change was sharp, like a hurricane blow, whereas today it is only a light breeze, though, grain by grain, shifting the layers of words and meanings quite far away, if we look back a couple of centuries ago. In this state of affairs, in five hundred years the vocabulary of any language changes by 95%, almost completely (it seems that the accumulation of percentages should be calculated not so linearly, but the error is not too great). From these two initial languages (or rather, from one, Sumerian as if gradually disappeared without leaving any noticeable traces), apparently, by means of constant variability and mutation, all other languages were formed, since linguists see the kinship of all existing languages and they are all reduced to one initial language.
The differences that emerged divided people into groups with the same languages. It seems to me that these groups did not always include only relatives, some members of the same family could be of a different dialect, which led to alliances of different families, when groups with a common language were made up of genetically different people. This could prove quite tragic for many. This uninvited miracle made many people think twice, and at the very least stop in their tracks. The cause by which they were united came to a standstill, cooperation between them in this meaningless construction became very difficult. The construction stopped, and they began to fulfill what was expected of them at the current historical moment - they began to disperse to populate the planet. The concentration of humanity in one place, Babylon, was not part of God's plan. The place of their stop, where Nimrod stayed, became the subject of jokes. The original meaning of the word "Babylon" means "gate of God" or "of the gods." Although it is unlikely that people then had any gods other than the real one, at that time paganism did not yet exist, the events of His intervention and open manifestation were too close at hand. "Gate of God" in that language sounded "Bab El." After the division of languages, however, people twisted it into "balal" - "chatter"... The word is the same one that is now used as a root in "blah blah" and the like. That's why some say that the word "Babylon" means "confusion", even though "confusion" is "balal" and "Babylon" is still "God's Gate". But ultimately they are right - Babylon is more "balal" than "Bab El". Babylon did not become a city where God comes to people, it remained only a good intention, in fact it turned out to be a place where people leave God... However, leaving God was not so direct - people wanted to impose their plans on God, and that is not union with Him. There are many such things in people's lives and in history, and this is the essence of the problems between God and people.
Those who stayed in the mountains with Noah also gave groups that spread out over the earth. It is not known whether their languages separated, but that their language also began to change over time is certain. There is no known language on Earth that is not subject to change, as far as I know.
It is very likely that people had time to disperse before the continents were divided. Then they would not have needed to cross the oceans to settle the Americas and Australia. And the catastrophe, which happened shortly afterwards, consolidated the achieved division of territories. However, very small groups obviously reached these margins, as among them there is less diversity of appearance and phenotype than among those who remained on the "Big Earth" - the Eurasian continent and Africa. Subsequently, North America was settled by another group (if, of course, there was someone before them), which came there through the Bering Strait, as researchers claim.
Continental divide
In geology it is claimed that there were times (a very long time ago) when the Earth was quite flat, i.e. there were no deep depressions and no mountains too high. True, this time is considered convenient for the origin of life according to evolutionary theory, but the same position is also convenient for understanding how water could cover the whole planet, so that even the mountains were covered by seven meters (according to the Bible). Where did that water, that gigantic volume, go? The answer looks simple - after the Flood the relief of the planet changed, and the volume of water on the planet now is the same as at the Flood, but it went into the oceans, the bottom of which was significantly lowered. Although we can also say that it is "surfaced" continents. The surface was not completely flat before, but the difference in height and depth has become more significant. However, because of this, the balance of the Earth's crust changed, and tensions arose that led to earthquakes, the planet's crust cracked, rearranging itself.
I learned a very curious point from geology that the continents, which are part of the lithosphere, happen to float in the asthenosphere, a semi-liquid rock. And the presence of a lot of water probably caused the continental plates to float a bit, which reduced the pressure at the boundary between the lithosphere and the asthenosphere. Because of the decreased (due to the continent's surfacing) pressure in the upper layers of the asthenosphere (the deeper it goes, the greater the pressure), its viscosity decreased significantly. And in fact, the continental plates were held together by nothing but the unity of the lithosphere itself, the oceanic and continental crusts... If today they seem to stand firmly in their places, it is only due to the integrity of the crust, but if its integrity is somehow broken, the picture of fast-traveling continents may be repeated again
Before the Flood and for some time after, the continents were like a huge island, a super continent, but under the changed conditions the equilibrium was lost and there was little to keep this super continent united. Probably, the mass of waters strongly disturbed the equilibrium, also mantle upward currents melted the plates from inside, as today the northeast corner of Africa is trying to separate from the big plate, and with this coincided the stresses and curvatures of the oceanic crust, which was lowered in many places[53] . All in all, the super continent began to crack. The North American plate was one piece with the European plate, and now has separated from it, the South American plate has broken away from the African plate. Geology refers these events far in the past, according to the biblical chronicles it happened in about 1757 from the creation of the world, or according to modern chronology in 2246 BC, plus or minus a year or two, about 4300 years ago. At one point in the Psalms it says, "we shall not be afraid, even if the mountains were moved into the heart of the seas." So someone must have seen it for what it was! And conveyed to posterity his impressions of it. The speed of the continents' dispersal was quite high, and it slowed down only when they were slowed down by the boundaries of other plates, or they went beyond the mantle currents that carried them away. At the boundaries of the faults, the deep layers opened up, molten rock, lava, and ocean water rushed in. Clearly the sensations, if anyone saw it, were the strongest, although to see something you had to watch from afar, up close it was just hell. The oceanic crust in the Atlantic Ocean today is the thinnest, about 4 kilometers, which indicates that it is young, while the old crust of other oceans is usually much thicker. In the middle of the Atlantic is the ridge that pushes the Americas away from Europe and Africa, and this pusher is still working, but not as fast as it once did.
On the other side of the African plate, the Indian plate broke off, which looked as if it was two or one and a half times bigger than it is now, and it pushed into the body of Asia very powerfully. If you look at the images from space, you can see how much it crumpled on its way, how much it pushed into the Asian continent and broke its harmony. It raised the mountains of Tibet, Pamir and Himalayas, and its influence extended to Baikal. After that, the climate of Central Asia, Mongolia, and many plains were raised to a height of four or five kilometers because of these rising mountains. The air became dry, rains decreased, and those who lived at that time in the territories of modern Uzbekistan and neighboring regions went far to the west, having lost hope to wait for the restoration of favorable conditions. Some stayed, others came when a new climate with a new equilibrium was established. Then the first great migration took place, but they were not nations yet, but only tribes. At that time the climate of Assyria also changed greatly, it became dry and hot, and people began to dig canals in the Inter-Area for irrigation.
I can't get away from the impression, although it could be quite different, but I still think that when the South American plate broke away from the African plate, it pushed Africa to the east, from where it bounced back. And because of the breakaway of the Indian plate with Madagascar, and it was just sitting very firmly in place. But those shocks back and forth did something to where the Mediterranean Sea and the Arabian Peninsula are now. The views in Google Earth show a very textured bottom in some regions of the Mediterranean, powerful folds from Africa's thrusting back and forth over Europe and Arabia. It is possible that this sea was not there at first, but this area was lowered after these shocks, went under the African plate, and the water came later when it broke through the Gibraltar Pillars... The sight was not for the faint of heart. However, in all the places where there was separation and collision on the other side, the views were breathtaking to any imagination. Because of those interactions between the European plate and the African plate, new mountains rose in the Caucasus, the Pyrenees, the Alps, the Carpathians, and many others in the European and fore-Asian regions.
Atlantis
The problem with identification of this land arises from the fact that in fact its history goes back to the time of a single foremarch, which today we call Pangaea or Gondwana, but we are looking for it on a modern map. Ancient historians wrote about it as a historically close event, but in the modern scientific picture of the world all changes in tectonics are attributed to times extremely distant, and since this picture of the world, inspired by the atheistic paradigm, has a very powerful influence on the mind, no one even allows the idea that moves of continents could take place within the existence of mankind, and it is not even tens of thousands of years, but only thousands. Thanks to these views, we can't even think of looking for Atlantis not in the Atlantic. People think too logically - to go through Europe to the far west, and look in the west in the ocean island. However, first it would be necessary to join the North American continent to Europe, and to pass it also to the western coast and already from there to look in ocean. On the maps describing the times of Gondwana, to the west of the supermass we see several islands, one of which may be the sought Atlantis (if it was it, of course). Where are those islands now? - Logic probably gives you the same thought as it does me. The North American plate in its westward movement either took these islands to itself, or sank them, submerging them under itself, while braking against them in any case. That is, they are most likely now the western tip of North America. Indeed, the physical map shows that between the Sierra Nevada, the powerful new mountains that are folds from collisions with the oceanic crust and these islands as they moved westward, and the coast with not so high mountains that arose for the same reason, from the oceanic crust's resistance to westward movement, lies a plate that is a substantial part of the state of California. Oregon looks similar, only the island is different, not so flat. The island plate sagged downward at impact, whereas the mountains are all around it. Geologically, California and the lands to the east are different, different rocks, different plants. The boundary between the true North American plate and the island plate lies in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. For example, in the mountains to the east you can find plants characteristic of Europe and even Russia, such as St. John's wort, but there are none in the valley of California. Over time, of course, many European plants have penetrated here, but still the difference remains. It's only unknown which of those islands that fit into North America is that Atlantis, whether it's in California, or Oregon, or Washington State, but that island is somewhere on the Pacific coast.
If anyone lived on these islands in those times, it is unlikely that they could have survived the annexation to the Big Earth, because a wave of water and mud swept across the low islands, which did not leave immediately, a considerable layer of rocks from that wave[54] remained in the low part of central California, hiding the original surface from our eyes. And no one has excavated the plains, no one has ever thought to look for anything from Atlantis here, only because they believe that this annexation occurred not forty-three centuries ago, but hundreds of millions of years ago, when there were no humans yet....
I should add that this is my version of understanding of the question, but I also met another interesting version, according to which this island was closer and therefore I can not assert anything confidently. Everything requires much more thorough verification. There were such islands, but they may have nothing to do with Atlantis.
Summarizing the post-Flood division of the world, we can say that a large or even overwhelming part of the people left the mountains and settled in the Inter-Area, and if it were not for the intervention of God, could have stayed there for a long time. But the division of languages confounded their plans, and they dispersed to inhabit the lands. The division of the continents cemented the picture of the world as we have it today. The time period considered takes us from 1656, the year of the Flood, to about 1800 from Creation, or the 24th-23rd centuries BC.
Patriarchs
In order to keep the knowledge of true things and principles on Earth, one needs people who appreciate and love them, who understand them, who can act as their keepers and disseminators, and the need for this was very urgent. For a long time this task was performed by patriarchs. They were the first sons of fathers who were themselves firstborn. It is true that Cain, although he was the first born on earth, lost this title because of his crime and subsequent lifestyle. In such cases, fathers can and should consider others to take his place. In the remaining generations the firstborn became the elders of the family, and this continued after the Flood. They had the duty of priests of the family and lineage when the previous patriarch passed away. Noah was the last common patriarch of mankind, after his departure the patriarchs of their clans became his sons, who had their tribes and clans divided not only by descent but also by language. As long as Japheth, Shem and Ham, living witnesses of the divine wrath and disposition, who had personally seen God, were alive, no paganism could arise. But no matter how long the patriarchs lived, their turn came, and the new generations were no longer covered by the restraining influence - either the scale of personality was weakening, or the new generations learned to resist the spiritual authority of the patriarchs, or simply there were many people, and it was more difficult to work with this mass, the influence of one person became insufficient. On the one hand they began to be worshipped as gods, on the other hand their example and teachings did not bother anyone, people gradually deviated from the ancient orders, allowing themselves to forget common sense. It fell to the lot of these leaders to lead their tribes and large families. The increasing humanity was more and more divided into peoples, more and more distant from each other, forgetting their kinship, and even if they remembered, sometimes because of this they were even more rigid about any differences. The leaders and princes themselves were not always the best people, pursuing goals leading not to the common good, but only to separate groups or individuals in general, which is a very important indicator of the degradation of not only morality, but also the power of thinking. It is always difficult to determine the consequences of this or that choice, and without the help of omniscient reason, mistakes are always made sooner or later, sometimes leading to the death of the clan or tribe entrusted to you. This began to happen more and more often as the population grew and the loss of health and vitality due to addiction to unhealthy things in the diet. The loss of health and overall body energy was inextricably linked to the loss of mind power. The sleep of the mind, however, has begun to produce unhealthy things.....
Paganism
As time went on, people began to forget about God and to drift away from the rules and canons of sound living. Knowledge of God also became perverted. Philosophers-sages in their analytical calculations divided God into parts, and His separate parts for many people began to look like separate persons - so paganism appeared. Images of those or other qualities of God appeared, and so the One was divided into Power, Knowledge, Love, Wisdom, Kindness and other aspects. They didn't forget Wrath and Warrior, of course. The key step after that was the personification of these qualities, the representation of them as separate individuals. It was a process of mythologization, when unscrupulous teachers began to give people not a real picture of the world, but a symbolically comprehended one, and they took it as real. When these wisdoms reached ordinary people (and many people did not want to grow and learn, having created a "swamp", a layer of the most numerous and passive, subject to many vulnerabilities), they were delighted and began to choose whom to worship. Especially since the set of laws and rules was also divided among the characters resulting from the splitting of the One. According to this perverted logic, the Warrior had different rules than the Scientist, not to mention Love. Some rules were stricter than the original laws of God, others, on the contrary, allowed much more (even if not always, but only from time to time, but even this was lured by increased pleasures) than the sensible restrictions arising from the very nature of man. God's commandments stood for the protection of human life, but were contrary to the selfish pursuit of pleasure, so when men became weak, they readily went along with destructive relaxations in customs. The old men, as always, grumbled that the youth did not keep the Law, replied that they were out of step with life, then fixed new, relaxed rules, which the next generation undermined. Then the aged youth rebuked the new one for the same, receiving in return their own words. And so this game between sensible and artificial rules with rebellion against both is still going on.
The cult of ancestors came in time to the philosophical prism that split the One into its constituent parts; it began just when the sons of Noah left, especially Japheth-Japheth-Jupiter, who as the eldest was endowed with divine properties in the imagination of descendants. The worship of ancestors as gods could arise only in the conditions of degradation of new generations, when the descendants began to differ from the ancestors not for the better.
Also, where people have degenerated drastically, and there have been some, cults of worship of local spirits have easily arisen. This is what some call "lunar" paganism. This is also close to what atheists say about the origins of religion - about "primitive man's fear of the elements" and deification of them - yes, that sort of thing happened too. In reality, though, all these tendencies usually permeated each other, so the rational religion of the Greeks contains soothsayer-pythias more suited to the paganism of stones, trees, and locales. Oracles too cannot arise on purely reasoning philosophy about the facets of the One, here it is necessary to go beyond the limits of reasoning rationalism, however ancient people, while they were still strong and healthy, easily combined all the contradictory facets of human nature, the infinity laid in them by the Being. Not without reason later generations began to deify ancestors, it happened precisely because they were closer to gods than to weakened people, having insight approaching to prophecy, combining the knowledge of the initial pre-flood times with the wisdom arising from proximity to God. Their descendants cared little about such wholeness, righteousness, perfection, so they lost and degraded, squandering the heritage of their fathers, paying them a distorted honor, which these ancestors themselves did not and could not teach them.
Abraham's calling and task
Under the circumstances, God considered the best option to create a special group - a nation of Law and Covenant keepers. This option did not prove to be the best either, it did not fulfill many of the tasks assigned to it, but the patriarchal way was even more losing, human weaknesses would also overcome the patriarchs as they had overcome Israel, but in Israel there was at least a clan obligation, which increased the reliability of transmission and reproduction in new generations of everything that God wanted to give to people. There were many requirements and clarifications written into the books to help maintain some level of God-knowledge even in the most unfavorable circumstances. Instead of one patriarch for all mankind (or one per nation), a large group of people with similar tasks was erected, which increased the reliability of the system, since at least some members of this group succeeded in the tasks assigned to them. If all of them were like that, well, at least a little more of them.....
For this purpose, from among the firstborn patriarchs, in the tenth generation from the Flood, God singled out Abram, who was not the firstborn[55] by birth, but was very prominent in spiritual qualities. Either idols or talismans had already begun to circulate in their midst, in general the theraphymic figures we find in the story of Jacob, which his wife had taken from her father's house. In general, Abram revived the spirit of the former patriarchs, the guardian-priests of the family, guiding the tribesmen to the true God and true service. However, the service itself was very simple, free from complicated rituals, the whole "truth" consisted in not inventing and complicating what God had established, not redefining what He had determined. They taught that at the sacrifice a person should be reconciled to the one against whom he sinned, if it was a sacrifice of repentance, that he should keep the commandments of the Law and other subsidiary laws and statutes, and in general any ordinance of God. The principles and rules were simple, the main thing was that the patriarch himself should be a star, possessing spiritual power, an interesting, energizing personality, drawing people to the Way, otherwise his ministry would lose its effectiveness.
But the destiny of Abram, now Abraham, was not to hand over the patriarchate to his son, but to give such a direction to his children that a whole nation of patriarchs, guardians of the Truth, similar in character to him, Abraham, would emerge. When his grandson Jacob found a large family, all his children and their children's children were obliged to be keepers, there was no longer a division in this between the firstborn and the rest. Although the primogeniture of the firstborn was partly preserved, they were princes, the chief of the clan and tribe, but they no longer fulfilled the role of priest, the patriarchal system was abolished, until the time when the new heavenly, divine Patriarch and Priest would abolish the Levitical priesthood. The new system, however, did not take its final form until some time later. It was not until after the exit from Egypt and the building of the sanctuary that the family of Aaron, Moses' brother, was assigned to the role of priests, and the rest of the family of Levi became their assistants.
It is not very clear to me where Abram's family lived before moving to Harran. Ur of the Chaldees is clearly assigned to the lower reaches of the Tigris and Ephrates. If this is the place from where they went to Harran, then that Ur was a well-appointed city, as I had to read about the excavations of archaeologists, with water supply and sewage system. It is known from history that ten years after their departure the city was destroyed by nomads, i.e. they either foresaw something and took safety measures, or God sent them the news about the change of residence in time. But there are other considerations about their initial place of residence. According to the excavations of the same Ron Wyeth in the same area where he found the ark (i.e. in the north of Turkey), he describes the area with the names of settlements that keep the names of the biblical patriarchs. There, too, Ur is found, and there, too, the Chaldeans are present, who are more likely just here in the north than in the south of the Inter-Area. This, if true, says that these people remained living in the mountains, not leaving with Nimrod to participate in his project, not joining with him in his plans for civilization, but keeping the knowledge of God and His statutes for mankind. If Ur was in the south, then it is not quite clear why the patriarchs went not just with Nimrod to Babylon, but even further south, and then north again to Harran. It seems more logical to think that they stayed where they left the ark and only then one of the families went south from there to Harran.
I also wonder about another question that probably has no answer - why did they have to go to Harran at all, since only one Abram received the call? Was there just one call, or were there several instructions from above for the others as well? After all, they went there on the decision of Farrah, the father of the family - we read in Genesis 11:31 "And Farrah took Abram ... and Lot son of Aran ... and Sarah ... Abram's wife ... and went out with them from Ur of the Chaldees to go into the land of Canaan; but when they reached Harran, they stopped there." If they were coming from northern Ur, they didn't go far; if they were coming from southern Ur, they could have been in Canaan by now, although it seems that the road to Canaan was more convenient along the Ephrates (but three times longer). It looks as if, after Abram was invited to become the ancestor of a special nation of truth-keepers, and to wander in the land that this nation would one day inherit, his father and immediate family wanted to have some part in this as well. At least to be close, though it was not as if God had called them, yet there was no prohibition, and their eagerness was commendable. On the other hand, it is possible that the desire to go to Canaan was not prompted by the message to Abram (if he did not receive the order to go until after his father's death in Gen 12:1), but by some other consideration. In any case, they formed a base to help Abram in case of any need, and it was quite justified - when he was looking for a wife for his son, he sent a servant there for her, just as his grandson went there for the same.
It wasn't until his father died that Abraham received a specific order to go on his way, and it was still as if he didn't know where to go. Just because the family wanted to go that way, wasn't that God's direction? However, the direction was still to the southwest, and he could have guessed on the way to where God was directing him, or he could have been fully informed already at a specific place. The places that would belong to his descendants in the future were not a single country, but different peoples, although most of them were closely related, but independent from each other tribes and cities.
Wanderings in the Promised Land
Abram walked the land from end to end, stopping at various places, but he did not choose a permanent home because he was told to wander it. He was to go around it, those places where his descendants would live. They would have their permanent places, but he, the progenitor, was to go around them all. And in many places where he went, where he made stops to dwell for a while, he placed altars to God. By this he reminded the inhabitants of this land of the ancient customs, gave them the opportunity to join in the worship of the living real God , not abstractions about the Deity, not demonic spirits of lunar cults, and not dead ancestors (who themselves did not worship any ancestors!). At that time there was still some possibility to bring these people back to the real real God and His laws, because paganism was not too developed and people were still familiar with the concepts of the One Source of life and power. However, it is usually difficult to reverse the trend of society, and this did not happen. But Abram's personality still attracted the attention of people of age who remembered the old days, and he was highly respected by the old people. However, those who were younger were also able to appreciate him and his way of life.
Trouble in Egypt with Sarah. Real and imaginary
It is true, as has been and will be the case many times, that some advantages can turn out to be disadvantages in a different environment. Something in his life turned out to be rather unsightly in the eyes of many people, especially of modern generations. It is Abram's strange weakness in the story of his wife.
There was a famine in Palestine because of a drought and Abram went to Egypt to wait out the bad times. One might think that God had planned to make Himself known through Abram to other places besides Palestine, but because of Abram's fear of people, things did not work out so well. Going there, he felt fear for his life. Judging from this moment and a few others, he was a bright representative of that breed of people who are called intellectuals (in the best sense of the word) today. In this word Russians can put very different content, but there is an essential sign of such a character - softness, a man is usually not a fighter, it is difficult for him to stand up for himself. Although Avram was able to hold a weapon in his hands, at a later time he defended his nephew by attacking the superior forces of the enemy, and very successfully. That is, he was not a coward, but he was still characterized by a heightened sensitivity of character that is evident in his every move. Actually, this is a great advantage - sensitivity, tendency to understand and feel a lot and notice a lot, but sometimes imagination fails and can draw different fears to a much greater extent than they deserve. Maybe nothing will happen yet, but the imagination, having gone wild, pushes a person to a completely unnecessary road.
He had not been to Egypt before, but he had heard of something that made him think that there was no law there - though there was not, Egypt was still a civilized nation, far ahead of many other nations in terms of government. However, even if there was law there, there could have been another problem - a lot of self-perpetuating rulers who could do arbitrary things in their domains. This is a more real concern and it is possible that this was the case. Wasn't that when the Hyksos took over Egypt? If so, it was a time of new relations between the conquerors and the conquered and a time of great change, so his fears may have been well founded. However, he had a defense - his God - who could well protect him. And so it was that He protected him even in a situation in which Abram was cowardly, though He would have been more than happy to protect him if Abram had not been afraid and had endured real hardship, i.e. someone had actually attacked his wife and tried to take her by force. And the story would have been very different, more palatable, but that's just the way it turned out.
Many people are confused by Sarah's age, for Abram was at that time about eighty, and Sarah, accordingly, about seventy. But it is not necessary to judge by our usual ideas that at seventy one forgets about beauty. Just today this story is quite possible to believe, at least look at the Internet about the preserved beauty and appearance of women at this age. Also in the nineties happened to see a movie, generally not worth watching, except for an episode where there was a woman of very old age, at least eighty, but still retained such beauty, in which even the existing wrinkles did not spoil anything, and felt freshness, which could be envied by many young people. This struck me, and considering that Pharaoh was not a young man either, it is rather natural that Sarah was noticed and her fame reached the royal palace. It is to be considered that in that antiquity those who did not give themselves over to excessive gratification of appetite and passions were quite healthier and fresher at any age, and even at the end of their lives, than those who allowed themselves excesses in their middle years. That is, Sarah in her seventies might well rival the thirties of today if she were among us today. For many people, modern quality cosmetics also make them look much better than others of the same age.
Another thing that stands out in this story is that neither Abraham, nor the Canaanites, nor Egypt ever saw the burqa or the covering of women's faces - if Sarah had one, no one would have talked about her beauty and the story could not have happened. While the burqa itself is known, Pharaoh later gave it to Sarah, yet its use was not exactly the same as where it is worn today; women could walk around with their faces uncovered in different cultures in ancient times and there was no problem with that for anyone.
So, Abram asked his wife to speak of him as her brother and not her husband (which was not a lie in principle, for in those days, when health was still at a higher level and genetic problems had not yet manifested themselves or accumulated, marriage between relatives was not forbidden), and in doing so he created a problem for himself and others. Had he shown courage, his marriage would not have been jeopardized. Maybe his fears did have a basis, but in reality the trouble came from the other side - no one took his wife away from him by force, and the trouble came just because of his precautions - they came to him and asked him very politely to give his "sister" to Pharaoh, and so convincingly that it was impossible to refuse... There was no reason to refuse, because he himself said that it was his "sister". By doing so, he must have lost some in the respect in his wife's heart that he was ready to give her up without a fight, having surrendered beforehand. Or was it the kind of rationalism where some people sense in advance the futility of struggle and defeat, and surrender at once? But it was not only his wife or his own conscience that judged him, but also God, who, with such an excessively rational calculation, but made with such obvious unbelief in Him, was, if not insulted, then dishonored. Abram had quite put Him out of the picture in his estimate of circumstances, and did not take Him into account in his calculations. This might be normal for an atheist (and not all), or for a man who feels himself to be a mere mortal, a grain of sand, or a cog in the machine, but not for the chosen one on whom future generations will look. And he was not weak, the war for Lot had proved that, but here and now he was thinking too down-to-earth. How much he had lost in the eyes of his contemporaries by his action is perhaps beyond description. God interceded for him in this moment, but his action was a problem in his spiritual development, in the development of the character needed for heaven, so it had to be neutralized somehow, or, if you will, redeemed, corrected, if he was to remain an example to the believers. It prefigured his later problems, that is, had he not had this decadence in Egypt, God would not have tested him more severely later. There is a lesson and a pattern here - a failed test weighs down the process of correction and refinement that heaven performs on those who claim to be holy. Heaven has to put us through tougher challenges to not only get us through, but also to neutralize the negative effects of the previous defeat. If we immediately go victorious in trials and training, it makes things easier for both God and ourselves. From the lessons of physical education at school I noticed, and many people confirm it, that it is much easier to run immediately in the front rows than to fall behind and then catch up with those who ran forward. Even a weaker person who stays in the front rows has a better chance of winning prizes than a stronger person who lets himself relax and falls behind. Of course, those who win may also have their own problems, such as the pride of success, but these are problems of a different order, and they too will be solved in due time.
When Sarah was promised to Pharaoh, which Pharaoh was overjoyed about, Abram was given many gifts and kalam as a reward for his valuable sister. But he had probably already said goodbye to his wife inside himself. How did he feel then? Counting on rude and terrible lawless people, he found himself in a somewhat different situation, where he was spoken to politely, as a relative of Pharaoh... Here, indeed - "a man believes". And there was no turning back, then the fears of rough treatment could be immediately realized... And only God did not let him down, He took immediate action. In the refined Egyptian society it was not customary to pounce on the beauty of women at once, such savages in those times, perhaps, there were not yet, except somewhere in the backyards away from inhabited territories some feral outcasts could organize themselves into a tribe devoid of any (or any) rules, and although Sarah was taken into the house of Pharaoh, she had time to get used to the new environment, and the courtiers were preparing for marriage ceremonies.
But God did not let the distraught Abram down, who probably also remembered his Guardian and finally told Him about his problems and the disappointment of his own plans. In Pharaoh's house they quickly noticed some health problems. It is not clear from the text what they were, but they guessed what or who they were for very quickly. There are many people with heightened sensitivity to the causality of events and feeling the reality of higher forces, and next to the pharaoh such people were - Egypt is known for the considerable wisdom of its priests. It quickly became clear who Sarah was to Abram, and Pharaoh called him to himself and reprimanded him, not very strictly - although for other people such a set-up could be costly. But from Abram, because of his respect for the magnitude of the forces that had risen to his defense, they did not even take back the gifts they had given him for Sarah... Instead of trouble, he even received some profit, though he could hardly be proud of it. He was, it was written, "escorted" out of the country, and that was the only punishment for his deception.
Because there was a famine in Canaan, and Abraham had not been in Egypt long, he did not hurry back to Canaan because of the continuing famine, but walked in the southern lands, and apparently it was then that he came to the Philistine Gerar, where exactly the same story with Sarah played out again, where he again said that she was his sister. Whether the Philistines were rougher than the Egyptians is unknown, but many of the personalities and situations in the description of this people reek of nobility. It is true that many peoples show generosity only among themselves and do not always extend it to strangers, so that Abram, in the same apprehensions, again showed (familiar feelings and fears) his overly mild character, expecting the same trouble because of his wife's beauty. God's intervention seems to have endowed him with a sense of some invulnerability, but for all that, he acted in a habitual way. Habit is the problem. Someone has characterized habit as "voluntary fetters," although there is no truth in this definition, for what should be called fetters are destructive habits that arise unconsciously, and where a person consciously inculcates something, develops character, it is not a fetter. Except in the view of those who are adrift, not caring about the consequences of their deeds, who think that they live freely and carefree. Many people in a crisis situation do not act in a rational way to solve the problem in the most effective way, but do only what they know best. It is good if this skill coincides with the need of the moment... After Egypt, very little time has passed, and Abram did not have time to draw conclusions, and again acts by inertia. And it turned out the same, people are angry at such a set-up, but they see him as a respectable and worthy person from other sides, so they are not in a hurry to condemn and reject him. "What have you done to us? What have I sinned against you?" says Abimelech, or in other words, "What have I done to you that you have set me up so badly?" Abram had indeed cast a shadow over Abimelech with his fears and suspicions. Avram, in his explanation with him, revealed to him that he had this already very long-standing billet regarding his wife, a pact with her that if they were ever in danger because of her beauty, that she should always speak of him as a brother. In fact, he was willing to part with her to keep himself alive. Such was this unconquerable weakness. God had to put up with all this, but perfect people are hard to find, so truly even He has to work with what He has. But He worked at it, bringing Abram into new and new circumstances that demanded his grit and determination more and more. He had to either get better or fall out of favor and God would have to find another candidate.
Since these stories of failure in Egypt and Gerar are separated by several chapters, it is possible that they are distant in time, not immediately following each other, but even so Sarah did not lose her shape after ninety years of age, for she had given birth to a son at that age, that is, in her case years did not mean loss of beauty. Only a couple of generations separated them from their ancestors, who had lived much longer than they had, and the fact that Sarah kept in good shape was something to thank her fathers and grandfathers for. Other tribes and peoples lived somewhat differently, living by farming, it ensured survival and abundance when the weather was right, but the diet of poor people could be nutrient deficient, which degraded the quality of health, followed by lower energy, caused loss of beauty at an earlier age, and a quicker old age, beset by decrepitude and later disease. But I am inclined to believe that Abram went to Gerar immediately after Egypt, since he had to leave there much earlier than the famine ended. Also, the narrative in the Bible does not always follow a chronological sequence like many other books. A chronological narrative is not the best way for the authors to convey a message, it just looks the easiest.
Breaking up with Lot
In those days the economy was simple, and in many cases it could be overlooked, if by economy we mean production for exchange, because many people knew how to produce most of the things they needed for the economy within their families, settlements or clans. The financial system had barely begun, banks were still a long way off, and wealth was measured in material objects. In those times, the richer were those who grew or produced more, who applied themselves more skillfully. It seems to be still going on, but when everything is measured in money, it happens that people have a lot of material goods, but their financial situation is not the most successful. If they can't buy what they need, they don't feel rich with what they already have. And sometimes people who have an abundance of money may suffer from a lack of something vital that money cannot buy.
But Abram and Lot were rich by the standards of those times. Their wealth - sheep and other livestock - did not have enough room to graze, and this led to conflicts between their shepherds and servants. Little by little, these conflicts could lead to personal clashes as well. Although people sometimes confuse conflicts of interest with the characters of their neighbors and think that if there is a conflict, then a person is definitely bad, and may consider them enemies, but wisdom says that conflicts of interest should be considered long before they begin, they are easily calculated, and then it is not difficult to avoid a clash and solve the problem. It is in a conflict of interest that it is revealed who is really a person and who has a tampered core. Because of conflict of interest, even the nicest people have to explain themselves and look bad in front of their neighbors, but one must not confuse bad character with bad circumstances. Ideally, sensible and good people will be able to resolve conflicts of interest with minimal damage to themselves and the other person, and I personally think that in conflicts of interest lies the potential for development, when the problem turns into greater benefits and opportunities, although it requires a lot of reorganization of views. The trouble is that people try to solve such things too flat and down-to-earth, without considering the prospects, with a broader view of the possibilities. But connecting bad character to a problematic situation usually means war or the need to do something in self-defense. When David heard that his son Absalom was "enthroned," he instantly made the decision to leave Jerusalem because he knew the customs of the people and that his son did not possess the nobility that he himself had once shown to Saul, his God-rejected predecessor. Saul was anointed, but already rejected and condemned, David was appointed to take his place, but he did not dare to raise his hand against Saul to remove him, as anyone else would have done in his place, but waited for the natural course of events, and did not hasten them on his own behalf. If God had given the command to remove Saul, as He had given it to Jehu to remove the house of Ahab, David would not have resisted, but there was no command, and he waited, seeing no other way out.
In this situation Abram behaves without conflict, avoiding even the shadow of discontent, even though as the eldest of the family he had some advantages. Although Lot is also reluctant to air his grievances, there is a problem and it must be resolved before it leads to more problems. Lot joined Abram, wanting to be with this outstanding man, but success and big business began to distract him from his spiritual mission... Abram was close to God and being close to Abram meant having spiritual advantages, opportunities for development, knowledge and just all sorts of unusual things, but a personal successful business sometimes seems like a very big deal, although its benefits are limited to a narrower set of opportunities. Avram saw that Lot was very much bound up in his household and his interest was no longer the same when he shared his journey with him. There came a point when his nephew's weak spirituality, which hindered Abram (such things always do if they are unwilling to be corrected) from representing God to the people of this world, brought Lot to the brink of choosing whether to continue his former life of ministering to spiritual objects or to focus on something that caught his attention more. It was not difficult to divide the flocks by scattering them to different places or just sell off some of them and let Lot stay with Abram, but Abram doesn't even discuss such a thing, he just suggests the simplest thing - to separate. And Lot accepts it without much difficulty, and this already speaks of his character. He apparently felt that he had gone after some wealth with his uncle, and by separating from him he was getting his share of the inheritance. As far as wealth was concerned, he got his share of the land, and did not expect more. But Abram got rid of an inert companion, who did not become a helper and support in his work. Most likely Abram's work was not difficult or dangerous in spreading knowledge about the true and living God, but reliable companions and collaborators mean a lot - they either help to kindle the fire of life and service and support it, or they extinguish it by their lack of initiative and passivity, if not by nagging and complaints. It is unclear from the story how Abram himself felt about all this, but it looks like God breathed a sigh of freedom when Lot left for the Valley of Sodom. As soon as Lot left, God says to Abram, "Look north and south, east and west - all that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever." So Lot, it looks like, was some kind of barrier to God, and He couldn't give Abram much while Lot was around him. However, if Lot had been like Abram, his presence would not have been a hindrance. He is called righteous in the Bible, and rightly so, the men of Abram's line were heirs of faithful and sound traditions, but as I have already pointed out, that heritage was beginning to be lost, and Lot was one of those who were losing rather than restoring the heritage of truth. Righteous, but somewhat limited - within himself, for himself, but his influence on the outside world was no longer enough, as the example of his completely unordained family shows. This may be enough to save himself, but this is not how a man should live, not like this.....
Abram, not abusing his right as God's chosen one and the eldest in the family, in fact patriarch, delicately offered Lot a choice of territory, saying "if you go to the right, I will go to the left, and if you go to the left, I will go to the right". Thus he somewhat risked his inheritance, because God called him and promised him this land, but he agrees to give his relative a part, not considering it an infringement of his rights. Of course, at that time he was not the master of the place, he realized that he was an alien and a stranger, but anyone in his place would have seen the prospects for his descendants, and few would have given in for nothing. However, he did not lose, although Lot chose the best lands at that time - the valley where Sodom was. Paradise living conditions in terms of climate and fertility provided many amenities, as well as the presence of cities seemed a significant advantage compared to the then sparsely populated Canaan. The inhabitants of the valley, however, had some oddities, but Lot had no trouble about this for a long time, except the moral discomfort of seeing and hearing things known as evil in his former surroundings. Besides the distorted sexuality of many of the inhabitants of those cities, as the ancient historians say, they had some rules, that it was either impossible or indecent to help the poor. Their idleness, satiety and pride resulted in rules "in reverse", that is, what was "bad" for all normal people was considered "good" there. Even small deviations from what follows from the very nature of man and his needs lead to very bad consequences, if not for themselves and not immediately, then for others, and then for themselves too. Often God allows too many things to mature, to manifest themselves, so that those who want to understand can see that His judgments and sentences are more than just. The fact that during this life it is not always easy to understand His righteousness completely does not mean that His policy in this regard has failed, because there will still be a final summing up and "rewards", and there everything will be summarized for everyone. There every little detail and every "why" will become clear to all. Although even now it is not closed to man, but it takes a certain contact with Him and a mind of a non-ordinary[56] scale to see more than the surface of events and things.
Abram and war
Wars can be traced back to early post-flood history. As soon as languages were divided and nations emerged, enmity with "them" who are "not like us" began. Already the Sumerians and Akkadians, the first nations in the history of the Earth, have records of clashes and attacks on each other to seize labor power, although they were one people not so long ago. Resources were desirable for their projects, post-flood life required a lot of labor, and people had already come to be seen as machines rather than individuals. The planet had barely begun to be populated, there was still a shortage of labor, and the population had already begun to thin out. By the time of Abram and Lot, too many nations and tribes had gotten into the taste of plunder, power had become too much, much more than knowledge and skills (though war also has its knowledge and skills). An account of all the deeds and thoughts of men is kept for judgment, and those who started wars and murders without cause or sufficient reason will be among those over whom "death the second has power."[57] . However, those who defend themselves and protect others are not guilty, no matter how many attackers they destroy.
The guilt for murder lies only on those who started it first (or provoked it, set up the circumstances, wanting to make themselves look like the injured party, in short, on the wrong side) - it is written: "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man's hand shall blood be shed"[58] , God said this to Noah and the post-flood mankind. Even if the attacker has not yet managed to kill anyone and is killed himself, the attacker is to blame, he provoked it by the very fact of the threat. The one who defends himself and others cannot and must not be guilty, otherwise the judgment is unholy and unjust. The notion of "excessive defense" is not always true, it is valid only when there was a verbal insult or a small conflict, but if there is a threat of bodily harm, it is already a sufficient reason to neutralize the attacker. Later the use of force became more complicated, but in Old Testament times it was very simple. But even today the principle of defense has not been abolished, and those who defend do a righteous deed, for which they are not only not guilty, but are blessed at least by those who are saved by their actions. Defenders tend to have far fewer cases of PTSD because a clear conscience protects them from all such problems. The attacker can't blame them, has no right to. Although he tries to confuse them with false accusations and embarrass them, but that's the tactic of bad people - to try to make their victim look guilty. And if there is an unjust law or a conflict of laws, when someone can be made guilty not by one law but by another, it is always a trace of bad people abusing civil law-abidingness. War is waged not only by force, but also by perversion of justice.
It happened that the Sumerian (Sumer was still Sumer at that time) king Amraphel gathered with Kedorlaomer and his other allies and went on a campaign against the kings of the Sittim valley. They had enslaved the Sittim valley, but then they refused to pay tribute to Kedorlaomer and so they came for their money. Amraphel and Kedorlaomer were quite successful because their campaign was not only against the Sittim valley, but other places in Canaan are enumerated and among them even the giants - the Rephaim, the Emim, the Zuzim and the Horrei. Their campaign covered a considerable territory, and they also fought with the Amalekites[59] and the Amorites. The Bible does not say anything about the number of the army neither at the invaders, nor at the defenders, and at that time it was hardly an army of tens of thousands, all the cities of that time were not big yet, the population of the whole world then was counted in millions, not today's billions. It was about five hundred years after the Flood, and the total population could have been on the order of twenty-five million[60] people under favorable circumstances. Though with all the calculations it seems difficult to know how many people lived in these particular countries, Canaan, Egypt, and the Inter-Area, because the distribution of people over the territories at that time is unknown. But if we assume that only a few people settled on the outskirts, and the rest concentrated in warm and comfortable or at least familiar places, then we can estimate these 15-25 million people per 3 million square kilometers of that world (a very approximate rectangle from Turkey to Egypt from north to south and a little beyond the Middle Kingdom to the east), then the average population density is 6-8 people per square kilometer. By the end of Abraham's life there would be three times as many, but until then there was plenty of free land and pastures.
The army of the Shittim valley was again defeated; they were unable to escape enslavement from their enemies. But what happened was that Lot also suffered, and was led away captive with the rest of Sodom. News of the defeat in that war reached Abram, and he rallied to his nephew's rescue. He had friends and allies who did not let him down and gathered with him without thinking of the consequences. It was unlikely that they had gathered more men than the Sittim Valley had put out, even more likely that they were significantly smaller than the invading army. An interesting detail, usually everywhere in the stories about Abram there are only family and rarely two or three servants, but here he had 318 servants (this is only those who went to war, and there must have been those who stayed to work, all could not leave the business). This is not surprising because the number of herds required a sufficient number of workers, it is just that without this situation of a military campaign, we would have no way of visualizing the real situation of Abram's business. Even in David's time, about a thousand years later, wars were fought with less than a hundred thousand troops, although after another hundred years the size of the army began to reach a million, although these were sporadic outbursts, such numbers were still excessive and perhaps inefficient in an undeveloped economy. So Abram was going out against maybe five to ten thousand. On his side, along with his allies, he may well have had a thousand or two men, although we don't know the status of Eshkol and Aner, they probably had about the same number of men as Abram.
The campaign was quite successful, with God helping Abram and his allies. Attacking the enemy camp by night, they defeated them utterly and recovered much of what they had captured (rather more, since the Sumerians had robbed many, not just Sodom). Lot and his family were not harmed. As they were returning south to their home, they passed by Salim, which is also Jebus and Jerusalem. Melchizedek, king of that city and priest, came out to meet them with blessings. The silence about his figure is symbolic, the apostle Paul later wrote that it is the lack of information about him that allows us to compare him to the Son of God, who has no beginning, having no parents and no lineage. Melchizedek blessed Abram, and Abram set aside a tenth of the spoils of war. The conquered had much of the goods captured in their campaign against Canaan and the cities of the Shittim Valley, so both Abram and his allies were well enriched. From his share he gave Melchizedek a tithe, which supported the clerics. Melchizedek in turn blessed Abram.
To a greater or lesser extent, there has always been a division of labor, which originates in the very nature of man, because different people are gifted in their own way, and it is always more advantageous for each task to be done by the one who can do it better than others. Exceptions are made only for the training of young people, so that they can try as wide a range of activities as possible, and in cases of special need, when the whole society or a large part of it is mobilized to perform tasks of extreme need, can solve problems, but such situations are temporary, and if somewhere the emergency mode becomes permanent, it must be assumed that there is bad management, most likely as a result of a lack of mental ability in the managers, or enemy influence aimed at undermining the efficiency of society.
Allocation of spiritual persons for society is necessary, because the spiritual and mental sphere of man is the key, both for an individual person in the realization of his abilities, and for society. Here and educators, and coaches, and teachers and priests, from their skillful work society benefits comprehensively - and morally, and in the creative plan, and in knowledge, and in science, and other similar things. The strength or weakness of the personalities that make up society, their moral qualities - on them depends what kind of society will be, how much strength can be mobilized for higher tasks or how much strength and resources of the society will be tied to the imposition of order, neutralization of crime and treatment of diseases. Therefore, it is difficult to overestimate the role of teachers who "set" the morality of generations. A faithfully directed society can retain the charge of morality for a long time, even if their teachers are taken away from them. Civilization will stand firmly only when there is a strong core of culture, not just the section of culture that is about music and dance, but the one related to behavior, understanding the principles of what builds and strengthens, teaches to distinguish between the creative and destructive.
Morality can be taken beyond religion because it is sufficiently independent and closely related to human nature that even the most rigid atheists can be highly moral people. Anyone who is not selfish is already on the right path, but selfishness is destructive to the most faithful (whatever that may be for someone) religion, contradicting it in its very essence. In times when God was still not far from people, there could not be atheists, so priests-teachers of the people occupied an important place in society. True, not every priest was a good teacher, some religions that emerged later contained sometimes very limited versions of morality, but the figures of priests-priests of the "limited version" appeared and appear in any religion. They see their vocation only in performing rites and nothing else, supposedly this is enough to keep people within some limits due to the magical or whatever essence of the rites. Rites do have some influence, but not in the field of morality, at best they play the role of music, harmonizing and calming or expressing with their symbolism some essence of these or those things, at worst they serve as a cover for dark deeds, helping to "clear the conscience", giving the opportunity to sin further with peace of mind. The Buddha in his time expressed himself harshly about such "ministers".
But even the performers of the rites were among those who were relieved of any business for the sake of this work. Society paid for their labor, realizing its importance. The principle of "ten feeds one" was used here. People set aside a tenth of their profits for the maintenance of the rulers and clerics, as well as those who did something separate for the benefit of society, a kind of exchange of services. The tithe in this sense is a tax, and when Samuel introduced royal rule, he warned about this, that in addition to the three previous tithes, the royal tithe would also be collected from the people, which was already the most common tax. According to the Levitical system, which has survived to us in detailed descriptions (the tithe in other societies and times could differ in details), a tenth of the harvest of grain, fruit, olive oil, and the litter of herds was given. It originated at a time when the economy was subsistence, i.e. the financial system did not yet exist or was only in its infancy, so it was not based on money. Although money had been in use for some time, it did not become a full-fledged equivalent, much less a substitute for things as it is today. In the time of Abram the system was clearly simpler than in the time of Israel, since Abram gave his tithe from the spoils of war, where there were things and valuables and money.
It must be said that Abram himself was a patriarch with an important mission, especially from the line of patriarchs, and he himself had the right to tithe and was not obliged to give it, but here was Melchizedek, of whom the apostle Paul wrote as far superior to Abram in rank. It is not difficult to suppose that this could have been a patriarch from his own lineage - Eber, Arphaxad, or even Shem himself, who were all contemporaries of Abram at that time. And for Abram then it was a great-great-great-grandfather, if not higher. But the Bible doesn't reveal Melchizedek's origins, so I won't pursue that either.
At the same place there was a meeting not only with Melchizedek, but also with the kings of the cities of the Shittim valley, who had suffered defeat at the hands of the invaders, and were now assembled to meet Abram and his friends, who had brought deliverance, vengeance, and other good tidings. The king of Sodom offered to let Abram keep their liberated property in gratitude for their help and rescue, but Abram behaved as any self-respecting noble man would. He replied, with a clear hint of the scandalous fame of the inhabitants of these cities, that he would not take even a thread of clothing from the property of these perverts, so that no one might say that they had enriched him. He left it to his allies, however, to take a share from the property of Sodom and the other cities of the valley. For them it was not a matter of principle whether to have relations with these people, but Abram had a calling as God's representative (but not as viceroy), and the demands on him were somewhat higher.
At last all these meetings and trips were over. Abram was alone, his excitement had subsided, and when he was alone, he was overcome by a delayed fear. The massacre they had inflicted on their enemies made him fear that they might come again to deal with him personally, to avenge their defeat. In principle, this was not unreasonable. But Avram's intellectual character, his tendency to non-violence, to silence and to a very different lifestyle than the military one, also played a major role here. For him, war was not characteristic of him, so his emotions were a reaction to an uncharacteristic case. War is not an easy thing for someone who does not have some of the qualities necessary for it, so he experienced deaths, even of enemies, acutely, realizing that enemies are enemies, but they are still human beings. This is a very important quality for the founder of a sacred nation, the representative of God on Earth, but, as a rule, every quality that is advantageous in some situations can be disadvantageous in others. But to his rescue came God, who appeared to him and said "do not be afraid, I am your shield". If the enemies were offended and wanted to take revenge, they would not be able to do so... Either diseases would attack, like the Egyptians and the inhabitants of Gerar, or everyone around him, not counting his friends and allies in the campaign, would stand up to Abram's defense, or they would simply give up such an unwise idea themselves... This was a balm for Abram, exhausted by his post-stress reaction, and peace prevailed in his soul. When someone big and strong tells you about your fears, that there is no need to be afraid, it helps a lot.
Heir
Abram was relieved of his anxiety about his enemies, but he took the opportunity to ask God a question that had long troubled him. If he is the founder of a great and glorious nation, where is that nation, where is the beginning, where are the heirs? Ten years had already passed in the land, but there was no sign of the multiplication of his race. He was already about eighty-five, soon to be incapable of procreation, as many, since the fifth generation after the Flood, had begun to live three times less than their glorious ancestors, when the great-great-grandfathers were still living and the fathers and grandfathers were already gone. Sarah, too, was about seventy-five, and for all her longevity compared to us, it was already the end of her ability to procreate. Thoughts of unfortunate delay on God's part surfaced, and doubts and questions grew. Abram began to think that his fatherhood could be understood symbolically, and his heirs would be the faithful and best men from his neighborhood who served him. He named one of them, Eliezer of Damascus, thinking that this man would inherit all of Abram's property and responsibilities after he was gone. Obviously this was a worthy man, but God responded to these doubts by saying that the nation would literally descend from him, that he would have his own son. This was to reflect a likeness to God, who also had a Son, begotten, of the same nature as him, not created like everything else he had created.
Some followers of the Bible have the idea that the Son of God was created by the Father, only before all the others, who later was also endowed with divine properties, and because of this stood next to the Father, and the rest of the creation was created by the Son. So this is a theory about the adoption of someone of a different nature than God Himself, but on Abram God reveals a certain importance of Isaac's descent from Abraham, so that His Son is also related to Him, they are of the same nature.
The conversation took place in the tent and God told him to go outside and look up. "Count the stars if you can... That's how many descendants you will have." Abram believed. That is, he accepted it as a fact that would inevitably happen, that he could rely on, that took its place in his picture of the world. It was the faith that was necessary for cooperation with God and salvation. He knew God, he knew that He could be believed. He believed always, if he had any doubts, it was because of an insufficiently clear picture. He had not been told before about personal offspring, so the idea of a non-paternity came into his mind, but after the answer the doubt dissipated. Far from everything had been explained to him, but he had enough confidence in the Promised One. Then again there was difficulty in understanding the promises of the Most High, and again Abram made a mistake. It was possible to believe better and more, but it is better for us not to judge him harshly, but to benefit from his experience so that we do not make the same mistakes. Isn't that why the whole thing was written down with all his and others' mistakes, so that they would be outlived by subsequent generations? If anyone thinks that the mistakes of biblical characters "license" them to sin too, they are making a much bigger mistake than they are. Abram paid a very heavy price for his mistakes, and it is better to learn from other people's mistakes than to repeat them and get in even bigger trouble for not wanting to draw conclusions from the information provided... What does it say about those who don't learn from other people's mistakes?
"Abram believed God, and He imputed it to him as righteousness." Here is one of the key points that reveals how God works in regard to imparting righteousness to people. The phrase sounds kind of weak - God merely "credited" Abram with righteousness. "To "impute" in most cases means to "count", to "count as" righteous. One would think that a person doesn't really change in any way, he is merely called righteous, and that's it, nothing further, and he himself remains the same as he was. That is not so. But before we talk further about the meaning of the word "count" or "impute," it is worth looking at what was happening to Abram himself.
Could he have been skeptical of God's words? Could he have continued to think in the same direction as before he received the answer? Many would have been able to, people often choose to be skeptical, which prevents them from perceiving the truth or understanding the interlocutor. Skepticism (and not nansmoking and ignoring a priori) is good in limited limits, in the mainstream of scientific thinking, when we interpret the facts obtained by other people as well as by ourselves, but in the attitude to people or to even the facts themselves[62] it is worth to include trust more often - the impossibility to repeat or reproduce something does not mean that it did not happen or it is impossible. Without trust, it is simply impossible to perceive some aspects of reality. Yes, doubt helps to avoid (not guarantee, but only help) lies and misconceptions, but we limit ourselves greatly if skepticism alone works in us. Doubt for the sake of doubt is unproductive; doubt should lead to verification, not denial. One should deny something only after verification. If skepticism becomes the only rule of thought, or worse, a character trait, it guarantees a limited view....
So Abram accepted as fact what God had said about his son. He made a choice at that moment, opening his soul to what God had said, leaving no loophole for doubt. In all such moments, when a person makes a choice in favor of God or against Him, His influence is either fixed or rejected in the soul, and in the relationships between people these are also some turning points. We are always in the field of influence of the Spirit of God, and in the moments of choice there is either fixing or weakening of these influences on us. We are either drawing near to Him or moving away from Him. This drawing near, in this moment of special significance, because God was near literally, on the special theme of bearing children in old age, left a mark on Abram, making him stronger in righteousness than he had been before. He moved one step higher in spiritual development. "Imputation" in this case also denotes "filling" a person with righteousness after the right act served as a trigger, a trigger that changed the situation. This time the "crediting" was not symbolic, when the fact and the record of it diverge, but what he was "credited" corresponded to reality. That is, that imputation penetrated Abram, became fixed in him. "Imputed" means it was filled with new content, divine influence entered through the door Abram opened....
For the average person, right actions alternate with mistakes, so people develop and change slowly, making fewer mistakes and bad deeds with age and experience, approaching God very gradually. This, of course, is not enough, but so far this is the case. Others, going downhill, develop unkind traits in themselves and develop in unkindness. But if a person were at least a little more directed toward the best, maintaining not a horizontal line and especially not a downward one, but an upward one, how much it could accelerate his development and change the lives of many and many people, families, society as a whole....
A prediction of Egyptian slavery
The conversation continued. As I understand it, it was not a direct face-to-face communication between two people who saw each other, but it was a kind of vision (audio contact), in which God spoke to him and Abram could answer and ask. But this time Abram seems even a little impatient, interrupting God's speech with his questions every time his consciousness latches on to a word, as a child sometimes instead of listening to a story asks questions that lead away for the sake of an unfamiliar word or an association caused by something in the adult's speech. Thus, after assuring of a large number of offspring, God proceeds to describe something important, beginning with a solemn syllable - "I am He who brought you out of Ur of the Chaldees to give you possession of this land..." Abram, however, interrupts with a new question, which is clearly inspired by the fact that he has been living here for many years, but so far is an alien who has become his own, but no more. And he asks: "By what sign or sign do I know that I will own this land?" - because he sees no sign of it yet. God agrees to the question, he probably didn't disrupt the overall plan of his conversation, and responds with a description of the sacrifice to be arranged this time. A three-year-old heifer, goat, and ram, along with a dove and a turtledove, are to be cut in half and the pieces spread out at some distance. This kind of sacrifice is very rare and was considered a rather significant event entailing high responsibility, judging from the second instance of such a sacrifice in the Bible[63] . In this act one sees a "total immersion" in the situation, a certain special rapprochement with what sacrifice can give to people. Abram did this and stayed near the animals, guarding them from birds of prey until nightfall. As the sun was setting, a fitful sleep came over Abram , and perhaps further he dreamed or awoke at some point. He felt a kind of intense terror and darkness all around him. Many of Abraham's descendants today are too proud of their descent from him, and many also think of the Jews as if they are given, or so they think, that they have the right to decide the fate of the world because of their descent. If the Jews really thought so, it would be a mistake - God did not create them to rule the world or even to govern it, but as guardians of truth and God-knowledge, i.e. as models and examples of heavenly standards, while leadership is a possible thing, but from the second or third row. But even without the aspiration to rule the world, this nation is somewhere really proud to be descended from Abraham. Except that what Abram felt here and now was quite different. He realized that his people would not be like him, that because of this nation or because of him, the world would be in darkness for a long time, and the horror he felt now would fall on many, many people because of the unfaithfulness of his descendants. People must have a guideline, there must be those who set this guideline, and woe to those who do not fulfill this mission, the most important on Earth. Without a guide people lose their way. Many will go astray, but the responsibility in these cases will be theirs, but those who do not go astray could be much more numerous, and the degree of deviation from the path would be orders of magnitude lower, if they had given the world more of a sound example. But the lack of guidance in righteousness and justice has created great deviations among those living on the earth, and it is not for nothing that it is said that "in it is found the blood ... of all the slain of the earth". These words are said about Babylon, and Babylon rose up precisely because the Holy City did not fulfill its mission as a whole, but only partially, and not always, leaving the Earth sometimes completely without the example and influence of goodness and truth. It is also said about Babylon "mother of harlots and abominations of the earth" - again it is the same dream-vision of Abram about the future of his offspring, which will turn out to be not his offspring, not like him. You say, "the sleep of the mind breeds monsters"? - I think you can guess what the lack of moral guidance breeds. The sleep of reason is just a consequence of that, and it was Abraham himself and the people descended from him that was put in place to avoid it.
However, the darkness and terror experienced by Abram also signified the slavery of his descendants in Egypt, which, however, was again due to their deviation from their destined path. God has allotted four hundred years for these events, which will take place before the nation that has arisen returns to Canaan. Though in reality four hundred and thirty years had elapsed before they came out of Egypt, and forty years more they had to walk in the wilderness because of their unbelief and disobedience, or rather their scandalous and picky character, which constantly created trouble for Moses, and through him for God.
Abram awoke from these sensations of darkness and terror, and God continued to speak to him, foretelling the four centuries after which his people would return and take full possession of Canaan, and answering many of his questions. There was a thick smoke and fire between the slaughtered animals, showing the acceptance of the sacrifice and the faithfulness of Abram's words, though the presence of such condensed smoke and soot, indicating the same problems, was a sign. But for all the weaknesses of the chosen people, the plan of salvation offered to man was destined to succeed, otherwise, if it had depended on the people alone, it would have had no meaning at all. But from this nation was to come the Messiah - the Man who would bring deliverance, the God who became man, the blessing of Abraham to all nations. It was He who was the guarantor of success. And His rare helpers, who understood the essence of their calling in this life, provided the minimum that was necessary for His coming. But if there had been more of them, how different the picture might have been, without the horrors that come from the weakness and poor quality of human material.
Their conversation ended with the establishment of a covenant, that is, a contract and a promise that the land where Abram had traveled so far would belong to his descendants. God emphasized that it was too early to give the land to Abram because, as He said, "the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites had not yet been filled." God had established a covenant with Abram now that this entire land would belong to his descendants, He had told him this twice before - when he had yet to come to Canaan and later when he and Lot were separated. But now, ten years later, this promise has taken the form of a contract, a more tangible commitment on God's part. Abram, it is implied, was to attend on his part to the right qualities of his descendants, to see to their proper upbringing.
An heir and the problems around offspring
Ishmael
I think this covenant event with the split sacrifice occurred when Abram was eighty-five years old, ten years after coming to Canaan. Also in chapter 16 verse 3 it speaks of ten years in Canaan, as does the birth of Ishmael when Abram was 86 years old. There is a clear connection between these events and this encounter with God. Sarah, on hearing from Abram the news of the future revealed to Abram, was delighted, and it is evident that she was anxious to see some beginning of the fulfillment of such grandiose plans. She was so enamored with the idea of a people descended from them that she could not stop herself from facing the fact that she had no children and could not overcome this obstacle. She also felt that she was past childbearing age and thought that was the end of her personal hopes. And it occurred to her how this problem could be circumvented... A child born to another woman, but in her lap, could be considered her son. She could consider that the other woman would agree to the great idea and give Sarah the right to appropriate her son to herself. To this end she acquainted Abram with her plan and made an offer. The Bible does not tell what feelings this idea aroused in Abram, but he agreed. At the right moment he did not have a foothold, God had not told him about it, and somehow he did not think to go to Him to ask. Or maybe the women didn't give him much time to think about it. He was obligated to at least take a pause to weigh such a turn, but this time his faith didn't move him to do so. Though one point of support was the original charter of one man-one woman marriage, it was only in himself that he had not found enough grit and determination to lean on a higher standard. Polygamy had long been practiced and it was so widespread that the lineage of the patriarchs had lost their clear vision of these matters. So the blurring of concepts at the critical moment meant that Abram saw no problem in having another woman besides his lawful wife with him. Through this his family will be under attack in the coming months and even weeks, and in the future it will cause terrible interethnic and international problems. Incidentally, this has already begun to fulfill the prophetic feelings of "darkness, gloom and terror" he experienced when he made his covenant with God not long ago. He had "fallen asleep" without looking into the situation and how it might threaten him and his cause, and allowed things to happen that led to that "darkness and terror." It all began soon enough.
When Hagar saw that she was pregnant, she began to treat Sarah as number two, feeling important in a family where she was now in a position of advantage. At first she might have accepted Sarah's offer as it was - to be the mother of a child that would be Sarah's and not hers, but soon enough she found out that there was another way to go about it, a way that seemed much more advantageous and prestigious to her. She had an idea of the importance of an heir to Abram, and since it could not be given by Sarah, but she could, it immediately led to unnecessary and superfluous conclusions in her shallow mind. She decided to twist things to her own advantage. One can bemoan human imperfection and pettiness, which showed up here as well, but that's too easy and would be productive? In terms of justice, the real mistress and wife was Sarah, because without her, Hagar could not have gotten into the family and become the mother of Abram's son. She broke the agreement that she was giving her son to the mistress, and that doesn't make Hagar look good. Sarah's unwise and hasty plan created problems for everyone, including herself. Hagar thought that if she gave an heir to Abram, she was now the main wife in the house... And she began to show Sarah that she could no longer consider her a servant or a subordinate, that she had a different status in the house. And as if Sarah is no longer the main one in the house, because the lord loves her no less, and even if this is in question, she has the main argument in her belly - an heir. All in all, trouble has begun to brew between Sarah and Hagar. Avram, by his inherent dislike of violence and scandal, most likely tried to stay out of it. However, he was not successful. Sarah said to him, "You are responsible for my offense."
On the face of it, she has herself to blame, especially in the eyes of the men, for she is the one who gave herself this headache, with her own hands, but here and now she is talking about something else. The maid goes out of obedience, offends the mistress of the house, in charge of the house, as it were, and Sarah's rights are violated. Sarah's authority is not enough to put things on the right track, because it is her authority that is being questioned. It takes the word of the master, which Hagar also recognizes, and the master is silent, thereby recognizing their equality and arming Hagar with it. So she is right and Abram recognizes it, though he is bitter about it. True, he himself avoids interfering, so it looks like he's giving Sarah every right to act as she sees fit, and probably never said anything to Hagar. It's too much for him too, telling this woman who's attached to him bitter things. Although it is a simple solution - "Hagar, you are not the one in charge of the house...". However, it wouldn't get rid of the question - is she still a servant or has she been promoted? Clearly she is no longer a servant, but... Anyway, there are plenty of reasons for arguments and disagreements, and the arguments can be endless, so he puts everything in Sarah's hands. It's a waste - although he's uncomfortable, his intervention and exhortation to Hagar would have led to a better and simpler solution to the problem. As it is, Sarah has decided in her own, masterful way. The harassment caused Hagar to run away, it was all about pride, a claim that the rest of the party would not accept - neither Sarah nor Avram. The latter was a blow to Hagar, she had counted on him very much.....
Hagar and the angel
So Hagar ran away, not because she was in danger, but because things were not going according to her plans and her pride was wounded. The fact that Sarah "harassed" her does not speak of danger to her life, but of belittling her just where her pride and her plans were vulnerable. She could not reconcile herself to this state of affairs, and to make matters worse, her master did not support her in what she had hoped for - that she would be in charge of the house. She did not think of God, of the covenant, of the purposes for which everything was going on in the house. She wasn't completely ignorant of religion - Abram's house was staffed by those who shared his ideals and accepted the rules by which they lived there. At least everyone was educated about it. However, knowledge of the rules alone does not guarantee imbibing those rules and their spirit. Hagar's interests were more down-to-earth, so she could not become a covenant participant, in the sense of a key figure, although she could become one of the covenant people. She was to some extent a participant in it, but in a more modest role. Had she been much more interested in the living God, His kingdom, His principles of life, eternity - who knows how things might have turned out. As it was, her son Ishmael became some sort of partaker of the glory of the covenant people, though not fully, but if she had been a spiritual person, and agreed to Sarah's terms, and raised Ishmael to be a spiritual person as well, with the result that Ishmael would not have shown mockery to the true heir and been cast out of the house as a result, they could have had a much closer involvement in the destiny of the chosen people. It is true that Sarah's plan was not initially sound, but if those involved had shown more principle and less pride, the history of these nations would have been radically different.
Hagar went southwest, fleeing from Sarah's oppression. Pressure was brought to bear on her claim to supremacy, and her pride was too wounded to bear it, and she decided to leave her place of service. The main point here, it should be emphasized to those who love politics and social justice, is that this was not a conflict between slaves and slave owners, between servant and mistress, but a conflict for supremacy, where the former servant claimed to be in charge of the house, and that is a different matter - it is a personal conflict, but not a class conflict. There was no room for such a conflict here and now - when Hagar was a maid, she had no friction with her mistress
She went to Egypt, where relatives and parents could stay. Or she would simply go to her people if there were no relatives left and nowhere to go, but in those days of subsistence farming it was easy to get by if one's hands were in the right place. Surely she had her savings with her, which she had managed to earn in the house of Abram and his gifts. Yet she had touched God's chosen one, carried his son, and God could not leave her fate to her own devices. As those who served in Abram's house were all more or less enlightened about Abram's dealings with the Most High, Hagar knew a lot about Him, and knew who was speaking to her, when someone came to her in the wilderness at the well and spoke to her.
He called her "Sarah's maid," thus showing her that her claim to primacy in the female portion of the house was improper. He told her to submit to Sarah, that is, to take the place that was allotted to her when she was hired into this family, not low or last in itself, but it was pride that had pushed her to seize the opportunity and claim a more important position, and this must be corrected. "Go back to your mistress and submit to her", that won't do you any harm, your position wasn't bad before and it's no worse now. In these words there was a condemnation of her pride, and she seemed to understand everything, she realized the fallacy of her claim to Avram, to primacy in the house. When such things are said by men, many may be tempted to object, to argue, but God was speaking, and Hagar was listening. Impressed by the communication with a person of great power, she said, looking at the departing figure, "I looked after him who saw me...".
If it had not been for Sarah's offer to be a surrogate mother for the family, she probably would never have caused any problems for anyone, following her own path to the light and purpose she knew. The responsibility for Hagar's temptation lies more on Sarah, she created the ground for it by her interference in other people's destiny, not realizing the importance of each person, not taking into account her own responsibility. However, Sarah realized her mistakes quickly, facing the unexpected consequences of her unbridled enthusiasm. Some would say - could Sarah not have foreseen the consequences, after all, it would seem, a wise person of years? But it's all about enthusiasm, passion, not backed up by calculation or good judgment. How easily a person can fail to notice that what he is doing is not in accord with reason if he is carried away and driven by the flow of desire. It was haste that let her down, the desire to see dreams fulfilled sooner rather than later. She thought that since it was God's work, God would help and protect her from problems and surprises in everything she did for Him - as it often seems, because we are trying for Him! However, in His work, no matter whether we have enough or not knowledge, we should move in harmony with His orders, His methods, and His will. It is better to remember this for everyone, even the most experienced people - there is bad luck for old people, says the wise saying. So Hagar returned and the Bible does not mention any more of Hagar's grievances or conflicts in Abram's house for quite some time.
In due time, when Abram was 86 years old, a son was born to Hagar, whom at first Sarah expected to be hers, her and Abram's son, who would be the beginning of their line. But by the time he was born, Sarah no longer had a claim on Ishmael, and he was all Hagar's. Abram, as well as Sarah, understood everything from God's words to Hagar, which she did not keep from them. There was a blessing there for Ishmael, and it was not like that with which God blessed Abram and his offspring, that offspring which should constitute the guardian nation of truth. The future of Ishmael's lineage is described as a conflict with all - "his hands are upon all, and the hands of all are upon him." From this it was clear that this child was not the son of divine promise. They had to wait for a son by Sarah, wait after their natural strength and ability to procreate had already been extinguished (they didn't know it at the time) so that God could exercise His ability on them. If you are on G-d's side, if you want to go everywhere with Him, then be ready for surprises, for the fact that He may want to demonstrate His supernatural abilities on you, so that people could see the advantages of His way and way of life. If He delays a promise, there is something behind it, so don't be disappointed and think that He has forgotten.
Isaac
It's time
Abram was 99 years old and Sarah was 89 years old when God saw fit to give them an heir. He came to Abram and that day a meaningful conversation took place between them. "Walk[64] before Me and be blameless." This is the main condition further, that He would "multiply him very much." At these words Abram fell face down before God. To him this was the answer for which he had waited so long, when human hopes had already ceased, he later voiced it in the words "shall there be a son by a centenarian, and Sarah at ninety years of age shall give birth?" These words should be understood as an expectation of a miracle, not a doubt of its realization, although there is also such a thing, he speaks of a son already existing so that "at least Ishmael will be alive." He did not express everything aloud then, but these thoughts have come down to us, he has not hidden them from his descendants, teaching them by the example of his own life to trust God more than we are inclined to do. Now he hears God's clear intention to fulfill his promises at last, and he finds it hard to understand how God will get out of it when even his fertility is gone, much less Sarah's.
I want to notice that Abram here is content with little, his maxim seems to be only to have an heir to his riches, whereas God had brought him more. Looking ahead, Abram here is willing to settle for Ishmael, forgetting about Sarah and her desire for a son, and Abram expressed this lowly expectation to God. However, humanly speaking, this is normal and understandable, but Abram could have shown higher traits... His potential was greater and maybe by over-concentrating his feelings on the available heir, he closed the door to bigger and better things. Sometimes it seems that Abram failed to pass on his best traits or did not pass on his best traits in the greatest amount, which is why there was a certain spiritual decline in his descendants later on.
Where God begins to talk about covenant, there are some strange words. Maybe I'm going about this the wrong way, but look at this phrase: "I am this is my covenant with you". The next thing it says is "you shall be the father of a multitude of nations[65] ". By the usual logic there is a covenant in this, in fathering many nations, but this is the initial "I am"... The fact that he is a great father to the nations is not because it is possible that the great "I Am" has accepted him into covenant with Himself? It is also worth considering the logic of the ancients, when language was more voluminous than the overly logical language of our times, which loses its voluminousness. What stands between the different phrases in this play of words can (and I am sure of it) refer to both - to what is before and what is after the central phrase about the covenant. The following sense emerges - "My covenant with you is I Myself" is the first half of the phrase. The second half is the familiar sense that the covenant is "thou shalt be the father of a multitude of nations." It does come across that God will be the God of both Abram and his descendants. He is the Source of all things, of every good thing and of the covenant itself as well, so to see God as the covenant itself seems right. This is also where the Law begins, the first commandment - "I am the One who am your God"... The rest is already particulars of this covenant - the multitude of nations, circumcision as a sign of the covenant, commandments, statutes and laws, and other details. Many believe that when there are two meanings in a phrase, only one of them is true, and the other is only masking. This may be true among people who practice deception, but it is not unlikely that both meanings are true unless they are mutually exclusive.
Here Abram also received a new name, or rather it was modified, from just "father" or "noble father" he became "father of many", from Abram to Abraham. It was also said - "Your descendants will receive the land on which you walk. But thou shalt keep My covenant, thou and thy descendants after thee." In doing so, God also gives the outward symbol of the covenant, circumcision. Sarah's name was also changed. In the Russian Synodal translation it sounds like Sarah, but the "p" was not doubled, the last letter was changed, this is the difficulty of translation. What her name means, just think of the Russian "tsar". This is actually a very ancient word, and the change of meaning is around this royal dignity, so Sarah's name, when it was still in Hebrew Sari (in our letters), meant "my princess", and it became "Princess", Sarah or Sarahh, if you try to transcribe the aspiration. But more likely it was already "Queen", very close in root and even sound....
Abraham, listening to all that God was saying, absorbing this startling long-awaited news, had a slightly different take on what was being said to him - he lowered his head again and laughed, implicitly, hiding his face. Whether it was a joyous laugh, or whether there was a dash of either disbelief or superfluous humor, yet there was little reverence in him at this moment. And he says things that show he doesn't have enough faith in God either. He says, if you turn his words around a bit, "Come on Sarah, she's 90 and I'm almost 100, I've already got Ishmael - let him have it all, what more do I need?"
But God patiently responds to this heresy that "it is so" - "It is Sarah your wife who will bear you a son whom you shall call Isaac, and with him shall be My covenant and with his descendants". In this is easily seen a rebuke to that decision to "help" God with the fulfillment of His promise, Sarai's plan, which Abram supported, though he should have stopped it. About Ishmael, on the other hand, he comforted Abraham that he would do great, and his people would be great too, but that He would accomplish His spiritual goals (which Abraham had somewhat forgotten) through the people descended from Isaac. If Abraham didn't care which son God's plan would be accomplished through, God did care... Isaac, God said, would be born in a year when Abraham would be exactly one hundred years old. God can be seen to have a commitment to round numbers in a number of instances, such as the birth of Christ took place in the year 4000 from the creation of the world. But this is not always the case, rather He shows some of His preferences that are not yet known to many.
Although I did not want to talk about circumcision, it is worth mentioning something. Man was created perfect in the beginning by God, and he was created uncircumcised. With all righteousness and perfection before the fall, man was uncircumcised; it was his natural state. But now Abraham receives the sign of circumcision as belonging to the covenant with God, as the apostle Paul later wrote, the sign of righteousness. Has something changed in the nature of man? Hardly, except for the resulting tendency to deviate constantly from the right course. And, as if to get this nature of man back on the right course, it is necessary to adjust the nature of man. Probably not much, but it's painful for our nature. And circumcision just symbolizes this correction, a little artificial intervention, a little more heightened sensitivity, openness to the outside world. Maybe a person because of sin has closed in himself, not trusting others, losing contact with them because of this distrust? Or could it be seen as affecting one of the central pleasure nodes? Yes, sin has indeed made men untrustworthy of each other. However, a person will not find support in himself, in spite of all the perfection the Creator has put into him, that is, even for himself a person can be unreliable, or even be an enemy to himself, what to speak of others. It is necessary to catch signals from outside, it is necessary to increase sensitivity. And also to remove something that prevents the achievement of this goal. You can see some symbolism in this. Perhaps there are other meanings.
At this point God stopped speaking to Abraham (not Abram anymore) and went to heaven or, in the old fashioned way, ascended. Abraham was left to reflect on what had happened and what he had learned. He probably had time for this only at night, because, in his haste to fulfill the instructions from above, that same day he gathered all the men of his house and circumcised them, including Ishmael and himself.
Another encounter with God. The fate of Sodom and Lot's loss
After about two or three months or a little more, God visits Abraham again. Before that, He came to prepare Abraham and all his household for the birth of Isaac, and He said that Isaac would be born "at this same time next year". When He visits Abraham this time, there is still no heir; He is spoken of again in the future tense.
It was a hot summer day, Abraham was sitting in the shade at the entrance to the tent, and as he looked once again in front of him, he saw three people. He did not recognize God or angels in their appearance, but they had a very ordinary appearance. This is also evident from the fact that he addresses them as ordinary people. When Abraham had met God before, there seem to have been distinctions by which he could recognize at once who had come to him, but not this time. They had the appearance of travelers going toward their goal, but who decided to take a break in a convenient place. Hospitality is a holy thing at all times, and Abraham, when he saw the travelers looking thoughtfully at the surroundings of his place of abode and discussing something, could not miss the opportunity to give rest to his guests, as well as to learn some news and simply to meet new people who might need some help. Maybe it was their first time in these parts and they didn't know the customs or other things important to Canaan because they didn't look familiar. I think that in those days, when there weren't that many people yet, most people knew who lived where in the area for dozens or even hundreds of kilometers, who did what, their families, and many circumstances. It is possible that some people may have known virtually everyone in their neighborhoods. The fact that they were strangers meant that they were from somewhere far away, and their impressions of the land and the people on it could translate into benefits or problems in the future for those who lived there.
Abraham offered the usual set of amenities for guests - a table, rest in the shade, and foot washing. For a walker on foot on a long journey, this is significant. They agreed - "do as you say." Abraham told Sarah to knead the flour for the unleavened flatbread, ran to the herd and picked out a good calf, instructing the servant to cook it. This took, I believe, at least two or three hours. Then he came to the guests with the ready meal and offered them refreshment. He did not take part in their meal, standing nearby like a servant, waiting to see what he could do for them.
His behavior here suggests that he sensed something in his guests that made him treat them as royalty, so that he did not sit at the table with them. The more time passed, the more clearly he felt that he was again visited by guests from heaven, of a higher origin than any human one. His feelings were soon confirmed when one of those seated asked of Sarah where she was now. Abraham replied - "here in the tent", which was located under the same tree, next to the guests. The eldest of the guests said - "I will be at your place again at the same time, and Sarah, your wife, will have a son." Abraham's feelings received confirmation of the One who had visited him.
During the previous encounter, when God had spoken to Abraham about the same thing, he had laughed with joy and surprise with a touch of disbelief. Sarah was already aware of this and could have been more ready for God's words about a son, but she showed by her reaction that she was looking at it somewhat aloofly, not excited about the opportunity to touch new and unknown possibilities that God was willing to manifest in His people. She looked too down-to-earth, and actually denied that the miracle of regaining the ability to bear children could happen to her personally. She was kind of unhappy about the promise; she likened herself to some people who, after waiting for a long time, lose all desire and when the expected comes, they are already negative and even scandalized toward the one on whom the delay in the promise depended. God did not see a problem in Abraham's laughter, that is, He did not make a direct comment, but for Sarah He sounded disapproval.
She, standing in the tent, heard all the conversations, especially the last words, and began to laugh at God's words, expressing skepticism, with the meaning that "well, can it be, should I have a child in my old age, when I have already lost the ability to procreate?". It sounded in her soul as if she was denying the message, as if she was disbelieving in what the Guest had said, as if instead of consolation and joy they were grieving her, as if she were saying, "Leave me alone, I have already lost all hope. God's people should keep the dream, not lose it (not necessarily personal in something concrete, but in the higher, unknown), but God works with us as we are, everyone has some problems. He does not punish us for every wrong done, but educates us to grow the right thing in our souls. For Sarah, though, there still came a moment of fear here. God says to Abraham, as if in rebuke to him, without addressing her - "Why did Sarah laugh? - As if asking, "Did you not tell her any of what you were told, did you not explain it to her?" At this point Abraham himself, who had also allowed himself to laugh the last time, felt, or should have felt rebuked, that his attitude to God's words was not as it should have been.
- Is there any difficulty for the Being? At the appointed time I will be with you again and Sarah will have a son.
Sarah was afraid, because her laughter was internal, not outward. Even though God's question was directed to Abraham, Sarah hurriedly excused herself by lying, "No, I wasn't laughing. Technically, she seemed to be right, because no one heard it - well, who could hear her thoughts...? But to Him Who created man, it is equally easy to read thoughts as to see and hear open manifestations, and for Him laughter was clearly recognizable. And He declared His knowledge to her in reply - "Nay, thou hast laughed." To argue with the heartbreaker Sarah dared no longer, feeling that it was not worth while to defend her little untruth. It was good when people were sensible enough, but it was still better to be right away rather than later.
Dinner and rest were over. The guests rose and went their way, and Abraham went with them to see them off. The masks had already been removed, the identities known. Dear God spoke, and said a rather surprising thing - "shall I hide from Abraham what I want to do?"... The surprising thing lies in the very frankness of God. Usually how do people think of God? - that He is inscrutable and His works are too complicated for us, especially among those who think they believe in Him, such pessimistic attitudes are common. Yes, there are some things that God will not reveal to people, probably never. There are also many things that people have to grow up to, and in their present state they may not understand a lot of things, and even if they do, it is unlikely that this knowledge will be of any use to the world. And there are many things that are well within our grasp, if someone will tell us about them. And equally vast are the things that we can learn, if we only have to do it and strain our thinking mechanism. And for acquiring this knowledge we are responsible, laziness in learning and developing ourselves is a crime, since we do not want to imitate Him in this. God in principle wants to see man knowledgeable, developed, practically everyone in His plans[66] is a highly learned master in sciences, crafts, art, wisdom, self-control, expressiveness. Including God wants to reveal to people and the future, maybe not everything, but there is a phrase in the prophet Amos - "The Being does nothing without first revealing (first) the secrets to his servants-prophets". Prophets have the task not to keep what is entrusted to them, but to convey it to at least one person, but very often they are appointed to inform large groups of people, if not the whole mankind, about God's plans.
Some of the church preaches the idea that men are not equal, that some are entrusted with power and knowledge, and that it is the duty of others to mindlessly obey that power, but there is no such idea in the Bible. Within the framework of such an idea, it would even be a sin for those who are created to obey to rise above their (someone's) intended level. But there are no such sins in the Bible! There is, of course, the idea of not organizing revolutions to free slaves, for example, because it is not the time for that, because according to Marxist considerations revolutions can only be successful when society is ripe for them, especially economically... That is, Marxists have condemned all previous generations to hopeless subsistence, without any hope or prospect for the masses of slaves. I remember how at school in history classes I was unpleasantly struck by hopelessness of such a prospect for the oppressed part of humanity. But then, don't blame God or religion for limiting revolutions... They limited them due to the same factors as the Marxists. Even the slave in the Bible is not absolved of the obligation to develop, educate and other duties of man to the best of his ability.
There is also the idea in the Bible of subjugating people from one to another, and this cannot be called abnormal, an army without such subjugation would lose a lot. But to restrict the development of men for the sake of subordination is a criminal idea. No matter how subordinate people are, every last cog must carry and realize the image of God with dignity, develop himself in order to understand what is inherent in him and realize his vocation. It cannot be that some can be developed to high degrees of knowledge and skill while others are obliged to remain limited - God created men equal, as the founding fathers of the United States correctly observed. Those who preach that it is the business of some to command and others to obey, and for the sake of the authority of the highest not to develop, thus diminishing the image of God who created men each with his own abilities, are criminals, and they will answer to God when the time of reckoning comes. Throughout time, classes of people deprived of the right to development and study have been formed, which brought a lot of problems to mankind, when huge masses of people were doomed to subsistence and lowered dignity. The dignity of a human being is not only in the respect given to him, but also in the fact that his personality "unfolds" to the extent of his abilities, knowledge and skills, and if someone is not developed to the extent possible, his value is lowered, and his Creator is deprived of the service that this person could perform.
"From Abraham will indeed come a great and strong nation that will bring good to all the nations of the earth," God said to Abraham. Of course, this can only be fulfilled if this nation possesses the desired moral qualities, without them it will be just the opposite of a curse on the world. God does not create this nation for superiority in talents or sciences, although they are not lacking in these, especially not for the sake of political domination and suppression of others, but only for a model of righteousness, goodness and other qualities of God. If the world is not to perish because of sins, there must be those who set an example of faithfulness, purity, and righteousness. If there is not this example, the world will be doomed. Either God will have to replace it with someone. "I have chosen you for this purpose, that you may teach your sons to walk in the same way as you, doing righteousness and faithful judgment," God continued. The task is an important one, did Abraham fulfill it? In the future it will be seen that in the next generations of this chosen family there was a decrease in the spirituality that was in Abraham, giving an upsurge only in individual representatives. Could it be because Abraham himself was not spiritual enough in all things, or because children do not always follow the way of their fathers, or do not desire great accomplishments, being content with limited deeds?
Then God told Abraham about the plans to destroy Sodom because the development of the community of people who lived there was not going on in the best of ways and finally it just got to the point where all the watchers serving the Shittim Valley area were fed up. And God said something that a lot of even believing people don't think of very well - "I will go and see if the news that reaches Me is true." Everyone knows of God as omniscient and even omnipresent, and He could seemingly see everything without having to personally go somewhere. This is absolutely true - and can and does know. However, what I see here is that God is indeed close to man, and it is true that we are made in His image and likeness - it is this case that shows that for Him too, despite all His superpowers, to be directly on the spot means more than knowing even EVERYTHING but from afar. We should not forget that the God who appears here is not the Father, but the Son, who is the same as the Father in all His attributes, but incarnated in such a form that the creation can bear Him and not perish from the forbidden energies of His presence. If the Father Himself had come here, Abraham and Sarah would not have been able to bear His presence. It is of Him that it is said, "No man hath ever seen God," "The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father - He hath manifested."
It is interesting that the destruction of Sodom and the surrounding area was overdue at the time of Isaac's birth. It seems that this hotbed of perversion should not have been near the rising heir of righteousness, who would have desired less exposure to the brazen profligates that were the inhabitants of the Shittim valley. Living in almost paradisiacal conditions, with a full supply of all kinds of foodstuffs, with no heavy worries about survival, they had become corrupted beyond belief, according to the Russian proverb "to go mad with fat". The valley below sea level had many water sources and did not suffer from droughts, so farming there was easier than in any other place on earth. God had no plans to separate Isaac from sinful people, there were enough of them around, but it was still worth keeping a distance from some particularly "advanced" wicked people[67] . The consequences of close communication with especially perverted people can be seen in the problems of Lot's family, part of which perished with Sodom, the other part carried his spirit into the big world.
Because of knowing Abram's age at that time (99 years old), we can know the exact date of the destruction of Sodom with the cities - 2107 from the beginning of the world or about 1897 BC.
Bargaining for Sodom
The angels accompanying the Son of God went to Sodom, with the task of leading Lot's family out of there before the punishment of the wicked place. Christ remained to speak with Abraham, who did not miss the opportunity to ask some theoretical questions. It is still interesting how different types of people can be recognized by the questions they raise in the same situation. Abraham, as a true humanitarian and intellectual, could not miss the opportunity to clarify for himself the relationship between God's mercy and goodness and His justice and fairness. Is this not the best characteristic for the ancestor of the Messianic nation? He clarified it in the current context of the forthcoming destruction of Sodom (knowing their manners and realizing that God, coming to see what was happening there, would not find anything mitigating and that the city was doomed), without delving into abstract matters, although he was enlightened by his fathers and relatives, who had ancient knowledge about the Existence. Still, it was a rare good fortune to be able to resolve his questions and doubts face to face with the Judge of the Universe.
What did he want to realize? - The same thing that people today still think about His judgments on those who have managed to bring them upon themselves. Children die there, and not all people are equally guilty - why does God not punish precisely at the right place, why do the less guilty, or the innocent, get punished along with the guilty? Abraham is not being so subtle here, it is atheists today who ask this of believers, but his questions are more specific, they are about the righteous, so let me answer something about this as I see it today.
When a society comes to the brink of destruction, as a rule the situation is so ripe that there are no "normal" people left there, most of them either leave because of the impossibility to live further among the high level of evil, or are expelled by the majority, or have already perished... Those who remain from the "normal", not infected outwardly, understand the fate of the doomed society, but make their own personal choice due to certain circumstances and attachments. And this is not just coexistence next to highly developed evil, but almost inevitable complicity, involvement in everything that happens there. That is why God is not to blame for the fact that those who die among the obviously guilty are those who are left with them. As a rule, the community is always warned of the consequences of their choices and deeds, that God's patience is running out. These are not necessarily prophets like Moses or Elijah, but they are always messengers who may not be heard by many, but they are heard by all, reaching all. At this time it is on everyone's lips, some seriously, some jokingly - "it's time to go" in one variation or another. Sodom was also warned, although the Bible does not tell about it, but it is undoubted - the history of mankind contains many such examples, and the presence of Lot, who did not accept the customs of Sodom, confirms it. There are children who are not always guilty of their parents' sins, but is it not the parents' fault that they do not think about their children when choosing a clearly ruinous path? Should not they, who are responsible for them, think of them? People leave the place where trouble is expected, and sometimes without any prophet they themselves feel the approaching storm perfectly well. By warning a generation that has reached the threshold of decay and destruction, God is trying to save these innocents. But to deliver them "manually" when society itself is not going to do it, to interfere in the choice of people is not in His principles, it would be a violation of the principle of free will. To stand over everyone and protect them and their loved ones from the results of their choices - God did not sign up for such a thing, except for rare special cases, but even then, deliverance from the consequences of every mistake is not guaranteed....
Apart from those judgments when God punishes groups of people, cities, nations, there are disasters caused by the Prince of this world, who is not God. He has some limited power over people who are not in union with God, who have not committed themselves to His ways, especially over those who willfully reject God and His laws, and he likes to deceive those who trust, often thinking that "they have a pact with hell and the abyss". But Lucifer does not always keep those who have chosen him as a leader, and knowing that the fate of people is not always in his full power, he, seeing the impending troubles, sometimes hastens to draw a line for many who thought that they were the beneficiaries of fortune and luck. To complaints (if anyone has time to ask) he answers simply: "What makes you think I keep my promises? You knew I was a Deceiver. That's what you liked about it - total freedom. Do I owe you anything?" Or he may simply reply that he doesn't like losers... He has vast knowledge and many skills, for he is a being of the highest intelligence and power, but today his main calling is to ruin the lives of those to whom God has offered opportunities to return that he and his angels are not given. Though he does not do this often, he still needs the living, not the dead, for his work, so he restrains his inclinations. Bullies and sadists come closer than any Satanists to understanding the devil and his essence. Satanists may sincerely despise them, believing them to be high in spirit like Lucifer, but they imitate other sides of Lucifer, while his true essence is still closer to those who are addicted to killing and keeping others in fear. And isn't that what Satanists themselves are reduced to? They don't run their movement. In Faust, he lies when he speaks of himself as a force forever striving to do evil, but doing good instead (in the part where he speaks of striving to do evil, he speaks the truth). This failure does not come from the devil, but from the fact that God can turn his evil into good and does so to give choice to the living, so it is not the merit of the Prince of this world at all, but only a by-product of the work of grace in this world. It is the result of the confrontation of destructive and creative forces, not of evil itself.
So Abraham asks, "Will You destroy the righteous along with the wicked?" In principle, he himself understands perfectly well that this can happen, and he cannot condemn God for it. This is evident from the fact that he is trying to find the boundary after which it becomes permissible, in the sense of "permissible loss" for which there is no condemnation. He is only trying to understand God and the principles of justice, to harmonize his understanding of things with the way God looks at it. This is evident from his question, when he step by step lowered the bar of the ratio of the righteous to the wicked to ten people for all of Sodom. Then he himself felt that he could not continue, he asked the first question as if through force, feeling some inappropriateness, apologizing for his persistence. He asked the question six times, bringing the number of the righteous from fifty to ten, but all he found out was that there was a limit to the number of those who were not worthy of punishment. Although in this particular case none of the righteous were harmed at all, Lot and his family were taken out of Sodom. Abraham could understand as much from life practice as he could from the answers he received directly from God. Though to have such opportunities - to ask God personally - seems very significant to me, it is something like the highest reward. And it seems to me that Abraham could have spent time on better topics, that the end of the conversation was a bit stilted, that God expected something more meaningful and profound from him. Who knows, though, we shouldn't judge harshly. It is important for God to have direct personal communication with man, no less than for us, and these opportunities are not over and far from being exhausted. And our questions, if they are deep and concern us a lot, not only raise us to Him, but also attract Him to us - He is no less interested in answering our questions, in lighting a flame of understanding and admiration in our eyes than we are in receiving an answer.
When Abraham was unable to ask any more questions-though it was logical to expect a question about the five righteous, which would have been right next to the actual number of those taken out of Sodom-he could no longer overpower himself, feeling that he was abusing the moment, God went His way, and Abraham returned home. That was the end of this year's meetings, but there was one more scheduled meeting ahead after the birth of Isaac. Abraham and Sarah knew to expect a miracle, and that expectation brightened their lives. And probably just within a week of that meeting, Sarah realized she was pregnant.....
When this happened to John the Baptist's mother, who was also of considerable age, she kept herself hidden from people, not telling anyone about her pregnancy, saying to herself that people would laugh. Sarah did not lurk, yet she too expected people to laugh. People can indeed laugh and make jokes, but it's usually not malicious or envious, kind people are pleased by such occurrences. She just wanted to make the timing of their jokes shorter, sometimes even non-evil jokes are not well received in certain moods or personality. She was a very beautiful woman, especially in the old days, when there were still alive, if not giants, then long-lived first post-Flood people who looked like gods to the eyes of ordinary people.
The destruction of Sodom and the fate of Lot
Meanwhile, the angels who had gone to Sodom were doing their work. They were to bring out a relative of Abraham who had been on his mission for some time. He had not lost sight of God for himself personally, but he had not been able to bring this out to anyone in his circle. His wife was from Sodom, and that city ruined her. Though how can one blame the city if she herself found herself attached not only to the good that was in it, but also to the bad.
Lot sat at the gate of the city, as the elderly and not only people have sat and sit in all centuries, it is a universal custom, in many places people sit at the borders of their villages, if there are any, or just at their gates or neighbors, if they want to be in company. In modern big cities of the world it seems unfamiliar, maybe for new generations, but even the sight of grandmothers at the entrance will help to understand and feel the nature of man, forcing to gather for a sit-down. No civilization, whether in America or Europe, can eradicate these traits in man.
Lot, sitting at the gate of the city in the evening, saw two travelers. They looked unfamiliar, which meant that they might not know the customs of this sometimes dangerous city, where good was called evil and vice versa, and where helping a man could be seen as a breach of order. He immediately suggested that they go to his house where they would be safe. I wonder, when he himself first came to this town, was he himself in danger? Hardly, for he was rich and had servants, which was a virtue in the eyes of the sodomites. But these two travelers, though they did not look poor, had no visible protection and could have been attacked by the mob, which is what happened a little later. As is quite often the case, bad morals develop quickly, a fall into one depravity or another takes hold of others and the circles of bad influence widen. Sometimes it can happen slowly, sometimes it can happen quickly. Here in Sodom it was going too fast. When Lot came here about fifteen years ago, it was still pretty safe, but on this night even he, who had seemingly become a local (but also not his own), was in great danger.
Lot began to persuade the aliens to visit him, but they refused, saying that the streets and squares of this city were comfortable enough for rest and sleep. The climate of this place was indeed very friendly to man, except that the inhabitants of this place took it for granted and had no gratitude to the Author of Nature. According to their ideology, as some tales of old say, it was wrong to help anyone. Their perversion was not only in the realm of sexuality, but also in the concepts of good and evil. I think that this perversion was not great at first, but blossomed over a period of a dozen years, and flared up towards the end in such a way that it forced God to take action to curb the hotbed of moral decay. I tend to think that the extent of God's "response" to human evil is usually adequate to the extent of decay (a purely human trait, but where do we get that from?), and then the fact that this paradisiacally flourishing land with the best fruits was reduced to a barren wasteland with barely thawing life means that they went too far. And there was someone who set the tone, or a few people who were followed by the rest. Though the whole population could be pretty unanimous too, so the seducers didn't need to persuade and try to influence them, their influence was picked up on the fly. But then it gets even worse...
Lot finally persuaded them. The Bible notes that he pleaded with them very strongly, indicating that he realized that the situation in the city was already very bad. And that Lot also for his part could not leave the people in danger, while the other would have given up, as if to say - "I did my duty, I begged them, but if they do not want to, it is their choice ..." But Lot, seeing that these people were fearless only because they did not know what was going on in the city (they portrayed the simpletons very well, while the level of violence in Sodom is shown even in the words of God "I will go down and see if the cry of complaint against them is accurate as it comes to me", i.e. there were many victims and it was known to the whole neighborhood), did not give up and still persuaded them to go to him.
The sun had set. The host and his guests had had their supper, but events moved quickly. They had not yet gone to bed when a crowd of excited local people gathered at the house to hear about the arrival of two strangers at Lot's house. Lot's insistence and the behavior of the strangers attracted the eyes of some, not unnoticed... All of them were in anticipation of close acquaintance with new people, you can imagine how... Their blood was boiling with sexual hormones, so they were free, unbound from the original norms of existence. A man can develop even where he should not, and can be proud of this unusualness, where he as if gets something that people, following the laws, are not available. If one doesn't care about consequences and results, it may even be interesting, and by saying "don't care about consequences" I'm not talking about the punishment that God prepares for apostates, but where the development of unhealthy principles will go, where it will lead man and society. It is always dangerous to disturb the ecology of connections within and without man. He Who calculated human existence, Who designed it, calculated the optimum, and these limitations, safety techniques, were voiced in laws, rules, statutes and orders. To go beyond their limits means to lose strength, health, happiness, meaning of life, which will turn into existence. Lucifer at the beginning of his path did not calculate the results of his plans and intentions, and later, when he began to reflect on what he had done and what he got, he was just on the road to destruction. Subconsciously he was already aiming for destruction, only wanting to take more people with him. Although many of his plans seem not so impossible (but is life?) - just a little more, and would have succeeded. Except that he and his activities were also calculated before his creation...
Why was evil allowed to exist at all? How do all the critics of God usually think? - If He is so omniscient, and foresaw that He creates the devil, or rather Lucifer, who will later become this devil, from a sane being who made himself the center of evil, then why did He create him? And could easily have avoided all the problems if He had created someone else in his place... However, this is a primitive idea. Maybe you and I would have created someone else in His place, but if we had so much omniscience in us, we could see that the problem of choosing the right or wrong way is universal... That is, it arises before everyone, not only before Lucifer. And not only Lucifer can fall for temptation. He was the first to do it. So could anyone else. Lucifer was successful mainly because he was the chief or one of the chiefs, a very powerful being at the origin of the government of the universe, as God characterizes him in the prophecy in Isaiah - "from the vastness of your trade your inward parts are filled with unrighteousness."[68] , that is, he had many contacts, he had many connections going through him, he commanded vast resources. If a less influential being had been in his place, the scale of evil would have been much less. However, the position and amount of influence does not fundamentally solve the problem of evil. A weaker one could still seduce many. Even a low-influence being could well have gained popularity and influence at the expense of the idea itself, as is often the case. So, not only could many others be in his place, but importantly, Lucifer might not have fallen! He had a choice, but he was not programmed to fall! He could have avoided temptations, or having stepped on his slippery path, he could have returned to the good path, he could have. And they say he was really on the verge of it, but that is beyond our consideration. Evil is not necessary for universal harmony, without it it turns out much better, in the sense that it is alien to harmony and life itself.
Another question is, could not the one who had taken the crooked path have been destroyed? But his disappearance, if the elimination had been done secretly, or the elimination publicly, would have raised questions and doubts about the goodness or rightness of God, since the causes of Lucifer's problems were not clear. God is certainly omnipotent, but not in the area of mind control. No, He can, of course, but then why create sentient beings? And if you create intelligent beings, you have to treat them accordingly, so that they understand. It is only God who can know everything before the beginning, but the rest comprehend it gradually, and they need time for it. Lucifer played on this gap of comprehension, as anyone else would do in his place. Not giving his followers time to comprehend the situation, constantly throwing them doubts about God - how long can you manipulate like that? This story stretches back about six thousand years. It is true that for the vast majority of people it has long been resolved, in many respects everything has already been resolved for everyone except for people, but they will have great opportunities to sort it all out. But in addition to the devil, doubts must be eliminated concerning people themselves - can those who have known evil, especially those born in a corrupted world, become reliable in righteousness? Will they not become new carriers of evil, will they not carry the seeds of evil and decay into the worlds of peace? How lasting is the salvation that God has realized through Christ? How firmly have men embraced it? - These are weighty questions, because the devil has also succeeded with religion, creating many distortions.
Therefore, the answer seems clear - it was impossible to destroy the bearer of evil without first defeating evil morally and ideologically. Other solution would necessarily entail doubts in God and would lead to new kinds of evil and retreat, the world would turn into hell. Fiction writers have done a very good job in this direction, depicting many variants of society management, and in their described pictures almost everywhere everything is unreliable and prosperity is short-lived, if evil has not won at all, in their variants of world order only variants of evil embodiment differ, not victory over it. Almost no one has found or pointed out a way out.
The answer is that the fall of Lucifer was an experience of maturation for the created beings, practically an inoculation. This experience could be received and realized in limited versions of the retreat, it was enough to think well about the received data, but in practice the retreat gained too much power. When Lucifer managed to connect to himself and the Earth, the matter went (for people) on a catastrophic scenario. In God's plans there was nothing like that, events for all involved in them went and go according to their own laws, everyone is completely free to choose, except for cases when we ourselves limit each other (in this sense, Lucifer is quite limited by the capabilities of his assistants, the more so, that he does not have and never had any divine possibilities, it is a subject of his dreams, for the sake of which he probably started everything, and those miracles that are available to him are available to others, including us by the very nature of things, except that he has noticeably more power and thinking power), such is life and the rules of the game. If God planned something, it was not to deprive us of freedom of choice. We can only say that He knew how things would go, but He did not plan it - He merely foresaw it. He voluntarily, for the sake of being understood, stood on the same level with the creation (not renouncing His divinity, hardly possible, but not showing it and not using it) and opened Himself to the judgment of all, expecting that the Deceiver's plans would reveal themselves and his essence of a thief and murderer would become obvious to all. To remove Lucifer before the time was to harm Himself and all the living - without understanding his essence it is useless and harmful. This is the essence of why things are the way they are. However, there is an opportunity for anyone who wishes to secure his future - to stand not only on the side of God, but also on the side of righteousness and other things derived from this path of common and personal good and harmony. Winning here is not instantaneous, although it is guaranteed by the powers of God. By winning now in unfair ways many lose the future, but those who win the future do not necessarily lose in everything now... In this life both sides play on equal terms, without advantage, so the crooked paths seem more advantageous to those who do not look far. This equality of conditions is necessary for people to pass the test of advantage - too many could tolerate for the sake of the future, it is the most self-interested who would try to enter life, but the conditions of this life and the duration of this reality reveal the real motivations of the candidates...
These measures bore fruit for all those who remained faithful to God and many who were somewhat fascinated by Lucifer's sophistry, but who did not rush to join him in his rebellion - they, seeing by the example of Earth what his rule and methods were, understood everything. When they saw what he did to the Son of God, whom everyone loved, how he treated Him when He was on Earth, there were no more sympathizers for the devil anywhere in the universe. The only ones left are us, the inhabitants of the Earth. We have many different points of view, much confusion due to misunderstanding of the Bible and God as well as life itself, even knowledge of ourselves is lacking for too many. Because of many and many sabotages from the evil one in the information sphere, because of apostate religious systems, called Babylon in the Bible, people are walking in darkness, but sooner or later enlightenment will play its role, and each of the living will be able to make a conscious choice about the side worthy to be supported. And then there will come a complete end not only to the rule, but also to the existence of evil and its prince ...
Lot, seeing the sex-crazed crowd eager to get to know the newcomers who had wandered inadvertently into Sodom, decided to personally influence them. He counted on his authority as a man of God to calm them down. Perhaps he did not expect complete success, but he could not help but try to stop the crowd. And the moment was such that he had to act somehow. Most likely, he had done it before, when reasonable words had cooled passions and the pictures he drew of consequences had helped someone to stop wrong actions. And now he went out to the crowd and asked them not to touch the guests, who in all, perhaps, cultures are sacred, who should be immune to hostile action while they are in the house. He even suggested that they take their virgin daughters out to them instead of the guests. It should be noted, this suggestion is not at all as simple as it seems to many. Not everyone has the experience when, when attacked, the victim suddenly seems to be set up by the aggressor, and the latter stops and stops hostile actions. It happens ahead of the aggressor, when he is not yet ready for radical actions, and the victim wins if he is "set up" before the aggressor reaches the boiling point... Often the aggressor is ready to strike, but is not ready, has no intention to kill. When a Russian at the beginning of a fight or a certain moment of quarrel tears his shirt on his chest and opens his chest, shouting "na, hit ...!", "opens up" to the opponent, it is just that - he psychologically disarms him, not ready for even stronger moves. The situation develops gradually, as a rule. Where there is no such gradualism, we speak of lawlessness, because the culture of conflict is violated, and the aggressor acts dishonorably. That is why Lot does not set up his daughters at this moment. And if he did not do it now, the crowd would have done this and much more later, if it had not stopped in front of the fence of the private property and stormed Lot's house when he did not give away his guests, and neither the defenselessness of the women, nor their cries or submission would have stopped anyone.
Some will say, "What would Lot have done if the crowd had fallen for Lot's offer to replace the guests with his daughters?" Would he have had to honor his offer then? Do you think the situation would have remained the same, i.e., his daughters would have been abused? Is it common to hit someone who yells - "on hit", revealing themselves? After all, they were still set up to "communicate" with men, not women... Even a change of setting would have meant some kind of thinking activity, a stop or pause in the program of actions, which was necessary at this acute moment, besides, the factor of preemptive "tearing of the shirt" should have worked, we should not forget. If they had come to the realization that they were guests of their countryman and respected man, it would mean that they had cooled down, and they could not touch his daughters, it would be an unforgettable insult to the honor of the citizen and their town itself. They would not be forgiven by others, not just Lot. At least that was Lot's own serious calculation. Yes, it could have been that his calculation would not come to fruition, but it was unlikely. Yes, there was another case when a similar calculation did not come true, but the retribution in that case was terrible, really terrible. But more about that in due time. Here Lot's move was ineffective - no, they did not want daughters. The crowd was over the edge, the development of wickedness in the city had reached a certain point when their fate was decided, coming to them in the form of these two guests of Lot. The situation in Sodom was overripe, the people had crossed the line in their moral "development." Lot's proposal, which could stop a simply angry or resentful or capricious person, was useless here. However, it was heard and appreciated, though not in the way Lot thought it would be.
The crowd reacted - "this alien wants to teach us here?" Is he going to tell us what is right and wrong? Manipulate us? - they noticed everything-"then we're about to do to you even worse than we wanted to do to them..." If they were eager to penetrate the guests' anus, then Lot was really in for even worse. The Bible goes on to say that they began to "come hard" against Lot. That is, they began to attack him, trying to seize him, to bend him over, but Lot resisted this and it was not possible to do it at once. The matter was complicated by the fact that Lot took too much risk, when he went out to them, he locked the door behind him. Getting back into the house now was very difficult, he would not be allowed to. He was literally sacrificing himself, giving those remaining in the house a chance that the attackers would stop at him if they still dared to attack. Though the matter could have gone according to his plan with what he had said about his daughters, and then he could have safely returned to the house after the attackers were ashamed of his exhortations, but it didn't work. Lot was being pounced upon, not violently yet, only a couple of men were attacking, the rest were just watching, but soon it could all turn on them. At that time, the door behind Lot opened and the angels pulled him back into the house. He found himself safe and secure. However, in doing so, to leave the attackers just like that meant that the crowd could begin to destroy Lot's house out of an excess of emotion, and the angels showed not the least impact by "shutting the eyes" or "taking away the eyes" of the crowd, as it is written "struck blind." The people stopped seeing where the entrance to this house was and began to search for doors... They searched for a long time, so exhausted that they began to scatter around in this search, trying other houses, and their further fate is unknown. This blindness was limited, not a total loss of sight. Not seeing, or rather not discerning the right door, they tried in a fury for a long time to find it.
Lot was allowed to catch his breath, but not for long. They didn't have much time before morning, at sunrise the valley of Sittim would cease to exist as the valley of the Garden of Eden, the sources of fire, lava and other things that would destroy this beautiful but corrupt and evil place had already been prepared. The humans had to be able to leave the valley by this time, and the angels had to activate the elements at dawn. The guests had now revealed themselves, not by what they said about themselves, but by showing their power and no longer playing the role of inexperienced aliens. They took charge and now asked Lot if there was anyone else in this city who had anything to do with him, relatives or anyone dear and near to him. It was no longer a question of the righteous, but only of family members who could have their lives saved because they had something to do with Lot and were thus brought within the circle of his sanctifying, thought-provoking influence. There were two young men who were wooing his daughters, and the angels sent Lot to them to bid them leave the city right away. But how do people who are used to their city, to an environment where there is no disturbance or reason for them from nature, take such news, and even in the middle of the night? It's hard to believe in such a thing, except that full of like-minded people will understand and believe, but not ordinary people living today. Anyway, it seemed to these guys that Lot was joking, and even so unsuccessfully - to get them up in the middle of the night for some reason, to leave everything and go somewhere unknown. Without preparations in advance, without agreements in the new place, without the slightest reconnaissance of the new place... Well, respectable people do not do such things... In general, only Lot's wife and daughters, the closest circle had a prospect for life of all the inhabitants of this bad place. When it became clear that no one else would go, and it was time to leave, Lot still hesitated, hovering in a kind of passivity and indecision. A long time passed in these preparations and gatherings, and then the angels, seeing that the words had little effect, simply took them by the hands and led them out of the house. Lot delayed not so much because he regretted the city, but because he was shocked by all that had happened and simply lost in the tumultuous and unexpected events. In such cases one must discount one's condition without reproach, which is exactly what the angels did. They explained to Lot that they had to get to the edge of the valley at least, or better, beyond it, but Lot, like Abraham, began to bargain for terms, sensing some possibility of God's favor with him.
He asked to be left with a small town on the edge of the valley, either because he had to live somewhere, or because he felt that he would not be able to leave the valley in the allotted time, although he was not infirm at all, so his persistence is incomprehensible. Apparently, Sodom had greatly relaxed his spirituality. One of the angels said that for his sake he would make this exception, and spare Sigor, about which Lot was talking. By the way, Sigor did not help him much, he did not live there for a long time, he left, it is not known for what reasons. Most likely the inhabitants of that place were of the same character as the Sodomites, which is not surprising. When Lot persuaded the angels not to touch this town, he somehow thought that since it was small, the wickedness of its inhabitants would not be so great. This can be heard in the words he used to justify his request. It was accepted, though it did not benefit anyone, nor did it benefit the city, which was later destroyed as well. Lot, however, was told - "Hurry, save yourself there, for I cannot do the work until you get there." It is interesting that if Lot is to be waited on until he goes to safety, it would seem that they could have waited as long as they needed to, yet he is very earnestly asked to go quickly. Somehow the time of dawn when the retribution was carried out was important, later times were unacceptable.
"The sun rose over the earth, and Lot came to Sihor." At the moment he was already in the vicinity of that place, it began in Sodom. They were all given a clear order not to turn around or stop in their journey until they came to the intended place. They could not see, therefore, what had happened in the first moments of the catastrophe, but they could hear the sounds of the raging elements. When they were already in Sigora, they had a right to turn and look back, and having done so, they saw smoke and fire falling upon the valley. There must have been some clouds or clouds or something else where the fire and brimstone were falling from. A meteor shower or it could have come from the earth itself, it must have been ejected from somewhere by a volcanic explosion and was falling on the valley. From the vantage point of Abraham, who went out early in the morning to look that way, it looked like smoke from a furnace rising from the ground. But only the three men, Lot and the daughters, had reached Sigor. His wife, probably hearing the sounds of what was going on, broke her orders not to turn around. There must have been a very targeted retaliation going on, which worked against her for violating the order. By disobeying at a critical moment, under the hot hand, she seemed to attract a charge of anger. They warned her for a reason. It is reminiscent of the military's instructions on how to behave in a high-risk area if one is unlucky enough to be there. Many in the religious world today laugh at those who care about following every instruction of God as it is given, saying that this is bigotry and that the most important thing is to love and obey in such a detailed and elaborate manner[69] . Yet even Lot's wife herself serves here as a tacit hint of the non-randomness of every order from above, and also Christ puts her case[70] to the disciples. Yes, of course, both here and where Christ speaks, we are talking about times of "visitation" critical of the slightest infidelity, in normal times there is usually no such retaliation, but although there may be no direct blow in "quiet" times, everything is written in books (or video recorders?), and in due time it will all be brought to judgment, with no less, if not more, effect.
It is said about her that she became a pillar of salt, i.e. almost instantly either covered with a crust of salt, or all her tissues became salt. I do not find the second option incredible, it is a common phenomenon in geology, when in petrified wood all molecules with the participation of carbon disappear, and in their place with the preservation of the structure of wood there are other substances. The difference is only in time, in geological scales it is enough for replacement of some molecules by others, but here it is very fast. But if there are forces that can control all elements and elements, what prevents this from happening?
After he had been in Sihor for a while, Lot could not live there. It does not say why, but it does say that he was afraid to live there. We can assume that the people there knew him as a resident of Sodom. Why was he saved when the others were all dead? How did he know of the valley's destruction, and only one man was saved? Suspicious, though... Explaining that he had tried to call the others with him hardly helped, only increasing the suspicion that he knew exactly what trouble was coming - they thought and spoke their own anyway, as the character of the inhabitants of this valley was not the best. Had it not been for Lot's pleas for their town, they would also have been out of the world by now. Probably Lot regretted his weakness when he left the place... It may also be that, according to the custom of Sodom, no one helped him when he found himself without property and wealth. So there was no place for him there from the beginning, but dangers from the locals began to arise, so he had to flee again. He left and settled in a cave.
It was hardly a life of poverty and subsistence, but Lot was no longer willing to build houses, at least at that time, after all the turmoil. They were still sturdy and skillful men with the right hands, in spite of their character flaws of one kind or another. It was not hard to live in those conditions, if you could sow and plow or take care of animals. He did live, but he was accompanied by his daughters, who were going to marry in Sodom, but were now separated from all other people. It seems that everyone avoided them and perhaps feared them. And since Lot was afraid to live in Sihor, they were also hated and treated badly. So it seemed to them that no one would marry them, and that life was passing them by. And they seemed to accept everything, except one thing - they wanted offspring. And to some extent both of them in their maternal instincts (or is it more appropriate to talk about passions?) succeeded, they became the ancestors of two outwardly quite successful nations. And they had no more children, except for one son each, and they had no personal life, they did not marry. Almost heroic detachment from the world and from themselves, if it were not for one serious deviation from common sense.
Sodom had damaged their thinking and ideas of good and bad too firmly. They chose their own father as a father for their children... Knowing that he would not even talk about it, they played a bad joke on him. And they knew that it would not last long, that they would be alone, while they could have looked for husbands through Abraham, the relative would not refuse to help, the father would also help, but for some reason they did not try to realize this option. They prepared the wine, perhaps mixing something into it to make it safe, gave it to their father, and while he was under the influence, managed to use it in a known way. I have heard stories from people that a woman can use even a sober sleeping man in such a way that he will not wake up and will not know about the contact, except that he may remember the erotic dream and be surprised that there is no trace, which should be in such cases. That's if he wakes up immediately afterward, otherwise there will be no trace at all. Lot realized everything later, when he found out about the pregnancy of his daughters, although he could not have investigated the subject, so as not to curse them for breaking the rules and laws, carrying his shame in himself. He had to endure much while living in Sodom, of which the apostle later wrote that Lot was "daily tormented in his righteous soul, seeing and hearing the works of iniquity." With the death of Sodom these torments, unfortunately, did not end, Sodom continued to take place in his life, although to a lesser extent. But he happened to be involved in Sodom's customs, though involuntarily, and turned out to be a father to his grandchildren... He had to correct the evil where it was available to him, which he did, trying to bring up his grandchildren as healthy people as possible. They were not to blame for their origins. If there is anything good about the Ammonites and Moabites, it is Lot's efforts, though it is completely impossible to attribute it to him alone. Nor do the faults come only from Sodom or Lot's daughters, but Lot had something to do with them. If he did not wish for his descendants to suffer the fate he did, the only right thing to do was to stay away from Sodom.
When parents have a sexual interest in their children, or vice versa (as well as people of the same sex), it is a perversion in roughly the same category as gastronomic interest in them (also happens, but fortunately less often). People who are called normal are practically incapable of such a thing, no matter what other flaws they may have. The sexual sphere in man is furnished with many regulators and programs of the unconscious, and in idea should be included only within certain circumstances. But since in it much is connected with pleasure, people living for the sake of pleasure can easily arrange a program failure, because human regulation is very subtle in most processes, by our habits we establish associations between things, and in principle these associations are limited only by morality, but not at the level of hardware-body, that is, we can build almost anything out of ourselves, except divinity, limited by the level of strength and possibilities. In us there are program blockages from healthy instincts, but with persistent efforts they can be bypassed or rewritten, so that a person becomes what he makes of himself (usually unconsciously). And since few people know what leads where and what will be the answer, and few are interested in it, it turns out that people become a problem for society, carrying unhealthy and dangerous tendencies.
The birth of Isaac
At the promised time Isaac was born. Abraham was a hundred years old at this time and Sarah ninety. She remembered the laughter again, no longer her own, now she said of others that people would laugh, speaking of her case. But she does not look unhappy, having conquered her weaknesses, rather proud to have a son at an age when none of the ordinary people had that opportunity anymore, knowing that it is a good advertisement for God and His followers. She may see different categories of people laughing - some will do it out of joy for her, and some will just chuckle disparagingly because of her age - "wow, what a thing to do in the world." But here she is rather transferring her emotions to other people, attributing her experience to them, she is afraid to laugh, as she used to, at God's words. When she laughed a year ago, it was to doubt or disrespect what God wanted to give her. Now there is nothing to doubt, the predictions have come true, and it is no longer appropriate to laugh and doubt, but there is something still lingering in her soul, a kind of splinter, and if not herself, at least let others laugh... But others do not need to laugh, they are not Sarah, they will be happy for her and that's all. It was she, Sarah, who had the pain of childlessness for many years, and when she lost hope, suddenly God began to touch the painful point with unbelievable promises, and then, when she had already received an unexpected boon, something in her soul rebelled and burst out with such a small laugh, attributed to others ...
Here it is necessary to clarify what we are talking about. Often people do not know themselves, and even less others, and seeing the manifestations of a person in this or that situation, they judge by the closest analogy, by the familiar and understandable, without knowing the real engines and levers that make a person bend out wrongly. God sees what is real and would like people to understand much more than they do, to "scoop out" the depths of the soul, subconscious and unconscious, as Solomon said.
What was it in Sarah that made her laugh and attribute her laughter to others? The thirst for motherhood, unquenched in her youth and maturity, which turned into some despair-pain, they did not disturb her mental health and thinking, did not lead to bitterness against life, God or people, did not lead to depression. This is good and right; it is a model for all others. This is her portion of suffering for Christ, for His cause, the portion that fell to her - in this delay with her son, the power and glory of God was manifested, and her patience allowed God to reveal His supremacy over all circumstances. Had she gone the way of discontent and scandal, it might have completely frustrated God's plans for them and God would have had to find other people, more patient and wiser. Still, the fact that she had to be patient created a little soreness that manifested itself on occasion. This knot of emotions is objective, but how it will manifest itself, what emotions it will cause, what actions it will prompt and what it will whisper in your ear - can you predict? It sits in the subconscious, and how it will make itself known when life touches it, who knows? Although the reaction usually predetermines the character, but still a person can act and atypical for himself, and the mind corrects the person ...
It can be controlled even when something unexpected and unthinkable pops up from inside, when our inner self starts moving us instead of rational reasonable calculations, when we do not understand and recognize ourselves (and others too). Consciousness, although it works sequentially and cannot comprehend everything at once, but it has time to guess, calculate and calculate what is going on under the surface of consciousness by external signs and tangible sensations and emotions... And having recognized, having understood the real structure of ourselves, we get the most powerful levers to control ourselves, and sometimes even others.
Why did Sarah have such a painful reaction when the subject of children was touched upon? It seems as if the answer is simple - the soreness was caused not so much by years of waiting as by that grievous blunder with Hagar and Ishmael. Afterward, seeing her hot-headedness, haste, and belligerent insistence, which was hard to resist, as she forced her version of the appearance of an heir to the family upon Abraham, and seeing the disastrous results of it, she might have felt ashamed that she had set it up with her own hands. So afterward, when things got right, in the sense of God Himself declaring His intention to fulfill what He had promised, these things in her mind came into contact with what she had done, and it was agonizing for her. It is usually in such cases that a person, in an effort to avoid these feelings (how blessed are those who are able to admit their blunders), begins to twist her soul and behave inadequately. Painful points or clots of sensations in the memory, when the current of attention caused by circumstances passes through them, make us cringe, but we should bear it with dignity and straightforwardness, that is, honestly recognizing the lapses, and not pretending that nothing happened and trying to imagine ourselves better than we are. But not everyone comes to that right away. That is why Sarah began to laugh when she heard God's words about the son she would have in a year, and that is why she attributes to others the laughter she could not laugh herself after Isaac was born. Even if someone laughed, she could not have cared less what others thought of her and her son, when she herself had great joy and triumph over the seemingly inexorable laws of existence.
It was time to wean his son, and Abraham had a great celebration. Everything was splendid, but there were some things that marred the feast. Ishmael, who had ceased to be heir, through Sarah's own fault, was hardly at first hostile to his brother, to whom all that he could have hoped for had passed. In his youth he was hardly burdened with greed and excessive pragmatism, but his mother might have whispered to him about it, and he was imbued with it. After all, he was the first and therefore expected a special share of the inheritance, and with the advent of Isaac he was losing his primacy and with it considerable wealth, which for the vast majority of ordinary people is a very powerful factor. So at this point he had a definite dislike for Isaac, which came out in mocking taunts. Sarah saw it and heard it. If Ishmael had been a friendly, unselfish, normal person at that moment, the situation would probably have developed peacefully, but after this, Sarah did not want the child of divine promise and heir not only to the material wealth of the family, but also to great spiritual knowledge, to grow up in an atmosphere of enmity. Yes, politeness and courtesy, benevolence not only make life easier, like a lubricant, reducing friction, but also have a direct relation to safety. Hagar, at first enlightened by God and impressed by this, gradually returned again to the memory of the missed opportunities that seemed to have been taken away from her and her son. Though she "submitted" to Sarah, she did not destroy envy in herself completely, and passed it on to her son. This was wrong on their part, and by putting the peace of the house, though not directly, but still a significant threat to it, and potentially a danger to the heir, they put themselves on the verge of being cut off from the family.
Sarah was belligerent, demanding the exile of Ishmael and Hagar, which was extremely unpleasant for Abraham. He sought peace and harmony everywhere, and was ready to make many sacrifices for prosperity, but would such prosperity now be possible for all? But on this occasion God saw that Sarah's position was more right than his, of which He declared to Abraham that He Himself would take care of Ishmael, and of his life and glory, so that Abraham would not be ashamed of him. It also contains another lesson to Abraham - God told him to listen to the voices of Sarah. Fifteen years earlier, Abraham had also listened to her voice when he didn't need to, when he thought her offer was flattering, but when he needed to weigh the decision more than once. And now, precisely because he had obeyed her when it seemed appealing, he had to obey her another time when it was unpleasant for him.
Ishmael, too, needed a lesson, which Abraham was hardly able to give, and which God arranged for him by keeping him for some time in weakness on the verge of death. Looking at the later successful life of Ishmael, it is evident that they were not poor with Hagar, had the prosperity which Abraham had provided for them in their divorce, but on their journey in the wilderness no riches could provide them with water. They lost their way in the wilderness, and when the water ran out, Ishmael became very weak and could not walk. Hagar moved away in despair, not wanting to see her son die of thirst without being able to help. She herself clearly still had strength, but she could not share it with the teenager. Sitting far away, yet seeing what was happening, she began to cry and cry out to the sky. Once on a similar journey she had not called out to God, but He had personally appeared to her because she needed help with something, now she called out to Him and He answered her again. The remarkable detail, however, is that God tells her that He is not answering her cry, but He has "heard the voice" of Ishmael. If Ishmael had not prayed, rethought his actions, and repented of his behavior that got him into this trouble, God might not have answered her either.
After her conversation with God, her eyes were "opened" and she saw the well near where she and her son had been wandering. All their problems were instantly solved and their future life was not sad, although it could have been better.
It says that God was with Ishmael. This is a great thing, it is not often mentioned in the Bible, and it is always connected with the way of life and morality of a person, that is, what Ishmael experienced and understood was enough for his whole life,.
The strengthening of Abraham
During his life and wanderings in the Palestinian land, Abraham was gradually noticed. All the events connected with him contributed to this, and surprisingly, not only his right and honorable actions, but even his failures did not diminish his authority too much. The God of Abraham was visible to all who dealt with him as well as those who heard about him. The way He defended His vassal even when he was not completely right made people think about life and served as a definite advertisement for God Himself, even if not always sound. Many would not have minded to have among their supports also the strength that accompanied Abraham, and this was in line with the task God wanted to accomplish. The people may not have known this God very well, and Abraham may not have presented everything correctly by example, but this could be corrected in time, and in the meantime things were going well.
Abimelech, the ruler of the Philistines, who had a good sense of God's power, may have had some negative feelings against Abraham because of the Sarah story, but as time went on he evaluated Abraham from other angles and came to the conclusion that it would be good to have him as a friend and ally. He knew of his war with the enslavers of Canaan when he rescued his nephew from captivity, and this was a definite plus in Abraham's characterization. Such an ally, accompanied by supernatural power, who was personally acquainted with the Source of that power, the real God, was quite valuable for any future challenges for his people. And this was a perfectly correct calculation, but beyond political calculations, Abimelech felt a purely human sympathy for this amazing man, being himself a man of similar principles. And when different interests coincide, is it not happiness?
When Abimelech came to Abraham with his deputy for military affairs, he suggested that they make a treaty that none of them would offend each other now or in the future, that is, a treaty of friendship. It seems that he understood Abraham's future, that this man was not walking through Canaan now by chance, that Abraham would become the chief in that district, and he wanted to protect his descendants. So it reminds him of the way he dealt with Abraham in the story of Sarah, and that was really quite generous. Yes, he could not do Abraham harm because God had forbidden it, yet he did not even rebuke him or feel bad for him, sincerely giving him gifts and treating him politely contrary to what Abraham himself expected from the inhabitants of the kingdom. It is also worth mentioning that Abimelech, having been honored with a personal conversation with God, who warned him about Abraham in a dream, appears to be quite righteous himself, if God honored him with His communication (God did not speak to Pharaoh in Egypt in the same case). Abimelech emphasizes this, asks him to swear, and Abraham responds by swearing that he will do so himself and pass this attitude on to his descendants. Nobility begets nobility, goodness begets goodness.
In their talks about the alliance, Abraham made a complaint to Abimelech that his men had taken away the well he had dug, based on the fact that it was dug close to their land. Abimelech said he had not heard of this story and recognized Abraham's right to it. Interestingly, Abraham concluded the alliance by the fact that in addition to the vow in words, he gave animals from his herd to Abimelech and he accepted them. This looks like a kind of purchase on the part of Abraham and a concession-sale on the part of the Philistines. This territory, where he lived at that time, they began to consider it his, Abraham's land, where he had the right to manage, without losing it at the same time for themselves, it was still their, Philistine, land. Abraham was a guest of theirs... This settlement he called Bathsheba. Abraham lived there for a long time, and even planted a grove there, which pleased him with its shade and coolness.
The last test
Everyone has probably heard that catching up is harder than running in front. And if someone has had to catch up, they know that it is easier to run in the lead right away. If you have the strength to keep in your head, it is better to keep up, catching up takes much more energy than maintaining what you have already achieved. In studies the mechanism is the same - if you have not learned the lesson, then you will have to catch up later, you will have to exert much more energy and spend time on both past and current tasks. Abraham showed weaknesses several times, and God was not represented by his actions in the way He needed to be. Although by a show of His power He helped Abraham to get away with it, and in some measure made both Himself and Abraham respect Himself, it was not a development for the better for Abraham himself, nor did people have every right to think of God as the patron of things that were not good. For the sake of His honor and the cause of salvation in general, He had to raise and resolve the question of those failures one way or another - either Abraham corrects those character flaws and becomes fit for His purpose, or He will have to part with him. Abraham did not pass the exam in Egypt and the second time he was given the opportunity to replay the situation with the Philistines, but he repeated the same scenario. Also with the heir, he fell for Sarah's entreaties to take Hagar as a wife, flattering for his male ego on a universal level, but for him personally as a righteous man it was not a worthy act, as well as was not useful for his status as the chosen father of the holy nation. And how it spoiled the future of mankind... In all these deeds he was noticeably "behind" in his movement along the Path, and now it was time to "pull up" and "catch up" in order not to lose the distance and not to let down the One who had bet on him.
One had to think about the process of development, about the transition from evil to good, about a person's attainment of the necessary qualities. If a person overcomes himself in the struggle with his negative traits, then there is a strengthening of a "new man" or a certain skeleton of a new structure in his soul and character. But if a person stumbles somewhere, makes mistakes, sins, evil, lives according to old habits and schemes, then there is a fall, the person is thrown back a step or down (I do not know the size of these steps, maybe to the very bottom, where he was before the beginning of the ascent). At the same time, his capacity for good is weakened, and his gravitation to the dark side is correspondingly strengthened, the old construct or "old man" becomes stronger, and the "new man" finds himself almost in a coma. To overcome this negative effect of the falls, God has to give a greater load in the next trial. This is necessary because of sensitization, habituation and loss of effectiveness of the previous measures - it is necessary to "remagnetize" the stale soul, for which it is necessary to apply a stronger influence. If the person falls down again, it is necessary to increase it more and more. I realize that in many cases education goes on without increasing the load, but life is vast, and there are responsible spheres where the result is very important, and this very mechanism works there. And so the load increases, the tests become heavier, the conditions in which it is necessary to show fidelity become tougher up to a certain limit. After that, if a person does not give the required result, he is rejected from the candidates for the post. I am not sure if this is the mechanism in the area of human salvation (there is probably some degree of it too), but when someone is called to a responsible job where the quality of the person plays a key role, as was the case with Abraham, it is so. Greater responsibility generates a corresponding demand.
These cases accumulated on scales invisible to man, and it was finally time to settle the question of which side Abraham was on, time to pull up the "tails" or be dismissed. Yes, he was choosing God's side, but was his character in Him sufficiently, and not in all the other representatives of mankind? It wasn't enough that Abraham wanted something, you also had to live up to it. And it was his habits and traits developed on his journey of serving the truth that showed who he was with and on whose side. If he had behaved correctly in the moment of crisis, he would probably have experienced more fear and tension, but it would have been a victory, and he would not have had to go through the great darkness on the slope of years, when everything he wanted seemed to have been achieved and he could relax. After all, the failed work is not only a guilt before God or people, not only the consequences for the world, but also a splinter inside, sore for years and preventing normal life, poisoning many things. To accept it or to forget it means to lose a clear conscience and disconnection with God, to whom access to the soul is closed by unwillingness to admit one's wrongdoing. Of course, it is possible to live with the confession of guilt without blocking the way of the Spirit's work, but is it not even better to overcome and live freely without bending under the weight of a wounded conscience[71] ? Abraham, on the other hand, had lived with this for a long time and could begin to get used to it. When you don't know what you should do, or rather, when "what you should do" seems unacceptable or impossible for you because of some attitudes or complexes, you will gradually rebel against the other right things, you will start to justify what you have done, because "I couldn't do it otherwise", "I am a sinner" and other things of that kind... But if a person is inclined to procrastinate with his shortcomings for a long time, risking everything, as Abraham did now, God could not leave it unresolved, and now the time of visitation has come again.
God did not come to him explicitly, but Abraham heard a voice familiar to him from his previous dealings with Him, commanding him to go with Isaac to one of the mountains and sacrifice him there. Had this happened to anyone today, he would not have doubted for a moment that it was not God, but His enemy, who was dictating such a thing. And he would be right, because what God told Abraham to do then was not what it looked like. Such a thing, a human sacrifice, could not have been done and could not be repeated, if only because under the laws and statutes of sacrifice, nothing but a special category of animals could be sacrificed. If Abraham had actually killed his son there, it would not have been a sacrifice in any way, but merely a murder, a sacrifice always having a symbolic meaning. Only fallow and ruminant animals could be on the altar, and nothing else. The other, non-kosher animals not only could not be eaten, but they could not be sacrificed either. God could not accept the sacrifice of a dog, for example, or a pig or a horse. These are good animals in themselves, but not fit for sacrifice. The king of beasts, one of the symbols of God, is the lion, and his image is borne by one of the cherubim of the Throne, but the lion cannot be a sacrifice on the altar because it is not in the category of "clean" animals, not having split hooves and not being a ruminant. Man also never appears on the altar of God, already only because the sacrifice of animals was intended for the salvation of man (although they did not bring real salvation, but were a pointer to the real Sacrifice). A man cannot die for the sins of another man, because then both die - the first in vain, the second without being forgiven. A man can die for his own sin (as will happen at the last judgment), but it will be the death of the guilty one in retribution for what he has done, not a sacrifice for atonement, and after that there can be no more life. When the Messiah, the Son of Man, came, He was not offered in the temple and on the altar, because such a literal act would be outside the symbolism God Himself had defined, and would be a desecration of the temple, the service, and the whole Mosaic Law. The symbols of the Mosaic Law were fulfilled in their own way - on the cross. Christ's sacrifice was an execution and murder for those involved, not a literal sacrifice in the Temple[72] ... In sum, Abraham sensed that something terrible and wrong, impossible and not to be. It seemed like a breaking of everything, a catastrophe. However, he was used to trusting God, and from his previous mistakes he had already realized how things should have been done, and this time he decided not to rush to any conclusions, but to do what he was told from above. The Bible says that Abraham thought that through this God would show new miracles, that He would not leave Isaac dead, since He had promised so much about him, but would raise him up, setting up new signs for the future. This was an extreme hope, and he had many other thoughts, but this idea helped him to endure and not to break down.
But this was the thinking of the positive side of Abraham, while the other side, which had helped him to fall in earlier times, could present very different considerations. Such as this - he, Abraham, had failed too much, for after Isaac was born, God did not get in touch. Why? Could it be that He was displeased with him, utterly disappointed, and so was breaking the covenant with him? And the murder of Isaac means that God is either closing the project of a holy nation or will look for a better candidate, and Abraham is finished, he is not worthy, having spent too passive a life. If he were younger, he could have been more energetic, changed everything, learned a better way, but now it's over, it's too late... Such thoughts probably could not pass him by at this time. But this time he did not give in even for a moment, he showed complete trust in God, which was justified to the highest degree. But not immediately, but only when Abraham had fulfilled everything.
First he had to go somewhere unknown - God said that He would show him a specific place in the land of Moriah only when he got there. And it was necessary to take his son on this unknown journey without informing him of the purpose of the journey. But this was not difficult, for the young man was always easy going, and the unknown stimulated rather than alarmed or disappointed him. Abraham told him that they were to make a sacrifice on some mountain that had yet to be found. The quest looked intriguing. Especially since his father hadn't brought any animals with him for the offering, which seemed unusual. But imagination all the more drew pictures of having to find the sacrifice themselves, sort of like they went hunting as well. Just a whole adventure.
On the way, Isaac asked his father this question - why didn't we take anything for the sacrifice, who will be our sacrifice? This was a painful question for Abraham, and the joyful look of his son anticipating the adventure could not please him. "Would that he had known that he was the one destined to be placed on the altar," was roughly what Abraham thought, agonizing and wrestling with himself all the way, wavering between faith and unbelief that God was good, that He would not turn them away from Himself. In response, Isaac heard words that have now become part of many proverbs, including the famous Russian "it will be seen there", the same "avos". To be precise, it sounded like "it will be seen on God's mountain", in Hebrew it is roughly "on the spot, on the mountain Yahweh will show (his answer)". This was enough for Isaac, but for Abraham it was agonizing because he knew what must be there, yet this expressed "avos" was also a vague shadow of hope for him, which he realized only when he got "there" and passed his test.
On the third day, looking at the chain of mountains in front of him, Abraham saw where he had to go and was told his destination. Two servants were with them, and Abraham told them to stay where they were and wait for them, and he and Isaac would go on together. It appeared to be a day or two's journey to the destination and no matter how long the time dragged on, it was over. Abraham and his son came to the place where the sacrifice was to be made. God's previous promises to him about the future connected specifically with his son gave Abraham a strong assurance that no matter what, those promises would be fulfilled. And if the dead Isaac could not be the progenitor of a holy nation, then Isaac would be alive. It was a faith that would not allow one to stray from the path, that even God seemed to keep even God within the bounds of His promises. One could say that Abraham, by his faith, kept God from breaking His promises, if God was inclined not to keep His words... However, here it was the other way around, it was He who strengthened Abraham to hold fast to what he knew of God and not to lose, not to give up. But God was pleased to see that Abraham did not waver and held fast, not doubting Him, not being disappointed, and not losing his convictions. Abraham had indeed had time to understand and feel God and His character well during his life, from his first childhood impressions to his last interactions. It was not only by the words God spoke that he judged of Him, but by the imprint of His very personality, by the influence that is revealed in every contact between intelligent beings, whether created or Creator, all are surrounded by a personal atmosphere which enables us to permeate each other with feeling. Everything Abraham knew about the Creator said that the One does not lie or even could not do so, so Abraham believed and felt that his faith was not in vain. Many of us have not met God or angels and that is a serious loss[73] . Although no one living has escaped the influence of heaven, everyone has sooner or later encountered it, felt the pull of goodness, truth and truth, but not everyone has been impressed or appreciated it properly. There is a certain minimum dose in which it comes to everyone, as John says - "there was a light that enlightened everyone who came into the world", and it is enough for a person to choose the side of goodness, to become one of those "good people" on whom this world still holds on. This is familiar to all, but by many this influence is rejected or denied. However, such visits do not happen once in a lifetime, but for some the subsequent revelations are of no benefit, while the majority still correct their path to some extent.
When they arrived at the place, Abraham had to tell Isaac about his part in what was going to happen here. He could have said nothing, of course, but it was out of character. It might not have been in his character to attack and overpower a young man from his already (to put it mildly) elderly father. Since Isaac was brought up in the right spirit, i.e. a thinking man, Abraham counted on his conscience and cooperation. He told his son everything, about the role of the Sacrifice in the very existence of mankind, its divine origin, that Isaac was to be the father of a great nation, and that he had to undergo, by divine appointment, the experience. They thought that this experience of dying must be passed by him, yet it was they who could think so, but to make a savior of man was not in God's plan. We could still atone for our personal sins with our lives, but then we would have to make every person a victim. Can you imagine the scale? They say a lot of unnecessary things about God, and such a way would make the salvation of man very hard, death would be on the same level of values as life, and what damage would be done to the mentality and soul sphere, especially by the efforts of the evil one, is difficult to overestimate. All the more, one man could not, was not even entitled to save anyone else, having one or another of the stains of the violations of the Law. Each of us gives an account only for himself, and if he is responsible for others, then only to the extent of his influence on them, but not for the decisions that others make. The choice is made by the individual only for himself and for no one else. If someone decides for others, it happens, but those others may not agree with it, or even actively oppose it.
Isaac was penetrated, let himself be bound[74] and put on the altar, in this he showed his own choice and faith, a great experience of knowledge, of touching the experience of the Messiah. He was in the role of the Victim, in its skin, was able to appreciate the feelings and sensations of all those animals who for centuries ascended the altars, symbolically taking on the guilt of man. And now his father took the knife and held it over him... What would happen to him next?
But man can only barely touch the experience of Christ, and not everyone can do so, it is not in man's power and ability, it is much more important for us to use the opportunity that He gave us, for the sake of which He went to death. We cannot go any further without full righteousness and partaking of the divine nature. So at that moment there came a voice to Abraham telling him to stop his hand. It is not known whether Isaac heard it, probably not. But he saw that his father's hand, instead of making the final movement, stopped and then slowly lowered, his father responded to someone with "here I am," the knife moved away from his body, and then the rope was untied.
Isaac realized that his father could have done what he was told to do, and that he himself was ready to participate in the restoration of the lost glory of man and the kingdom of God on earth, but it was only a test. But the experience was enough for both of them to change and grow in the great work of man's salvation. Abraham showed by his firmness and steadfastness that he was no longer the one who had behaved unseemly to Sarah for fear of men, but that he had changed in reality. His former behavior now looked very different to him, and he saw how he should have behaved on those occasions, and the shame he had brought upon God, and upon himself. God Himself recognized his faithfulness and firmness when He said to him, stopping his hand: "now I see that thou fearest God." Isaac also had his share of experiences - although he lived a secure and safe life, he tasted the terror and fear from which no power can deliver, making him especially prone to ponder the meaning of life. Jacob, in making a vow of peace to his relatives, mentioned "the fear of Isaac," his father. This was an experience that was, or was to be, passed on in Israel as an introduction to understanding the person and service of the Messiah, what He would have to go through to become the Redeemer of mankind.
They were both overjoyed at the resolution of the problem, for it was not easy for Abraham to kill even an enemy, much less an innocent man, much less a son, even with the best of excuses. Casually glancing away, he found a ram entangled by its horns in the bushes nearby, which took its place on the altar. This is the final touch in this story of Isaac's sacrifice - the man's place was taken by another who replaced him. We discussed the legality and legitimacy of the substitute in the situation of the first sacrifice in Eden, so here we can only state that the plan of salvation again sounded bright and significant, this time for Abraham and Isaac, the patriarchs of a special nation, the guardian of truth.
Abraham called this place "He who will see to it", or "will take care of it", or "will provide it", fixing in the geographical name one of the greatest principles of human life - not to try to solve everything, to coordinate everything, before making the next step, leave the things that lie beyond the power of man to the Higher One, to whom such seemingly "unreasonableness" is pleasant, because it shows that man realizes the dependence on the higher powers and knows how to count on them. This is in fact wisdom, although for the unwise person who is not able to weigh the circumstances correctly, this quality easily degenerates into arrogance or negligence. Here it is important to distinguish between what is available to man and what is unavailable. If we do not put in order what is within our reach, it will be laziness, disorderliness, foolishness. But if God requires us to take a risk, we must realize that then what is unavailable to us is on Him and He takes responsibility for that part of the work. Cooperation with Him in this way teaches man something higher, and in such things we get to know God in a real way, we learn to interact with the invisible, when the intangible becomes more tangible.
God reiterated to Abraham His previous promises of many descendants and other blessings. They sounded much more meaningful to Abraham now than they had the first time, now he had the son he had once despaired of having. He was ashamed of his former unbelief and thoughtlessness, and was happy with his success. He had now conquered himself. And what had prevented him from doing the same before?
Afterward they returned again to Bathsheba, where they lived for quite some time.
Sarah's death
Something else to say about Sarah is that she was not at first privy to what Abraham did (or did not do to Isaac). Had he told her of God's command when it was spoken, she would not have been able to bear it and might have said something unnecessary, would not have taken into consideration any other considerations than the life of her son without trying to absorb what was happening. Everyone has their own trials. It is possible that she never learned anything at all about Isaac being threatened. And that is probably why Abraham could not be near her, for he could not have kept silent long about what had happened, and if he had, it would have caused her a painful wound, and so they lived in different places until she passed away. But what probably happened was that he had told her the story at some point, and she could not stand to be near him after that, when she imagined that he was drawing a knife on her son... All the old wrongs done to her in Egypt and Gerar might have been stirred up in her soul, though they were things of quite different orders, but logic seldom helps. So it was better for them to be apart, especially as their property was quite large and the interests of business might require them to be in different places. Her faith should have required her to understand what Abraham had done, and she probably did in time, but emotionally there might have been a lot of residue. Also her age may have failed her, so that she may have lost interest in life and faded away quickly. So she didn't live long after this test of their faith.
She died at the age of 127, that is, Abraham was at this time 137 and Isaac 37. She lived these years in Kiriath-arba, which also bore the name (in later times) Hebron, in the east of Palestine, while the Philistine region where Abraham founded Bathsheba lay to the west. Abraham came from Bathsheba to mourn for her and to say goodbye. After days of mourning, he went out to the people of the city to ask for a place to bury her. He already had one place in mind, a cave with a surrounding area, and he asked the owner of the place to sell it.
It is interesting to read these dialogues, they show a considerable overlap between the approaches of both Abraham and the Hittite elders. He begins - "I am a stranger to you," saying that he has no personal property in the land for burial, and asks to be given such a place. On the one hand, there was plenty of land, when his grandson Jacob buried Rebekah he didn't ask anyone, but it wasn't in a populated area. However, here Abraham does not want to take her anywhere, respecting her attachment to this particular place, and wants to set up her final resting place here, where all the land already belongs to someone.
The elders answered him with all respect - "you are a prince of God among us" - a very honorable title, a certain recognition of his role as emissary of the Most High. For this reason they offer him their own choice of the best seats. Abraham rises and bows to them, thanking them for their honor and help. He then asks them to intercede with Ephron about his lot, which Sarah liked and probably he did too, which he intends to purchase. Ephron is right there and offers this field for free. Abraham bows again, thanking him for his kindness and generosity. However, after bowing, he asks to take the money for the field from him so it is not gratuitous. He is not a poor man and to receive such an expensive gift of sorts for nothing, taking advantage of people's sympathy, would not be honoring to him. Efron understands and agrees to accept the money, naming the price, though he says it's not a great price for either of them given the wealth of both of them. There was some haggling in reverse, with the buyer raising and the seller lowering the price, and they agreed on the original price... Both understood that in this situation it was not worth lingering on the haggling, realizing that it was inappropriate, so they finished almost in a single touch - Abraham only found out the price and after Ephron's answer he gave him the required number of silver coins. Although money in the form of coins did not exist at that time, in the sense that it was in its infancy, it was a weight of silver of four hundred shekels[75] in bars or pieces. Thus the transaction was completed and Abraham could now place his wife in a place of rest, where she was to rest until "the cry of the archangel and the trumpet of God" .[76]
The marriage of Isaac
In the next chapter Abraham is pictured three years after his wife's death. Isaac is now forty years old and not yet married, avoiding dealing with the women of Canaan. However, in the eyes of the world around him, most of whom had begun to live short lives and because of this were marrying fairly early and everyone was already used to it, thinking it was the norm, it was kind of wrong. By their standards, he was wasting his time. However, there was another incentive to take up the matter now - Abraham had a suitable match in mind for him in Harran from relatives who had stayed to live there decades ago. If he didn't take it now, it would simply "go" somewhere else and finding something more suitable would be problematic. At that time, Farrah's descendants still remembered kinship and Abraham was a light and a hero to them, whom they should help in times of need. There grew up a daughter with Bethuel, the son of his brother Nahor. Loneliness was not a problem for Isaac, he was a healthy man, well-mannered and self-controlled enough not to be infected by the loose morals of those around him, who saw no great problem in breaking the seventh[77] commandment. For many young people the example of their peers seems to be a law and if among the leading personalities of society it is popular to have a couple that does not lead to marriage, so, temporary, for entertainment or prestige or romance, then those who are led begin to think that this is how it should be and cannot be otherwise, and if you think otherwise, you are a laggard, a sucker, a loser. The examples of the older generation are somehow not a model, existing independently in some other space... And not all the older generation is a model in this case, they were young too....
Abraham feels that his strength is not what it used to be, and as long as he is active enough, he must take care of the future of his son and his descendants, for they are his people. The greatness of a nation is determined not only by the number of people, and not even by the military strength, but most of all by the reasonableness of the organization of its life, the quality of people, characters and skills. It is always several factors mutually influencing each other. And Abraham was not to let anything go to waste - everything in his power he had to do to reduce the influence of evil on his descendants. At the same time he could not do much, he could not directly predetermine the choice of Isaac and his children, but at least he had to take care of the most favorable circumstances for spiritual and other kinds of well-being as a father. To find a good wife for his son - that was his task. It was not an easy and important matter, the saying "one man married and saw the light, another man married and lost his head" was true. He saw what the people around him were like, what their principles were, their culture, their prohibitions and restrictions, what they could and could not do, and he did not see the possibility of a normal party for his son anywhere around him. He knew that his nephew had a son and daughter growing up in Harran and counted on that family. They were close people with understandable principles and customs, especially since they shared a heritage of faith and spirituality from their ancestors (though they too were infected with paganism, but to a lesser extent than other peoples) that was becoming increasingly rare in the world around them.
Abraham summoned the servant who was in charge of his household, the one who was in charge of thousands of people. He gave him the rather delicate task of marrying his great-niece Rebekah to Isaac. Although at this point he is not talking about his relatives or Rebekah, but in general "to my homeland." Geographically his homeland is not in Harran at all, but his inner circle who came out of the Chaldean lands live there. There could be many of them who came to Harran, and when the former circle of communication, many neighbors and relatives move to new lands together, it is also very valuable for those who changed their place of residence. I have thought a lot about the problems of migrants, for example, Molokans in the USA, who came here from Iran, who at one time moved there from the USSR, which tightened the screws during collectivization. They didn't feel the big problems of severing ties because most of their ties just moved with them. This solves the problem of nostalgia in no small part. When friends and brothers with fathers and children move together, their small homeland moves with them. Therefore, in ancient times, the relocation of peoples to distant lands did not create a big problem with nostalgia or a sense of foreignness. While this is not a complete solution to the problem, it is still no small mitigation. And when Abraham speaks of his homeland, here it is more a former circle of loved ones than a geographical concept. From this circle a suitable bride for Isaac must be found.
In those days, inbreeding was not considered (and was not) a problem, nor was it a sin, because God had not yet warned against it in those days. He did not do it because the viability and health of people had not yet reached a critical point, when diseases had accumulated so that inbreeding "lifted" the damaged genes out of heredity. That is at those generations there were no damaged genes carrying disease traits, except that family traits became more sharply expressed and diversity within a family decreased. The eating patterns of people who were attracted to the taste of food rather than the health and strength from it literally ensured the accumulation of disease. This is probably obvious to many people, but it is worth describing it for those who have not been interested in health and do not know the problems that walk around a man and from time to time as if by chance for himself come to visit him. Then they wander in more and more often, until they settle in for good....
If people ate only cooked cereals and meat, leaving fruits and most vegetables raw, there would probably be little degeneration. Also, if they did not mix heterogeneous foods together, which is often required by perverted taste, then what they ate would be digested more easily, without overloading the digestive system and without creating too much waste. And the third rule of health is to avoid overeating, which is also a common sin. This also creates problems of digestion, no less than the violation of the previous rules, because the excessive mass in the stomach is simply not always enough enzymes and digestive forces - well, the system is not designed for constant overload (here I consider only the problems on the side of unhealthy eating, without touching other areas).
Any of these violations makes it problematic to digest what we eat, and these are the simplest rules, easily deducible from the very nature of things and our experience. And they are also statutes (i.e., God's law for individual particulars), because He programmed and calculated our bodies and all their activities, and violation of the rules of operation always destroys the Manufacturer's warranty. He is not responsible for those diseases that occur due to our unwillingness to understand the essence of things and follow the operating instructions.
It's worth repeating the laws of health:
- what can be eaten raw, is best eaten raw; what should be boiled, should not be fried, especially in excess
- not to mix things that interfere with each other's digestion and assimilation - if proteins require an acidic environment, carbohydrates are better broken down in an alkaline environment; there are legumes that are rich in both, but therefore they take longer to digest, and not everyone is successful; the consequences of violations are not always clearly manifested due to the fact that many have a high vitality, and adaptability of the body can successfully cope with overload, but abuse the reserve of strength is not worth it, they are not infinite.
- there are things that are well compatible and there are things that are badly compatible, and probably many people know from experience which are which; it may even be that these can be different things for different people and it is important that everyone knows their limitations and does not impose them on others (which means they have not yet figured out health issues enough)
- overeating is the enemy, even healthy food in excess will often do more harm than the combination of incompatible foods in small quantities; the reason for this is the simple lack of digestive means of the body for excessive volume
- Chewing food should be sufficient so that there are no large (and even medium-sized) pieces, otherwise digestive substances do not penetrate the clumps properly
Each of the violations leads to one or another failure of processing of the eaten, and this in turn inevitably ensures that from the eaten instead of good nutritious things our intestines will produce something poisonous. Instead of proper processing with the emergence of a favorable bacterial and microbial atmosphere in the intestine (often already in the stomach), a painful one arises and forms, that is, the food mass is fermented not as it should, ferments or rots.
The digestive system and its associated purification systems (liver and kidneys) are capable of neutralizing harmful substances, but they are not designed to handle excessive amounts of poisons. I am not an expert, so I can't give exact figures, but for this conversation approximate figures are sufficient. Let's assume that the body can eliminate up to 30 grams of waste without much strain. With tension - twice as much. And that's it. And if a person has eaten too much at a feast (and drunk too much besides) not only mixed food, difficult for digestion, but also in extreme quantities - what then? The body can no longer eliminate these slags and poisons from itself, and it feels very bad then. When wastes cannot be excreted, they are stored somewhere and fall out as solid precipitates, and then it is more difficult to get them out of the places where they have settled, thus reducing the overall strength and energy of the organism.
Yes, it often happens that our mouth (or even a large part of our body) is delighted with something, and we, not used to listening to the body, cannot hear or feel how the stomach or liver wrinkles at the sight of the same product, because they still have to work with it... This is already bifurcation, lack of unity, integrity in our life at the simplest level, the food. And this is often the case in other spheres as well. Dangerous and harmful things are evaluated only from the point of view of entertainment, while entertainment can be very different, i.e. some people satisfy their interest with things that are destructive for themselves, while others are happy with what provides themselves with strength and health in addition to pleasure.
For a long time our body, if it initially received good energy potential from its parents - health, keeps in such hostile food conditions due to filters and strong digestive system. As long as the liver and kidneys are intact and strong, as long as the body is not very much clogged with slags and poisons, our health will be at its best. But binge sooner or later (and the more often they happen, the faster) lead to the accumulation of unremoved waste. If blockages are infrequent, then in the intervals the body will painfully or sometimes, quite possibly painlessly, cleanse itself. But here too, many people give the body added problems - people do not let the body cleanse itself. They start "treating" it by taking away fever, removing inflammation and painful processes. And instead of healing the organs, the blockages go deep inside. The disease acquires already systemic features, when for which side do not pull, the knot is tied only stronger. Of course, even so, the body is still quite strong and can recover, but it is necessary to give it the opportunity. If a person does not consider that the pleasures in life (the worst, of course, of the pleasures, they themselves are endless and diverse, but many people are tied only to the simplest of them) is the main thing, then he saves himself from many problems, if he decides to have pleasures while he can, then the worst thing is that the pleasures for the sake of which he decided to ruin himself, over time cease to be pleasures - without health, they lose a lot of weight ... And the last days of a person pass in an unpleasant, if not painful, payback for them. Often life does not end with the complete loss of health, and a person still has to give up pleasures already naturally, because of the impossibility to enjoy the former dishes or substances, and wasn't it better to do it earlier, without depriving oneself of the possibility to have many other pleasures? I am somehow very sure that the main pleasure is health, the other ways of feeling pleasure from something are derivatives of it.
What has been said now is only an introduction to the subject of health, and it is not the place to cover the whole subject here, but since God and His rules and health are connected quite directly, it is necessary to speak of it.
Abraham spelled[78] servant to do exactly as he said. He forbade Isaac to take a wife from the local women. He was to go to Harran to the remaining members of their former family from which he had come, and find a suitable girl there. However, the matter was not secured by arrangements with the relatives, and the servant asks about this - what if the one who suited Isaac did not want to go to Canaan - could Isaac then go to live in her region. Abraham forbade it, because Isaac must live here without leaving his future inheritance for long. He assured the servant that it would have to work out, but if anything went wrong with the human factor, he would be free from his oath to Abraham. The matter would then be left to Isaac himself, and of course to God, who was interested in providing Isaac with everything he needed for His own plans. It would not have been a catastrophe, there were other relatives, and there were other tribes on Earth besides the Canaanites, Isaac would not have been left alone, but the Harran option was the easiest and most reliable for Abraham.
Abraham provided the servant with jewels for gifts to the bride's family, but this man also had his own contribution to make; he assembled the caravan as he saw fit, who and what to take on the journey for the success of the journey and the mission. In search of a bride for the heir, this manager could spend a lot of time getting acquainted with Abraham's community in Harran, so he prepared for the road thoroughly. But still Abraham's immediate relatives in the house of Bethuel were the main goal, as the next words of the steward show.
It was evening when the caravan arrived in Harran. Abraham's servant had by this time laid out for himself a rather unusual plan of action, not based on calculation or even luck, as it might seem, but directly on God. Abraham, though it is not visible that he ever carried out any explicit missionary work among the Canaanites, in the sense of organizing any kind of education or propaganda, yet in his house and household he had not only enlightened people, but people who really knew God and His order, imbued with true knowledge, preserved from his ancestors and multiplied by Abraham. His employees were the same examples of sound works and manner of life as Abraham himself, and the steward was also an outstanding man in every respect. This may have been the same Eliezer of Damascus that Abraham mentioned in his conversation with God when the talk of an heir first came up. He figured out how to identify the right girl for Isaac - to have God Himself point her out. He assigned himself and God a sign, the fulfillment of which was the right signal. He said to God, "May the one who gives water to me and my camels be the woman we need.
It is interesting that willingly or unwillingly he selects on the basis of politeness and courtesy, good character. Like attracts like... For a good and happy life, this is a key quality. But how many attempts could he have made? If all Harran girls were polite, then the only one who would get him drunk was the one he had to deal with. And that could turn out to be a girl of a different sort altogether, not Abraham's. And if not all were polite, how many would he have to ask of them? Besides, how could these girls think? - Many girls could avoid talking to strangers, others could be in a hurry for dinner, in general, they could find many reasons for refusal, not necessarily rude and harsh. They carried jugs on their shoulders or heads, and even asking them to make unnecessary movements, to make it difficult, was not very decent - this is another side of the matter, and also an objective factor - can't you see, dear man, we are busy with business... And in return think to yourself - there are all sorts of people walking around, he has his own servants, and in the wagon there will be a bucket and a jug, there is something to scoop... Something suspicious. Or even to say something like that out loud. It is adults who are staid and more inclined to respect in conversation, and young people sometimes have their own layer of customs and habits, not yet polished and not fully ennobled. Although they may well show the best traits with a non-zero probability. And it is this probability that the manager wants to discover.
He knew from Abraham on which end of the city his relatives lived, which by that time could be many families, so Eliezer came to the right place, where there was a high probability that it was the settlers from Ur of the Chaldees who lived.
He chose one of the ones he liked the most - he had a good knowledge of people, a sense of their qualities - if you know what to look at, you can read a lot about a person from their behavior and movements. He approached exactly the prettiest and best of them all and asked for a drink, and he was pleased to see her respond in kind, as he had hoped she would. A great result of choosing the best, and getting the expected and desired! After all, approaching the most beautiful girl in the city with some request, you may find that she is spoiled by attention and success and is not in a hurry to go along, especially in some small things, especially since she is not interested in absolutely nothing yet. But Eliezer wanted to deliver the best to his master and so he risked starting with the most attractive option. God did not let him down - the attempt turned out to be a hundred percent hit. And the bride was beautiful, and, most importantly, she was from the family and house from which Abraham wanted, from his relatives, though Eliezer did not know it yet. The one he asked a favor of took the pitcher off his shoulder, got him drunk, and ran to water his camels. A marvelous nature! But it is in the line of hospitality, if to receive a guest well, to give him shelter and food, then to do a stranger a favor is the same thing, he is, after all, also a guest in a strange place. She behaved faithfully, imitating the best qualities of the best people of her town, doing what she had been taught from childhood. Not everyone and not always follows the instructions and realizes them in life, but here and now hopes and their realization, expectation and reality met.
Eliezer saw the answer to his request in which he had conditioned God, which He answered faster than he spoke it to himself. While he was still speaking, turning inwardly to God, he saw Rebekah as she came to fetch water. He waited while she fetched the water, and he did not plan to ask anyone else, feeling that he must try his luck with this maiden alone. He had already realized that his question had been answered, and now only watched the unfolding action with some exasperation. He tried to determine if it was a coincidence, if it was really an answer from God, and asked a question that might further clarify the situation - "Whose daughter are you?" At first he thanked her for her kindness and politeness with a pair of gold bracelets and an earring weighing about two hundred grams, probably embarrassing her and the rest of the audience with such generosity. Her answer cleared all possible doubts, she was the daughter of Abraham's nephew, Bethuel, being his grand-niece and great-niece to Isaac. Abraham's assignment, which coincided with God's will, began to be successfully realized. Eliezer got exactly where he needed to go and to the right people. It is hard to explain it by coincidence, and he himself felt that as soon as he saw Rebekah he already knew from whom to ask for water. He saw once again how God leads and guides, how He shows and prompts. Although as an experienced and knowledgeable man, it was not the first time he had encountered such things, he had gone through all his problems and adventures with Abraham, it was simply worth it to see God's hand in action once again.
After the gift and inquiries about their parents, Eliezer hinted whether they might not stay with them, and Rebekah, though neither a man nor the eldest in the house, invited[79] them to her house, assuring them that they had not only a place to sleep, but also food for the animals. Eliezer in his senses worshiped God with all his gratitude and delight at the success and apparent assistance of the divine hand, and Rebekah ran home to tell of the noble guests, surprises and gifts. The jug, most likely, remained here, even the strong and agile cannot run with it, though one never knows... Perhaps it was taken away later.
When Rebekah came running home, she told her mother that they would have visitors from Abraham in a far country. Her brother Laban ran to meet and welcome the dear guest into the house with his entire household. When he saw the expensive gifts in his sister's hands, he could additionally feel respect for the person who had come. He had later shown some bad traits of stinginess in his dealings with his sister's son, Jacob, but now he was young and had a good chance to learn from this story, by associating with a significant man of God's emerging people and seeing God's hand in what was now happening to his family. He addressed Eliezer as "blessed by the Being," which shows his respect for Abraham and his people, his own definite dedication to God. He had good assignments at the time... He invited them all into the house, guided them in and helped with setting up the animals.
A table was set, but Eliezer refused to eat, feeling that there were certain matters that needed to be settled at this moment, and he could not even eat without resolving what was troubling him. It was as if he feared that if he relaxed when God was helping him, God might leave him, and that blessing of good fortune and device in all matters would disappear, and a streak of problems would begin... "Bite the iron while it's hot" is the Russian wisdom in this Jewish story... Although this nation did not exist then, as Eliezer himself was from Damascus. However, this is not only a Russian proverb, even a brief look at proverbs shows that they come from deeper layers than language (or languages have a lot in common, no matter how different peoples treat each other).
He said, "I will not eat until I tell you my business. He was asked to tell them what was troubling him so much, why he was behaving in such an unseemly manner, why he was in such a hurry. He briefly told them the circumstances of Abraham, the miraculous birth of Isaac, to whom he was looking for a bride, Abraham's own instructions as to where to look for her, and the other circumstances that had brought him straight to this house with all the signs of God's guidance. It didn't take long, maybe ten minutes, so that the people were hardly hungry, rather on the contrary, they were fascinated and interested in the story. For the house of Bethuel it was all a meaningful reminder of the living God, whom they were in danger of forgetting and losing interest in walking in His ways. After the story, Abraham's steward asks a direct question if they intend to help him and Abraham, to help the God who arranged this opportunity for them to participate in His plans and works. Who knows, thought Eliezer, if they might have some brilliant plans of their own for Rebekah's future, or if she herself has a young man in mind, and so he asks, as if in a hurry to finish a matter so well begun. He does not look like an experienced matchmaker, skillfully and leisurely bargaining for a bride, nor does he use gold and jewelry, as professionals would have done in his place (except for the initial gifts to Rebekah, but that is far from it). Bethuel and Laban, seeing such haste, do not condemn him, though they shrugged their shoulders. They responded as any man faithful to God would in such cases - "since it is a matter from God, we cannot oppose it." They gave their consent to Rebekah's marriage to Isaac. Although the matchmaking did not take place according to all the rules, but for this case these were small things not worth much attention. Although they may have wanted a more thorough collusion, not so hasty, they realized that such a party for their daughter and sister was very successful on every side, not only materially. And after all, Abraham's steward was right, God's hand was here, and there was no need to make any calculations, especially since the calculations also led in the same direction.
Hearing this answer, desired and as if there was no other normal solution, Eliezer bowed to this family from the bottom of his heart. From his shoulders fell the stone of responsibility and the fear that something would suddenly go wrong. It is only now that he opens his chests and boxes of gifts and jewelry. And after that they finally begin to feast with a light heart.
True, the rush pushing Eliezer did not end there, only took a break. In the morning, having barely gotten up and cleaned himself up, the steward felt the need to carry his joy back to the one who had sent him. He asked that they be released today. The parents did not intend to be so hasty, but there was no problem, no objection except the simple desire to say goodbye to their daughter, who had to leave her father's house. They suggested that they stay longer, ten days, because they might never see each other again. It was not the father who requested it, but the mother and brother, as they were more attached to her. But Eliezer also expressed his good reason - "The Creator has arranged my way, therefore do not hold me back," that is, while His blessing over me and my way lasts, let me be and act in this field. The sense that procrastination might cause the blessing to abate is clearly seen in his these words. Back then, people also had an idea of the white and black stripes of life... Was there really a need to hurry, or was this his subjective feeling? I think, as an experienced person, he saw more than once that obstacles, especially in the human element, can arise literally out of nothing, on an even place, and his desire to keep luck, a wave of blessing of the Almighty is quite justified. There are examples of such procrastination in the Bible, when for the sake of the table and staying as guests people got huge problems, not ending on them alone, but passing on to other people. So I'm personally on Eliezer's side, trusting his feelings that he really should have been in a hurry. If the case had started and was not on the usual track of human relations, it was dangerous to change it to other tracks, to change the protocols of procedures on the fly. Eliezer had asked for guidance from above instead of the customary "normal" long search and election in this city, and had received an answer as to who was suitable as a bride for the heir to the greatest blessings in the history of the planet. To proceed according to human custom may have introduced an element of human error, unreliable and unstable. People could question God's choice, pick on Eliezer's train of thought, and drag the matter out until the whole enterprise collapsed. His desire to leave these people and this city as soon as possible is therefore completely justified. Not the members of the Bafuel family themselves, but their neighbors and acquaintances who had heard the story, could twist the matter in their minds and whisper doubts to them, so that a delay here could lead to much trouble. And Eliezer wrought iron while it was hot.
Baphuel's family did not see anything wrong with Eliezer's eagerness to leave on the same day, God had protected them all so far, and they themselves had already given their blessing for Rebekah's marriage, but there was still one last instance, Rebekah herself. It is not yet clear to me whether she was present when her father and brother agreed to her marriage to Abraham's son, at least her opinion was not asked at that moment. She knew, could not have been unaware of what had happened, she had been told about it by her mother at the very least, but she had not yet spoken her word, and if she had said no, she would have. She had the right to decide and to vote, not in all cultures and not in all times were women or daughters deprived of their voice or human rights - even in Abraham's conversation with Eliezer this question is heard, "if the woman will not go?" And so, when Eliezer insists on going, Rebekah is called and asked - "will you go with this man?". It is clear from the question that she already knows where she can go and why, and she answered "I will go." No one else argued, her will and decision helped settle the parting and parting. She was escorted away with words of admonition and best wishes - "Our sister, may millions be born of you, and may your offspring own the houses of your enemies." This her brother, Laban, who evidently loved her, attached to her by a friendly childhood, wished heartily. After this Rebekah and her maids settled on their camels, and the caravan set out on its return journey. The steward finally took a breath. The dangers of the road were easier for him to bear than the worry in the hospitable house of Bethuel that something might upset a well-started business. He understood that he was being treated as a rich and powerful man, all the more so representing an even more important man, but there were many things that could lurk in such situations that one should steer clear of. It was no coincidence that wealth, influence and power in the card system were signified by the suit of spades or swords, and while that was a gross oversimplification, in this evil world it was something to keep in mind.
While Eliezer traveled to Harran, Abraham sent for Isaac, who was not with his father at this time. He had gone south to Be'er Lahai Roi, perhaps not for long. He was just as likely to wander through these parts as his father had been before, who was old for long journeys and lived in Beersheba. He came in time for the return of the caravan sent by Abraham. With a distance of about 800 kilometers, the journey could take two weeks (if not for the Dromedaries, who could travel 3-5 times faster). Moses notes an important quality in Isaac - his tendency to think, when he writes that he "went out into the field to think". For the founder of a Messianic nation, this is a quality of paramount importance. As it is for any representative of such a people (and indeed any people and any person). Going out in the evening to the hilly steppe (if Abraham planted a grove there, it means that the area was not originally wooded), Isaac enjoyed the nature, under these beauties it was easier to think and feel. It was a little early to expect Eliezer's caravan, but it was time to start waiting, and Isaac could cast his eyes on the road coming to them from the north. And he spotted the caravan from afar, and moved toward them. Rebekah also saw the traveler coming toward them and asked Eliezer who it was. When she learned that it was her fiancé, she put on a cloak to conceal her face. Customs, however. At home she could easily talk to strangers without a veil, but in front of the bridegroom she had to hide her face, and apparently everyone or many did so, and so she did.
In the beginning, covering the face was not a religious or sacred necessity; the appearance of burqas, veils, and cloaks is more likely to be of pagan origin. The Bible does not speak about any commandments (only about the already existing human custom) to cover the face of women (as well as men). Closing the face has to do only with psychology, with human nature, when it is desirable to close the face according to one's own feelings. However, people are inclined both to minimize the importance of things and to exaggerate. In ancient times we can find cases of hiding the face for brides, for harlots and prostitutes and for some reason some prophets serving false gods in Israel also did it during their prophecies. What it gave them, whether it strengthened their authority or helped them to detach themselves from some feelings, is unknown.
We hear that it is in the Muslim world that women are preferred to cover their faces, and it is from there that we see most of the cases of covering the face. However, as far as I know, the Quran itself does not declare the uncovering of the face to be a sinful act, only recommends it for some reason, which is based more on the same old customs than the commands of God. The custom of covering women increased with time and by the beginning of the 20th century it reached its greatest development, when in Central Asia all women had to wear the burqa or something similar. In older times, even a hundred years before that, faces were covered more in cities, while in villages almost all women's faces were uncovered.
Rebekah covered her face according to the marriage custom of her place. By doing so she emphasized that Isaac was her bridegroom. That is, she rode in the caravan with the men with an open face and it was not a problem, and only before the bridegroom, emphasizing her attitude to him, she covered her face with a cloak of hair. Most likely the features of her face could be seen through such veils, but even if Isaac could not see her face and might have wondered, "Is my bride beautiful?" - Eliezer, if he saw his questioning gaze, might have given him a thumbs-up, saying, "Don't doubt it, boy!" Abraham's lineage was not yet as weakened as many others, and so the beauty of its members was guaranteed, so the groom did not have to doubt the beauty of the bride there and then. Also the members of the family had increased similarity of many features, were of the same type of build, which is just responsible for the compatibility of men and women, so the probability of a very successful choice even "blindly" was high, even if there was no choice. And considering that Rebekah was originally conceived in God's plans to be Isaac's wife (not necessarily in Abraham's or Bethuel's plans), which is evident from the direct instant response to Eliezer's request, their compatibility was complete, guaranteeing mutual complementarity, half-hearted understanding and other pleasures of life and happiness in general.
Moses does not describe a wedding or any rites. The arrangement had been made by the governor in Haran, and we do not find in the description of the life of the ancients any elaborate rites and customs in the marriage sphere. All that is described here, as in many other cases, is simply the beginning of life together without any extravagances such as registration, filling out documents, witnesses or weddings. We see only some control, in the form of help in the conclusion of the contract of the parties on the part of their parents, but the consummation of the union itself took place by the action of the young people themselves, without any intermediaries between them. Isaac, it is written, took her into his mother's tent, and from that time she became his wife. Rebekah came into his life and brought him joy, and helped him to overcome his longing for his mother, to whom he was strongly attached and longed after her death, which had occurred three years earlier and had not yet been forgotten. He was forty years old at this time, and Abraham was one hundred and forty years old, and after that Abraham lived thirty-five years more. After twenty years Isaac and Rebekah had twins Esau and Jacob, who could see their grandfather Abraham until they were fifteen years old. If it had not been for Rebekah's barrenness, the children might have come earlier, but the matter was not resolved on its own, so Isaac had to ask God specifically for it. When Isaac finally turned to God with this problem, it was immediately resolved. It sounds simple, but Isaac and Rebekah had to wait only five years less for their offspring than Abraham and Sarah, who had to wait twenty-five years for their visitation time (and that was only from the entrance to Canaan, but if you count the time from the beginning of their marriage, it would be much longer). Though at a younger age than Abraham - Isaac only waited until he was sixty, but twenty years is still a long time.
This delay serves as some indication of the purpose God had for his people. Two types of cultures are known in terms of attitudes toward child rearing and human formation. Their difference can be characterized as one "fast" and the other "long". In the animal world, the differences in offspring are clearly visible - some require long training and development, care and upbringing, while others, having barely appeared in the world and having dried off, are already practically ready for life. It is clear that the latter do not have complex programs and are quite simple, if not primitive, built-in instincts are enough for their existence, while the former are much more complex and cannot survive without learning the necessary skills. But they can give out a lot more than those who are organized simpler. Humans by nature are among those who must not only grow but also learn in order to unlock their potential, though not everyone strives to do so, being satisfied with the minimum, living a very simple life. People of pleasure, living for simple pleasures, became trapped in their passions and degraded rapidly, failing to educate new generations accordingly to the potential inherent in man. This depopulation caused criticism and annoyance to their forebears who observed the degradation of their grandchildren and great-grandchildren. It is from there that proverbs like this one echo - "the former people moved mountains, but these people will soon be lifting straws with all of them". The established communities of lovers of simple pleasures did not bother with the education of generations, contenting themselves with some minimum, gave simplified rules, which in addition were poorly observed. But not everyone followed this way, although all people due to their fallen nature were inclined to simplification for the sake of the same pleasures. However, the example of sharply degraded communities warned many who held responsible positions in their tribes against following their example and made them take time to develop higher aspirations in new generations. However, few people did everything necessary for this, being satisfied with partial solutions, and as a result, many tribes and groups only protected themselves from degeneration, not reaching the possible peaks, being satisfied with little. And few reached the top, and not all of them deservedly, but only because they were lucky enough to have caring leaders or educators who, through much effort and even violence, drove their peoples to the top.
Simplification and primitivization, reduction of human potential is a considerable sin and an insult to the Creator, who laid in man the infinity of[80] and the ability for very great achievements. After physical abilities are revealed, spiritual abilities should be revealed after them. Without education and knowledge, without wisdom and full mastery of his abilities, man is not fully human, stopping at a low stage of revealing the potential of his nature.
The last thing to mention about Abraham is that he took another wife after Sarah died and had six children by her. In addition to these six, the Bible speaks of children by concubines, although they are probably the same children of Hittite and Hagar. But all of them were later sent away with rich gifts to somewhere in the east. These people, as I understand it, together with the children of Ishmael, and later Esau, made up the Arab tribes, maintaining among themselves still the difference of origin. All of them might have been in resentment of Isaac or their father, but having been taught the knowledge of God and enlightened to some degree about the role of Isaac specifically in God's plans, maintained and still maintain, if not politically, then at least spiritually, religiously, a respect for God's will and for the people descended from Isaac. Did Abraham violate God's will by remarrying after Sarah? I won't judge categorically, I don't think so. It's a worldly matter. Would he have been better off alone? Had they not made the mistake with Hagar, yes, it would have been better. But after Ishmael and a separate nation from him, it probably didn't change the situation in any meaningful way. The rivalry between Abraham's sons was assured and Abraham's new children added little to the problem. On the other hand, Abraham showed an enviable strength and health, which, although not the best advertisement for the benefits of following God's will, was also present.
The issue of polygamy and concubinage is topical, it is on the lips of all critics of God, the Bible and religion. Today, the religion of Christianity is ascetic, but its past (the time of Israel) still raises very serious questions, although not always deservedly so, and sometimes serves as a stumbling block and temptation for Christians themselves.
How polygamy appeared is an obvious thing. Wars took away men, on the one hand they had to protect their families, tribes, cities, on the other hand, a considerable part of people (not only men) sought profit, which gave rise to conflicts and wars that devoured the strongest part of humanity. Women remained, they were mostly protected. In ancient times, when people were few and resource issues were not acute, everything was enough and even territories were not filled, even if occupied by someone, it was not difficult to raise children. The surplus of women instantly gave rise to the fact that a widowed woman would go to someone who was inclined to help, to lend his protection to her and her children. The elders saw no problem, it took men - the more men a tribe had, the stronger it was, the more it could afford, the more it could process and make, and stronger in defense as well as offense. On the part of God, who many people were still oriented toward, people saw no objections either (direct objections), and how many were really seeking God's will? Where paganism was emerging, these considerations overshadowed everything and served as justification for polygamy. However, it was not a new thing, even before the Flood, in the old times the seizure of property and women from the neighbor was a common thing, everything was decided by force or cunning. So the consideration of population increase was more than enough to justify it. It seemed a perfectly natural solution to the problem of widows' loneliness, and even the righteous teachers could not say anything against it, because the considerations "against" polygamy were very weak in the eyes of the people. It is clear that all they could say was that the original charter of human life states "one man, one woman." But Lamech's act is also very ancient, and for this, the defenders of polygamy would say, he was not punished, and yet he was motivated by the feeling of helping "the woman of murdered Abel" to find a family. It was simply unthinkable to leave a woman, who could give society many new members, to let such a valuable, in some conditions even super-valuable resource "idle".
But these are the considerations of men. How did God view it? That can be gauged from the words of Christ. His principled position is that "in the beginning it was not so." That is, the unchanging God adheres to unchanging ideas about good and evil, good and bad. Only admissibility of some or other deviations from the eternal principles depended on time and epoch. It is clear, and even the world of polygamy (though not all of it, but still), passing through civilization development, gradually came to the same original monogamy. At the time of Christ, although the orders of antiquity were preserved and polygamy was not abolished, we do not see it anywhere in Israel. And yet, did God consider the case of Hagar a sin for Abraham? Or, as caustic critics say, did He make an exception for him, like it was a sin for everyone, but not for Abraham? Or something else? However, not only Abraham had two wives, but also Jacob, especially the kings of the Jewish people differed in this.
Let us note at once the second option of "exceptions for the elect", this is not an option for God. His justice is the same for all and His rules are the same. Rather, we get a mixture of the first and third options, when it was a sin, but it was not counted. How is that, you ask?
It is probably understandable to anyone when an article of the law provides for different punishments for the same offense. And people quite understand the necessity and reasonableness of such "staggered" laws, usually we are outraged only when someone who could be acquitted is given the maximum punishment, while someone "chosen" is given the mildest punishment, if it can be called punishment.
One must also grasp the difference between sin and evil. Usually these things go together, but not always. Sin is the breaking of the law, whereas evil is some kind of destruction, suffering, or deprivation. When someone is punished for sin, the punisher, though he does evil to the punished person, he does not sin, he is not guilty before God, before men, or even before the one he punishes.
In the case of polygamy, evil is always present, because the original charter of human nature is violated, where two people meet and all their needs and requirements are maximally satisfied (ideally). The third person is superfluous here, someone from the couple does not have enough resources for it, the harmony possible in a couple (not all couples are harmonious, but even in them the "third" is not the way out) is destroyed inevitably. Suffering, accordingly, is also inevitable. That is, polygamy is evil, and God here is only stating the fact, not attributing and creating someone's guilt arbitrarily. But God did not impute it as a sin, taking it as a given that to demand stricter observance of the rules from apostates would toughen their lives too much. People have lost sight of the meaning of His orders and laws, and if they are charged with violating this statute (which is part of the schedule of the seventh commandment), it will complicate people's lives and His works as well. When people do not understand the meaning of a "small" violation, what is wrong with it, then if they are charged as strictly for the violation of this article as for the violation of a rule with which they agree and the evil is obvious to them, it will result in an unpleasant situation that people may begin to look at even "serious" commandments as lightly as at "small" ones, or they will be afraid and discouraged because they do not understand what God needs from them, they will be confused. It can be said that He entered into their situation, showed understanding and humanity.....
It is very hard to resist illustrating this situation with a situation from an anecdote I heard from our deputy police officer. To make a long story short, a man from Russia came to the southern lands where driver's licenses could be bought. He stopped at a red signal, but when he saw that his neighbor drove, he also moved on, thinking that it was "so accepted" here, on the contrary. Just then he was stopped by the whistle of a policeman, who came up and asked why he was going through a red light. The man explains that his neighbor ran a red light, so he, thinking it was the right thing to do, went too. The policeman asks if he knows that it is not allowed to drive on red, the guest of the republic replies that he knows, but.....
- If you know, you're in violation, pay the fine.
- But what about them? - while the others were running the red light...
- They don't know! Do you know?
- I know, of course, but, uh.
- You know, pay up!
I don't think it is necessary to tell further, it has nothing to do with our story, but this approach about "the ignorant" and leniency towards them makes more sense than it seems. Christ actually explained a similar situation with divorce by saying in response to a question about how Moses allowed divorce - "Moses, because of your hard-heartedness, allowed you to divorce your wives[81] ". When a society evolves in something, that greater and better understanding of some issue also enables God to make rules that better suit the true needs of man and his nature. The concept of the Mosaic Law was that when a Messiah like Moses came, He would be the one to make the laws and it would be necessary to obey Him.
Therefore, the issue of polygamy was postponed until a better time, until the greater development of Israel, humanity, civilization and other conditions. More strictness can be shown when a person is willing and able to understand it. This principle God adheres to in relation to a great many people, it is evident from the words of Christ again, when He explicitly declares "staggered" punishment and responsibility of people - "To whom more is given... from him more will be charged[82] ". So picking on Abraham as well as David or Solomon is not worth it in the sense that God has a double standard. Solomon could have been more modest about the number of wives he had, but even if he had been more sensible about it, he would have had more than one, and would not have pleased those who would blame him or God for it.
This is not a double standard - it would be double if He were harsh to some and lenient to others at the same time. But He has an approach according to the degree of development not only of man, but also of mankind, according to time and epoch, and these are not different approaches for His own and strangers. Although He asks more harshly from "His own", He may not ask much from "strangers" who do not know about His laws. The apostle Paul wrote that God will ask people as they understand His laws, saying of the Gentiles who do not know the laws that "the work of the law is written[83] " in their minds, when their own thoughts "accuse and justify one another", revealing the laws of good and evil from life itself, delving into the nature of things. As the earth filled with population and society developed, temporary solutions had to become obsolete and recede into the shadows, giving way to light, a clearer understanding of the laws of life.
There is something to be said about such a phenomenon in the ancient world as concubines. In the then conditions, when polygamy turned out to be an unprohibited (or unenforced) violation of the rules, this case, too, was not a violation greater than the one already violated. The only difference between the two was that wives lived with their husbands in the same territory, while concubines lived somewhere else (although rich men could house them, but did not give them the same rights as their wives). They could be maintained at the expense of the man, they could maintain themselves, but they were not alone, they had their own man. There was a name for them - concubine - but what was her man called? Regardless of the status in the eyes of people it was still a marriage, husbands and wives... He might not be called a husband, but he was her man and she belonged only to him. Only in those days it was not reprehensible enough to be considered a sin, also an independently living woman could not change her man for another without it being called and considered a violation of the law, adultery. There is one important difference between concubines and second or third wives and women of reprehensible lifestyles who rent their nature - they had one man and their affiliation did not change, it was permanent. There were divorces, but no one usually associated divorce with the arbitrary and frequent change of men. This state of affairs was considered legitimate.
Since the original charter of human existence allowed for only one relationship, it is clear that a relationship with another woman destroys the relationship with the previous one... That is, polygamy by its very nature seems to provoke divorce, since the constant change of partners within a polygamous family was, no matter how you look at it, a treason permanently present in such a family, even on a micro scale. It is a source of disharmony and suffering, and not just for the woman. No one can be truly happy in a polygamous family. And when polygamous families appeared, so did divorces. Before that they were unlikely, because in ancient times people heard their nature more and chose not arbitrarily, but only those who suited them truly, who fully complemented them in personal terms, and not just in the sexual. In general, although polygamy in the eyes of people was not reprehensible, and in many cases was also an indicator of high status, but it was an evil, a tolerable evil in the eyes of God. The Messiah, expected by all, even by nature itself, was to bring a "change of customs", even ancient ones, even those from the time of Moses, even with the permission of God Himself, and no tradition and sanctification of centuries could save them. Everything that was not the original order of things must sooner or later pass away. Therefore, since the advent of Christianity, we can expect a restoration of the original order of things, which is what has happened with the issues of marriage, concubines and divorce. Christ demonstrated this when the Pharisees asked Him about divorce, and there He made it unequivocally clear that the "permission" to give a letter of divorce was on the verge of being abolished - the hard-heartedness that caused divorce to be allowed in the time of Moses would no longer be a justifying and tolerating factor.
Jacob. The birth of the chosen people
As has already been noted, Isaac and Rebekah had almost the same story with offspring as Abraham and Sarah, and they too had to wait a long time, almost twenty years, although the matter was resolved more easily and without much friction. Apparently, the experience of their fathers benefited their children. It should be said that even Jacob had the same experience with Rachel, and her firstborn came also after about six or seven years of waiting, when the rivals already had a lot of children. But those wives were not the ones who were originally intended for him, so they were not subject to God's Providence to that extent. In this line of God's behavior toward the chosen people, we see the idea of slowness, delay, even artificial delay for a purpose. For what purpose does He arrange such long waits?
In the animal kingdom, we see differences in the length of childhood and formative periods in different animals. Those with the simplest instincts and behavioral programs are usually independent from birth or need only minimal prompting, training and support. Those who must master complex programs of behavior and skills, on the other hand, always have a long period of helplessness when even food must be put in their mouths. These facts suggest that the chosen people had to be characterized by a long period of formation and education, they could not be precocious, unsuited for masterful work. They had to learn a lot of knowledge and skills, they had to be like God in skill and wisdom. Parents also had to gain as much experience as possible, so that everything they had achieved could be passed on to the new generation without loss or distortion, in which experience, knowledge and wisdom had to be accumulated and multiplied. Only such qualities could reveal well enough to the inhabitants of the Earth their God.
It should not be thought that God planned to give all the advantages to the Jews for some evil purpose, as some people think, confusing everything in the world, the human with the divine, the purposes of some people with the purposes of God, the plan with the way it turned out in reality as a result of many sabotage and subversion of the enemy. He did not plan to make them masters and enslavers. What God planned to give to the Jews was to be given to everyone else through them. They are only God's intermediaries, agents or contractors. If they wanted to get something for themselves as human beings, leaving God's plans aside, they would have betrayed their calling and brought trouble on their heads, as they did more than once and more than twice. Their destiny was to serve mankind, and by personal example, not to be masters or even worse, oppressors. Such is the unenviable lot of the Jews, and is it not because some see in their gaze the eternal longing that they cannot live as their simple human self would like, and even when others suspect that they have a secret dominion over the world, and they have never seen it in their whole life....
So Isaac was forty years old when he found Rebekah. He was completely happy with her, but they had not had children for a long time. However, they did not grumble, having the example of their parents before them. After nineteen years, Isaac prayed about the problem, before that it was as if they were just waiting very patiently and in no hurry, and received almost immediately the answer, Rebekah became pregnant. It was true that after some time the children in her belly began to beat against each other, and it looked quite serious, such blows from within were simply painful for the mother and, they say, it was dangerous for the children themselves as well. She wondered what it was and was it worth putting up with? Is there not some sign in this? With this question she turned to God. In later times, the stones urim and thummim were part of the high priest's garments, through which one could ask God and receive an answer. The glow of the right urim was a sign of "yes", while the blurring of the thummim on the left shoulder meant "no", and thus it was possible to ask rather complicated questions and dialog with God. At the time of the patriarchs this option was probably not yet available, but one could either go to someone like Melchizedek, the "priest of the Most High God", who was also a prophet, the liaison between God and people, or God could even answer her personally, if not through Isaac. Yet it is said that she went somewhere, perhaps to Abraham. Isaac appears to have met with God less frequently, but this is not an indicator, the number of such meetings in itself says nothing about Isaac's spiritual problems or achievements, his path may have been devoid of this, like so many other faithful and trustworthy people, because perfection and holiness do not depend on direct meetings with God. A person who lives under the influence of God is already connected to Him by a strong contact, though he may not be able to hear His voice or see Him personally.
God answered her, whether personally or through someone else, but she recognized that these clashes in her belly would continue into the future, they were a sign of the relationship of brothers. From them were to come two nations that would not get along with each other. Was such a thing "programmed" by God, was it His will, was it "just so" for some very important reason? The Bible says nothing about such a thing, so we can "no" to such questions. In the future, Paul will say words that seem to imply that God is somewhat biased, favoring Isaac and rejecting Esau long before they did anything good or bad, but he does not say that God endowed them with characters, nor does he say that He predetermined their fate. It is precisely from the characters that everything flows out for them, as it does for all of us. In some people's view, God even made a mistake in choosing the "deceitful and cunning" instead of the "upright and noble" Esau as his favorite (neither characterization is correct). Is Esau so noble, neglecting his primogeniture, his opportunity to give the world a Savior, to prepare His way? Such a trait is very significantly bad for those who value these things. But this is still to be discussed, but for now it is worth considering what the apostle Paul is talking about. His further words do not show the voluntaristic attitude of God, who arbitrarily appoints favorites, but an objective foreknowledge, from which He knew who was who, and it was the moral character of each one that ensured God's decision. Paul himself refers to the prophet Malachi, who relayed these words of God about Jacob and Esau, that He loved the one and hated the other. And Paul is precisely talking about foreknowledge, not arbitrary choice. In Romans 9 Paul says, "He says to Moses, 'Whom to have mercy on I will have mercy on, whom to pity I will pity I will pity.'" Here is the whole explanation, in light of these words things begin to look different than they seem when reading that chapter. God has mercy on those who need it, not on those who try to get it, no matter how much they want it. He also pities those who are in trouble, who need help, not those who play on feelings and try to speculate on God's emotions and pity Him. It is clear that those who want to play on God's feelings are in a better position than they try to portray, they are puffed up, or they try to get something from Him on their own terms, i.e. keeping some sin, not wanting to admit their guilt. It happens all over the place, people very often want to get help from God, and yet they are not interested in His rules and laws, they do not want to hear about His conditions for getting help, that is, they break the order and at the same time they want success, prosperity and His favor. That is people are ready to use Him as a magic wand, an automaton of desires, but they do not take into account that it is the Master who entrusted His resources to them for some time. After all, even human life is given to him from somewhere, he did not make himself, he did not create, assemble, build and launch himself... And even parents have an indirect relation to this process, they only "press buttons", but the real Father for people, for each of us, is the One Who calculated our whole construction and existence, Who launched our forebears into life.
Paul seems to be a bit of a "bummer", he does present God's side a bit harshly for some reason, but he does not set God up as the One who programs who is to be saved and who is not. He takes on the heavy paradox that there really kind of had to be "vessels of wrath" as well, not just recipients of the good. But he balances the seeming unfairness of his constructs with the fact that God tolerates these wicked people for a very long time. Within the framework of freedom of choice, Paul solves this with no problem, especially when one considers how large a percentage of people live randomly, unconsciously, adrift. There will always be a sufficient number of "instruments of wrath" among them, but if the majority of people would think and consciously begin to deal with the question of how to organize their future, how to avoid death at the final reckoning, the laws of large numbers would give us a completely different picture of the life of society and man, other tendencies and gravitation of society and man, very significantly reducing the number of "vessels of wrath", ready for the evil of people. What Paul writes is true, but it is a picture of the current state of man and mankind, a snapshot of the current state of affairs of this world. He himself realizes enough the role of human choice, and that God is quite just and will not leave anyone of those who really seek Him, who realize their situation, and will definitely give them opportunities and knowledge.
So the problems between the descendants of Esau and the Jews are not programmed from the outside, their history clearly shows the reasons for their problems. These reasons could not have existed, it was easy to bypass them, to solve things peacefully, differently, but unfortunately they went the way they went. This is reflected in the fact that God knew about them before time began.
In the meantime, their clashes in their mother's belly continued for some time until it was time for them to be born. Esau was the first born, with red hair and skin, so that Edom, a nickname consonant with "Adam" meaning red, became his middle name, which was also given to his descendants.
Jacob came out second, and what was surprising and symbolic in their destinies, he held onto the heel of the older man with his hand. It was as if he were tripping him or trying his best to hold him back. It was as if they had originally sensed the characters and properties of one another, and could not stand each other (fortunately, in fact, far from always between them was such a relationship). And they reacted as they could, having no reason yet, purely instinctively or animalistically, pushing each other and causing pain and fear to the mother. They named him Yakov, "grabbing the heel", and in this name for the Russian ear sounds the familiar root "kov", which makes the meaning of "fetters", "shackle" and other things of this series. However, they grew up peacefully and without conflict, and nothing is said about their childhood that is said about their in utero existence. The clash predicted by their struggle in the womb was realized much later.
In idea, both of these sons could have already been the founders of this special Messianic nation, although most of the blessings should have gone to the firstborn. Why was it only with Jacob's sons that God's chosen nation began, what prevented both of Isaac's sons from beginning the process together as Jacob's sons did? Was there something missing? Was the selection of the right traits not yet completed? But Jacob's sons were not a gift, for some time they were even more problematic than Esau, figuring out how to kill their own brother (although later they changed very much), in some ways they were weaker spiritually, at least because the mothers of most of them were women who were not meant for this, who got Jacob's wives by chance, or rather as a result of his mistakes and wrong actions, who passed on to their children unkind traits of character or at least indifference to high things.
I see in Esau only one glaring trait (but what a trait) that prevents him from being in God's special people - a total preoccupation with earthly things, a lack of interest in spiritual things, and even a disregard for them, which God could not leave unreacted. Had he been more interested in the prospects that were promised to Abraham, already from this generation, the second from Abraham, the chosen people might have begun to multiply. But it was not only his disregard of the birthright that prevented Esau from being numbered with the glory of God, it was only the result of his general disposition and state of mind, but he took two women at once as wives, both of whom were not of a character suited to the chosen race. The fact that they were Canaanites and Gentiles also brought out the worst in him, but they were also just problematic members of the family, causing frequent trouble for Isaac and Rebekah. That said, Isaac seems rather indifferent to Esau's spiritual condition in this regard, he did nothing to stop him from marrying, he continued to spoil him with his affection. His personal experience of participating in the sufferings of the Savior of the world did not tell him anything about what was happening in front of him, he looks asleep and relaxed in a completely comfortable life. And the failure of a favorite marriage in that sense could have been a reminder, a wake-up call. Isaac may have thought about it, but he drew no conclusions and took no action. These were moments of Isaac's downfall or weakness, of unworthiness compared to his father, who in his place would not have left such things without one conclusion or another. And it was also part of the prediction of that "great darkness and terror" that came upon Abraham on the day of the offering of the sacrifice of the slaughtered animals.
The sale of primogeniture
Esau has become a skillful hunter. Not the most peaceful of occupations, however. He could have been a shepherd, if he was so attracted to animals, but he was more interested in stalking, chasing, catching, killing than in caring for them. These games are not harmless, they involve taking a life, from the victim, or if unlucky, from the hunter. On its own, under the conditions of life on Earth, this cannot be considered reprehensible or bad, but in the case of this particular family, making hunting a vocation is somehow not the best. Esau seems to be following in the footsteps of Nimrod, who was also a successful hunter early on. It is an occupation that requires concentration and the ability to exert all his strength for risky moments, it requires keen senses and error-free actions, but the mind may not be developed, stopping at a sufficient level for hunting. Though it is not the only activity that develops these skills, Esau finds himself absorbed in it. He is close to nature, living in the breath of the fields and forests, which is great in itself, but the purpose and calling of his ancestors, the call of God and the vocation to serve humanity were alien to him. The skill and skill of killing were not harmless for him, and they removed him from the influence of the Spirit. And it seems to me that he himself chose this occupation precisely to be away from the calling of his kind. He had once lied, and after that he did not turn from the crooked path, he stuck to it.
It is not surprising, therefore, that when his brother touched the subject of primogeniture, he reacted so sharply and contemptuously. The birthright had two main components - the first was a material advantage in the division of the parents' inheritance, a double share, and the second was the right to be the priest and elder of the family after the father's death. If he wanted to show his unselfishness and unwillingness to enrich himself at the expense of others, it was one thing, and it was very doubtful, because the double share of inheritance was given not for wealth and advantage, but on the contrary, for service and support of the other members of the family and for sacrifices - a considerable expense. That is, from the material side it was not an advantage, all privileges were concentrated in the spiritual side of the matter. But to be a teacher, a guardian of morality, order, spirituality, to be an educator of others - for some reason he did not want to see himself in this, moreover, he was burdened by it. That is why he reacted sharply to the mention of primogeniture. Did he want to show that he did not value material gain, that it was alien to him, that he was above all mercantile considerations? Or is it any "fancy" about morality, rituals and rules that cause his dislike? Still the second, life among nature did not instill in him higher notions, though it seemed that it should have elevated him and lifted him above the vanity of the world. He had sold his right of seniority, not given it away unselfishly, if he really saw his inadequacy to this high calling, and yet he did not resent it, as a noble man should resent such an offer - to give away his right for a mere portion, however large, however tasty, of food.
Jacob was simple in this respect - he was one who was drawn to the eternal questions, to whom the stories of his parents and grandfather about God and the destiny of mankind were not just a matter of words. If he saw that his older brother, the heir to such significant advantages, valued what he had inherited, he would have no problem being his helper and support in everything. There was no rivalry between them for the sake of rivalry; the sign of the struggle between them before they were born concerned more serious things. Later, Esau, in his complaints to his brother, named only two points where Jacob had done something wrong to him, and the first, that he had "taken the primogeniture," was in no way reprehensible, for he might not have sold it to him if he had thought it wrong. But when Jacob saw that Esau didn't like almost everything about Abraham's inheritance, it bothered him a lot. He wanted to stand in this "holy place" that could not, must not, remain empty. Except that he did not act in an overt or honest way, which got him in trouble with his brother and with the rest of the world - Jacob's mistake is being used by the enemies of God and His work. Wanting to take his sacred place before God, unfortunately he was not acting as a follower and worshiper of God, but as a yet unconverted, unspiritual man. This was his problem.
One book caught the theme of twin brothers, one of the religions of the fantasy world. In the case of Jacob and Esau, it could have been a similar story, but only if Esau was as dedicated an adept of the Being as the younger Jacob. Together the brothers could have turned mountains... They would have complemented each other by being different - Esau's activity and strength would have been complemented by Jacob's activity of thinking and searching for solutions.
The case was that Esau was coming from a hunt, tired and hungry, and his brother already had food ready. They were both old enough that there was no direct rivalry between them (and probably none at all, except what happens in most ordinary families), they had successfully "divided" their parents - Esau was favored by his father, who was attracted to the active character of his elder son and his adventures in the fields and forests, as well as to his meals from what he had hunted. Jacob, on the other hand, was preferred by his mother, who harmonized his gentle character with her way of life. Esau asked to share a meal with him, and Jacob, as if in jest (though he was very serious inside - this was the moment!) offered to sell him his birthright. And Esau said what he said - "what is there in this eldership for me when I am starving"? He is clearly weighed down by his responsibilities, which his father and mother and grandfather had told him much about. It is unlikely that the image of a skillful hunter, who knows how to kill and skin the prey harmonizes with this attitude to the princely share. Many would take it as an insult. However, Esau did not react to it as an insult either then or in the immediate aftermath. It was only later, when Jacob had deceived his father and had a reason and a great desire to kill his brother, that his reaction to this bargain, which had not shown itself before, appears. What would have happened if Jacob had realized the purchased seniority in a non-deceptive way? In time, he would have either realized the offense, for which he had only himself to blame, and repented for his criminal negligence of spiritual things, or he would have become a petty hater of the one who had revealed his weakness, which could have led to the same enmity between their descendants, which was in the existing reality. Esau was not bad in all things, but one of the apostles calls him "a wicked man who gave up his primogeniture for mere food." Sin is not the same as sin, the commandments differ in character, but the consequences of breaking any of them are destructive, even if the violation does not appear to involve suffering or anything bad. But this destructiveness is visible to those who look into and calculate the consequences of every deed, and in time it will become apparent to even the most shortsighted.
The fact that Esau is dissatisfied with his primogeniture shows that his father prepared him for the role of patriarch as his favorite. He was well aware from his wife, or had personally heard it, being with her when it was given, of the prophecy of the younger who would be stronger than the elder, but who showed a certain stubbornness and opposition. In this insistence of Isaac, who imposed on his son a role he did not like, is the cause of the elder Esau's internal problems....
Jacob holds his breath - his brother agrees! And they make a deal - Jacob is now considered the oldest, and Esau gets his portion of lentils. However, there may have been other ingredients, and those who have cooked them can tell us wonderful things about them and other legumes. Having eaten and refreshed himself, having enjoyed his meal, Esau got up and went to his room, and showed no sign that he regretted or even doubted what he had just done. Most likely, in this outburst of dissatisfaction with the role imposed on him and the exchange of his right to food, he found some satisfaction, his problem suddenly found a solution. Unfortunately, he did not continue this line later, but began to think about the material benefits of primogeniture when he became older and began to look at life more down-to-earth.
Once I had to read a story of a young man from the generation of teenagers, which seemed to me quite different from what we were in our time. They had some other external traits in their behavior that I didn't understand at all, they seemed to live with completely different things and values (I even wondered if they had them at all?) - that's how it seemed to me at the time. I think you realized that I am talking about growing up in the nineties, when the old communist propaganda was replaced by propaganda of completely different things. However, that story helped me realize that human nature remained in the same place it had always been. External conditions had changed, but the reaction to them came from the same centers as in any other generation. The essence of the story is this: in a company of teenagers, one offered to sell his soul to another. Nothing more, nothing less, just his soul. And this in an environment where this topic was not forbidden or hushed up only because the word was not used, it was not their topic. The one who received the offer instinctively thought about it, because money is not usually offered for nothing, and it seems that he is not giving anything away. But what was he giving away? He didn't think about the soul, like the rest of them, and didn't specifically care, though that didn't mean they didn't have principles. And the "buyer" was hardly from the Orthodox or any other environment and did not do it with a far-reaching purpose to confuse thoughtless boys, but only being more well-read, decided to make a joke. In general, he thought for a while, but not finding a trick, agreed to the deal. He received a small sum of money, and in return he only uttered words confirming the sale of the "soul". The buyer said: "Here, I have an empty matchbox, I put your soul here and I will have it in this box, I will carry it in my pocket. And he put the box in his pocket. In spite of the seeming lack of necessary concepts in this environment, those who witnessed this action became somehow uncomfortable, especially the one who was selling. After a while, he went up to the one who had bought and returned the money and asked him to return what he had sold to him... Although Esau was not selling a soul, it was not a significant topic between them, but still....
The reason Esau didn't want to get involved with leadership in the field of religion was not because leadership was alien to him - he had the necessary qualities in abundance, and he was followed by many dashing men who had great authority over him (when they met after Jacob's return from Laban, Esau had 400 men with guns with him who were on their way to take Jacob down). He had everything he needed, but he was not attracted to the way of truth, the way of God. Somewhere inside himself he wanted a small but wider freedom, not excluding some indulgences in pleasing himself - this is what is so close to almost all ordinary "good" people. And this repelled him from his vocation... And performing rituals and spiritual counseling - that was not his either.
Following in my father's footsteps - repeating mistakes
This story happened before the children were born[84] . Because of crop failures and famine, Isaac began to look for better places to live, and God came to him, as He had come to Abraham, and told him not to go to Egypt. There were other fruitful places within Canaan, and one of them was already familiar to him from his father's experience. That experience was not entirely successful or commendable, and Isaac could have avoided repeating that mistake, could have drawn conclusions, but somehow he did... They came to Gerar, and Isaac, who had undergone self-denial to the point of death, somehow forgot his experience, forgot his fearlessness for God. It is often the case that things in people's minds do not clash much with each other. Alas. Our mind is not shrewd and sharp in all things, it does not grasp everything on the fly, but since things must be understood, then the connection between things has to be established manually, through in-depth reflections, meditations. The human mind often provides food for thought, but not everyone is inclined to give them their due place, looking at things simplistically and too easily, trusting too much the attitude of the majority "not to think", not to think. If the human mind worked the way it should - keenly noticing everything, then maybe the connections between things and meanings would be really automatic, but our mind is distracted by emotions and not always correctly understood interests, depending on where we turn the vector of emotions and desires, or even just give in to the will of our emotions. Therefore, in the thoughtless "automatic" mode things and tendencies remain untracked and instead of a slender storehouse of things in our mind we form cluttered corners, the mind suffers from indigestion and the spiritual sphere of man produces ghosts, if not monsters instead of sensible things (the very "sleep of the mind gives birth to monsters)".
In short, Isaac feared for his life and, like his father, put his wife, and himself, along with his honor, under attack, doubt, and censure by calling his wife his sister. If Abraham was a man of soft nature, Isaac inherited this quality twice as much, and when after many years of quiet life he found himself in an uncomfortable, potentially threatening environment, he followed the same relaxed way - "whatever happens later, a dead man doesn't need a wife, they will take his wife away, but right now I want to avoid problems".... Most likely Abraham did not share with him his conclusions about such mistakes of the past or touched them only slightly, so that he did not lay in his son a fuse against the dangers of his own fear or inclination to an easy life. Or in practice the matter was not so easy as it seemed when the warnings and lessons were sounded.
The same Abimelech who had been deceived by Abraham was set up again by his son (or since "Abimelech" means "father of the king", each successive king received the same name along with the office by inheritance, so it could have been a new Abimelech, although the longevity of the Philistines is not unbelievable, especially in those ancient times). Isaac feared the Philistines as a rough and cruel people, but the king of Gerar was also worried about his city, knowing that it was dangerous to touch Abraham or Isaac, knowing what forces were behind them. Fortunately, by chance Abimelech saw that Isaac's relationship with Rebekah was not brotherly at all and immediately expressed to Isaac that he was doing extremely wrong, that his wife, thinking she was a free woman, was being targeted by someone from his circle and the consequences would be bad for everyone. It's a good lesson, though, that you should be less afraid. After all, you have such forces behind you and you don't take them into account - that's what Isaac must have thought or Abimelech, who had seen and learned a lot in his long life. The Philistines may have been what Abraham and Isaac imagined them to be, but their king was a worthy man.
Isaac was not cast out as Abraham had been the last time, apparently Abimelech had gotten used to them and did not consider them strangers, especially since Abraham was his ally in his last years and Abraham had possessions in his territory. Isaac lived in the land and prospered, but, as Genesis 26 describes this period of his life, he suffered much from the Philistines. Their character in some respects was really not exemplary, they argued with him about wells, they harmed him in little things. It came to the point that when Isaac, on account of his great success in farming (the usual occupation of this family before and after was animal husbandry, but for some reason Isaac decided to try his hand at grains, and was very successful) became richer than many of them, they demanded that he leave their borders, and even Abimelech joined in these demands. Although he himself was hardly hostile to Abraham's son, the people's dislike of Isaac alarmed him, and in order to avoid more trouble, he decided that it would be better for him to leave on his own.
Isaac lived near these places for a time, but later went to his possession in Beersheba (again within Abimelech's kingdom) and lived there. After some time, the same men, Abimelech and Ahuzaf, with the commander of the army, came to him, as they had once come to Abraham, to make a treaty as they had with Abraham. Isaac expressed some surprise at this visit, for they had recently driven him away, but Abimelech did his best to smooth things over, distancing himself from the people's indignation, adding that "with you the blessings of your God, you have lost nothing as a result, and we want to be friends with you after all". Paradoxically, sometimes it is much easier to be friends at a distance than at close range (of course, it is far from real friendship, but still even such a reduced version is not bad), and reasonable people keep a distance if they do not see a close kinship of souls or minds, keeping themselves and others from the problems of misunderstanding and distortion of each other's motives, which too often happens at close range. This is not to say that close friendships in themselves are guilty of anything - if people understand each other easily, they will benefit more from close ties, but not everyone is so attuned and accustomed.
Father's deception
Nothing happened after Jacob bought seniority. It is possible that Esau may have thought that what had happened between him and his brother would make no difference in his fate or in his father's attitude toward him. I persistently think that he was so relieved to be free of the responsibility that had been weighing on his soul so far that he did not care or think about it any more. But the matter was more serious than either of them had expected. Jacob had gotten what he wanted from his brother, but could he turn what he had bought into real value, into seniority in the line of the righteous? Would his father recognize him as the eldest, give him the blessing that would follow from his acquired right? Would he receive the inheritance that was due to an elder, a double share? The father did not know this because all were silent. It looks like Jacob did not receive anything from his father's property afterwards, there is no such record in Genesis, though it may be simply not mentioned. But Jacob in any case did not need anything, he himself achieved a lot with his own hands. Jacob does not look like someone who wants to get to the top for the sake of benefits and advantages, he was looking for closeness to God, for belonging to the highest calling.
Isaac, their father, sensed that his time to die was approaching[85] . He felt weak, and his eyesight was also greatly impaired, and so he decided that his time was at hand. True, here he was mistaken and exaggerated something, for after this he lived about forty-five years. He did not ask anything about God's will; in general, in the situation with his strange attachment to one of his sons, he shows a weakening of his spirituality. And naturally he wanted to bestow upon his favorite a blessing which contained not only his will, but also the power of the Most High. And he only considers Esau alone, not taking Jacob into account, not taking the younger one in any way. Rebekah, I think, has pointed out to him more than once and more than twice the shortcomings and unsuitability of Esau, the prophecy about Jacob and his interest in Abraham's heritage. It is not good of him to overlook the younger man's drive for spiritual things, his honesty and diligence, and to overlook the older man's serious shortcomings. Esau by this time has long since had two wives, perfect Gentiles, which would have been like a siren's call to Abraham, yet Isaac somehow continues the line he has long drawn that Esau should be the patriarch. At this point Jacob does not play any political games, which in his place many people would have played, but on the other hand he does not act openly either, he does not go to his father and announce that he is the first and not Esau. He should have at least informed his father of the fait accompli that he was now the firstborn. If he saw that Esau was not living up to the calling, he should have talked to his father about it. Had he done so, the whole story could have gone down a very different road.
Most likely Jacob chose to trust God, remembering Abraham's experience and his fall, when he acted from himself, not according to the principles to which he was called. And this would have been all right except for one thing - such matters as the cession of one's right to another must be declared, it is a very serious matter, far from being personal. One can partly understand Jacob's motive in keeping silent about the acquisition - the fact is that the benefit his father wanted to bestow on his favorite did not depend on him alone, as Solomon notes - "the heart of kings is in the hand of the Most High." At the last moment, unexpected factors could have come into play, or other thoughts could have come to mind, or even just that unspiritual attitude to bless Esau could have been lost, the fervor could have disappeared, and the blessing of Esau would have turned into a pathetic effort that would have upset both Isaac and Esau. Jacob could have simply turned to God at that time, because he was already entitled to a special relationship with Him, even if informally (although he was formally entitled), and would not have gone unanswered. Then sooner or later Isaac would have thought about another son, and the failed blessing for Esau would have turned into a powerful stream of consciousness for Jacob, which he undeservedly neglected. But this option of total passivity did not take into account Jacob's own responsibility; it was impossible to eliminate himself completely.
However, his mother intervened in Jacob's fate at that moment, seemingly wanting almost the same thing, but with a completely different attitude, with a different spirit, and spoiled everything that could be spoiled. She, knowing that God should be on the side of her youngest son, remembering the words of the angel, began to act in the heat of lack of time in the most wrong way, sowing the seeds of great problems not only for her son, but also for herself, not to mention the destruction of the destinies of entire nations. She tried to promote Jacob not as a spiritual man with a vocation to a holy work, but as her favorite, caring more for his material status than for the success of his vocation. She appreciated his thoughtfulness and his attraction to higher subjects, but still the path she chose to help her son was a bearish favor. Here she acted in the same style as Sarah, who offered Abraham a maid as a wife to produce an heir of her own, since God was slow to help them. Again it was an attack of darkness, very successful in neutralizing God's plan for a holy nation. Again the cloud of "gloom and horror" contributed its note to the nascent melody of the plan of salvation. She should have simply come to the ceremony which Isaac had decided to perform in secret from her and Jacob (which in itself speaks of his perceived wrongdoing), intervened and demanded a hearing, and there would have been no need to deceive anyone and involve her son in an unworthy cause. The patriarch's blessing is not held in secret from the others... But what she undertook was of no higher quality than what Isaac was doing.
How much spoils the work of salvation or the plans of God by the unworthiness, blunders, and sins of those particular people who are supposed to bring light into the world by their example? Very much so. It is difficult to convey the level of hatred of some, not even of individuals, but of whole groups who have collected and concentrated for themselves everything negative from the Bible and the lives of those who represent or should represent God and impart knowledge of Him and the grand enterprise He has undertaken for the world.
But this is an extreme that cannot but arise in society, because people by nature realize everything that is possible, and even common sense and extreme costs are not always a barrier to them. And in the final judgment those who contributed to such attitude to the Bible, to the God of the Bible, to the Jews, to Christianity, will have to receive the full amount, all those who gave a reason for disappointment and hatred. However, haters of this or that act, being not in their right mind either, it is excessive, unreasonable hatred. More reasonable people do not fall into this trap of irrational hatred, realizing that the problems of the Jews stem from the structure and nature of man. God Himself resents Israel, giving them the example of the Gentiles who do not change their gods, while the Jews kept trying to imitate others, not appreciating what they had, almost ashamed of their God and their too simple religion.
Rebekah demanded that Jacob put on Esau's clothes, disguise himself as Esau, imitate his hairiness with animal skins, and receive his blessing instead. Jacob tried to resist, but he did not do so vigorously; on the contrary, he went along with his mother's wishes, and only weakly objected. His objections were not principled, he did not tell her how a spiritual man should act, that what she was proposing was wrong from the beginning, but only that they might get caught and then there might be trouble. He said that his father would easily recognize the deception if he touched Jacob, because they were very different in touch from Esau. And his voice would give him away, which it almost did. But Rebekah had something to object to, and Jacob, who had raised a weak, unprincipled objection, could not resist her pressure. He was under considerable pressure of darkness at this time, and he did not shake himself, but went with the flow.
What was it? They were counting on not missing their father's blessing, as if it was the only significant factor. But what would happen if the deception became obvious? Wouldn't the father curse the deceiver, for he was not his favorite son, yet had hurt the favorite, dishonestly stealing the dearest moments of his father's heartfelt impulse? In other families this might easily have happened. But Esau, would he not take up arms? After all, that's what he had promised, and it had almost happened, more than once. The first time he had to run away from home and, if I'm not mistaken, his mother never saw her beloved Jacob again - when he returned twenty years later, she is not mentioned anywhere (although she could have lived a long time, so it is possible that she saw her son and grandchildren). And the second time was saved only by divine intervention, and even then at the cost of a very serious struggle with God, when he had to go through the agony of self-denial, like his father and grandfather. Anyone here will ask, was it difficult for them to evaluate the reaction of the other side to the maximum? They could have, they should have, but for some reason they didn't. And this is the image of many people who at a crucial moment show weakness, although capable of better, and on other occasions quite show their best abilities. Human beings are subjective, too complex, and there are moments when everything against you - both inside and outside - hinders, confuses, distracts you. Those who have not had such moments might throw a stone. But it's better not to; it's better to make sure that such things don't happen to ourselves. Vigilance and caution do not grow by themselves, a person cannot live in this mode, so people sooner or later turn off, attention is spontaneously switched... Yes, it is possible and necessary to deepen and sharpen these qualities, but one cannot expect that they will never fail, that they will always work in the same mode. The only real way out is to cooperate with something greater than man, with the One who exists for this very purpose, to take on things that are beyond our control. That is one aspect of God, to keep and protect us always, whether we are asleep or awake. Yes, He delegates many things to us, and the more advanced we are, the more responsibility we receive along with opportunities, but no matter how much we accomplish, we remain children with Him, ready to be taken care of, to shield us where only He can see the problem.
But in this case, something whispered to Jacob himself that if his father gave Esau his blessing, all would be sort of lost for him. This was not true for several reasons, but under the pressure of his mother and circumstances he, like Eve at the tree of knowledge of good and evil, did not have enough time to look around, and he could not think of stepping aside to do so, nor was he allowed to. He should have resolutely rejected all attempts to involve him in these matters at once, and if he missed one blow, at least later, until he entered his father's house, he could cut short all these foolish and reckless plans of his mother. And even when he went to his father, he could not hide himself, but could say directly what should have been said long ago - about the deal between him and Esau, that Esau was no longer the firstborn by right, or at least ask his blessing for himself as the one who had bought the firstborn status. And there would have been no problem at all, or much less, and everything would have been fair.
In general, no one gave God a place at that time... However, to take a limiting case, if even Jacob had done nothing, and if Isaac had bestowed his blessing on Esau with all his might, with his honesty and thirst for spiritual riches, Jacob would have become a powerful support for God's work on earth. A support for his brother, with invisible power, inspiring new research and discoveries, with the support of his formal seniority, he would have become an indispensable counselor in all directions of the cause. If Esau had utterly failed to fulfill the expectations placed upon him, God would have eliminated him as He had eliminated the children of Judah in his day. But God would not allow spiritual privileges to be entrusted to an unworthy man, so that He could easily have interfered with the blessing procedure, and Isaac's plan would not have gone as he thought it would.
But Jacob did what his mother demanded, and on the verge of failing, he somehow convinced his father that he was Esau. He was doubtful because of his voice and intonation, but somehow he gave in to Jacob's words. After enjoying his favorite dish, which Rebekah had managed to make as good as Esau's game, and breathing in the smell of Esau's field-smelling hunter's clothes that he had put on the poor deceiver, his father was filled with inspiration - God had allowed him to be filled with the expected mood and words, which for Isaac was a sign that everything was going right. And Isaac expressed all that God also wanted to give to the worthy heir of the great promises of salvation for mankind. And a huge advance was given to Jacob.
But the advantages he had received also brought with them responsibilities. But the advantages were to come later, and in the meantime Esau, the former firstborn, had returned from the hunt.....
He brought the game, cooked it, and brought it to his father. When he came to him, he offered him something to eat and then blessed him, just as he had intended. Esau also had a certain oddity - if you consider him a man of honor (unlike Jacob, whose name was a symbol of dishonesty, though he had done very few things worthy of condemnation - only once in his life had he done the wrong thing! - and not on his own initiative, which is significant), he would have to report to his father that he was no longer the firstborn, that he had simply sold his right. After all, he too at this point deceives his father, telling him that "I am your firstborn, Esau"... But he did not do this, he continues to pretend as if nothing has happened and he is still his father's favorite. He felt that his father would not like it, and he did not think that the material advantages and authority that were to be given to him were unnecessary, and he did not care whether they were deserved or not... But is it fair to call what he sold his own?
Isaac, hearing again the same offer to eat his favorite food and blessing, only this time in a real voice from Esau, who even without groping confirmed that it was him and no one else, shuddered violently. He realized what had happened. Had he realized even here that Jacob's attraction to higher subjects was not accidental, since it had pushed him even to such a very risky venture? He could not help noticing that Jacob was upwardly inclined, while Esau was rough and down-to-earth, but his mental closeness to his elder son made him uncomfortable, for he could not honor his younger son, for fear of offending his favorite Esau. And now even this small weakness was costing them all. He felt his own guilt in Jacob's guilt, and was shocked at the consequences of seemingly harmless little breaches of justice at the expense of seeming convenience and comfort, leading to a great conflict. He sensed that the matter smelled of blood, which might well have happened in the near future, and in the time that followed, had taken place more than once in the relations of these nations. The same "darkness and terror" of Abraham's vision continued to gather momentum.
In a few moments Isaac made many important conclusions, the most important of which was that Jacob should have his share, even though he had done so in violation of the rules. Esau had not sold his primogeniture in vain, and his father finally realized that he had long avoided thinking about the problems in the house. He replied to his son that he could not bless him. For some reason he thought there could only be one blessing (Jacob successfully disproved this idea on his sons). And the fact that he had not prepared a second blessing for the younger one, in a way actually neglecting him, turned out to be the reason why he had to refuse Esau now. But the latter pleaded, for some reason he now noticed that his father's words of well-wishing had weight and significance. And the primogeniture, which he had longed for and neglected, was also somewhere around here shining with considerable glory. He had not thought of such things other than disparagingly before, but now it touched him. "Have you only one blessing?" - he demanded of his father. That his brother would be without a blessing had not bothered him before, but here it turned out that it would come in handy himself. And his father, having thought well, gathered his courage and tried to please his beloved son. But without inspiration from above, he did not succeed very well. It did not sound. Esau, when he heard what his father said, that he would be enslaved to his brother for a long time, was upset and became even more angry, promising himself to kill Jacob as soon as his father died. After that, until his reconciliation with Jacob, he multiplied and built up his military force, a large troop, hoping to counteract the prophecy that the elder would be weaker. He did not doubt his father's prophetic abilities, he trusted completely that his people would be weaker than Jacob's tribe and enslaved. This had been foretold before they were born, and Esau may have hoped that through his father's special favor he would be able to change that predestination. But even if Jacob had not listened to his mother and deceived his father, and Esau had been one-on-one with his father without interference, and his father had somehow managed to carry out his uninspired plans for Esau, there was no way he would have gotten what he wanted. He could only take his place in the sacred work as head of the race, in the divine plan for the restoration of man's fallen nature, but he could not avert the leadership and headship of Jacob. Even if he had become the head of the race, it would have been a visible, external position - without the right qualities he could not have become a spiritual leader and teacher, Jacob with his "inner style" would have been the center of attraction for all who needed the light, and Esau would only have performed sacrifices and rituals. However, this would have been more than enough for him. And such work in a pair could be a great way of realization of divine plans through cooperation of such different people, through their consent and harmony. But I don't think God would have tolerated such an extreme variant with Esau as a formal head... Esau took himself outside the boundaries of God's work and Jacob had to work alone. He now had enough problems, he had to pay for what he had done wrong, and he had to be trained to be fit for the work he was so passionate about. It took a long time, leaving much that could be done undone. The world was not getting the light it needed because God's plans were delayed by the doers, by their unpreparedness.
Jacob's flight
Rebekah was troubled when she heard of Esau's intentions to kill her brother, her favorite son. She must have realized at that moment that instead of favoring and arranging her son's life, she had caused him great trouble with her own hands. Perhaps she now wished she had listened to his objections - his father's curse was not as dangerous as Esau's threat, and she felt that as a mother she had no influence over her eldest. She had missed out, and long ago. But what she had done could never be undone. But she had one solution in store. Jacob was not yet married, although his age was already sufficient for that[86] . She decided to send him to her brother in Haran, although the main thing was to save Jacob's life. It was clear from Esau's words that he was going to take revenge on Jacob when his father died, and although his father had lived more than forty years since that time, Esau could have been impatient (and so it happened - when Jacob returned, Isaac was still alive, but Esau was on his way to kill his brother), so it was dangerous to delay sending Jacob away. The issue of Jacob's marriage was indeed resolved, but Jacob encountered difficulties, though not serious, but annoying. Rebekah scolded herself for wanting to do good to her son, but she had arranged the exact opposite for him. But her son did not blame her, he realized that if he had been a little more determined, all her tossing and turning would have done nothing to anyone. Except that, seeing Jacob's straightforwardness and firmness in honesty, she would have gone to his father and talked to him herself, as a responsible mistress could and should have done, seeing that the head of the family had become a bit forgetful and relaxed in his pleasures, losing sight of the aspirations that attracted the younger son and the moral decay of the older one. And it could have changed so much more and been safe for all. If Esau had taken offense at having his blessings slightly reduced (and that was in case he could have suspected something), the mother would have been beyond blame, her position incomparable to Jacob's. It should also be said that by choosing their favorite, by dividing the sons, they eliminated themselves from the life of the other - Esau was left without a mother's influence, as Jacob was without a father's. This was not the way to do it, they had put their upbringing on the back burner, attachment is attachment, but there is also the duty of parents... Isaac seemed to like Esau's powerful masculinity, he himself seemed to lack it a little. That in itself was fine, but it was not worth forgetting about responsibilities.
Lavan's. Settlement and multiplication
Bethel. The Stairway to Heaven vision
Rebekah saw that Jacob was in danger of death in the near future; the only consolation was that Esau did not throw away his decorum and carry out his threat immediately. After talking with her husband, they decided to make the matter more solid, especially since the issue of starting a family was indeed already pressing. Rebekah told Jacob of the necessity of fleeing to her brother, and though her son did not reproach her for anything, she realized that she was more to blame than anyone else. But what to do now but try to get on with her life somehow? She would have plenty of time to think and evaluate her affairs, but for now she did what she could.
Isaac summoned Jacob and gave him detailed orders to travel to Laban and marry one of his daughters. He did not yet know that Jacob would have both daughters... He blesses him as the chosen one, not blaming him in the least for his deception. In doing so, he acknowledges to some extent that he was wrong to ignore his gifts and aspirations, confirming his superiority.
It is interesting that although he sends him to get a family, it looks as if he sends him there empty-handed. Perhaps it is not quite so, and he may have given him some gifts, for when they went to get a wife for him, there was a whole wagon load of valuable things and gifts. Isaac had not become poorer since then, but he did not give his son any such things. Moreover, from Jacob's words when he returned twenty years later, "I crossed the Jordan with a staff, and now I have two camps," we may infer that he had no valuables of significance with him. Though it may not have mattered to his kinsmen in Harran, since they were well aware of the wealth of Abraham and Isaac, that is, some vouchsafing and recommendation was not needed. It would have worked out that way, at first Laban was not against giving one of his daughters to Jacob, but as time went on Laban became much more calculating, the sight of a "poor relative" pushed him to take advantage of Jacob's simplicity and he was not honest with him. In doing so, Jacob received much retribution for allowing circumstances to involve himself in his father's deception. Not that God caused Laban to do wrong to his nephew, but the fact that Jacob had stained himself with an improper deed (especially as a man of integrity who was not prone to deceit) created an atmosphere around him that was not conducive to righteousness... The people of the Far East would say "tainted karma" about his not-so-good influence, devoid of the power of integrity. Had he been faithful in a difficult moment, it would also have been a factor in influencing the behavior of others. So our deeds and actions, even our thoughts, not that they determine someone else's behavior, but they still influence our neighbors. Sometimes it seems that even on the distant ones... No, they will be responsible for their deeds, the influence on them does not justify them in any way, because the choice is made by a person himself, always by himself. And the duty of any of us is not to do what circumstances push us to do, or to follow influences however influential, but only the truth, what must be done, whether it is contrary to circumstances or coincides with them.
There seems to be an important note to Isaac's sending Jacob away empty-handed to make his own life. I have heard that some rich families do not immediately give their children, when they start a family, living conditions according to their wealth, but first they send them to live on their own for a few years, earning everything with their own hands in sweat, with small children on their hands and other difficulties of the beginning, and only after they have settled down, lived in this way for a few years, they invite them and give them all the opportunities that were at their disposal. In this way they teach them to appreciate the means and benefits of life. Moreover, did not Jacob's father punish him in this way for his deceit by depriving him of all his means?
Rebekah had hoped that Jacob would stay with Laban for a long time, and so he did. But the hope that in time Esau would grow close to Jacob did not work out. The calculation "according to the flesh", deprived of G-d's advice, did not come true, and the family of Bethuel and Laban was not highly spiritual, unfortunately. Until now it seemed that they were fit enough to participate in God's work. The friendship with her sister and their bond of shared childhood was lost somewhere in the affairs of life, and Rebekah was later ashamed before her son for her brother's deeds. Nevertheless, in spite of the unhealthy element in the affair, the blessing of his father and God accompanied Jacob and kept him from the most destructive developments. Jacob himself had to show whether he was worthy of the title he sought and dreamed of.
Esau, suddenly realizing that his father and mother did not like his Canaanite wives, decided to remedy the situation a little. He went to his uncle, Ishmael, and took one of his daughters as his wife. It was the right thing to do, and though he didn't realize it right away, it was better late than never. True, in doing so he had become three wives, but that had long since been considered reprehensible. Perhaps his parents were happy about it, especially if Mahalatha took it into her own hands to put his house in order, with the result that Esau's home was somewhat ennobled. That was most likely the case.
Jacob went on his way toward the northeast. He stopped at one place for the night, in the vicinity of the small town of Luz, which later became known as Bethel, the House of God. It was hardly very far from his father's house; it could only have been a day or two since he had left there for his share. Here he went to bed, taking a comfortably shaped stone in his headboard instead of a pillow.....
I remember various things about what people used to say in my childhood about the pampering and spoiling of the new generations.. I add to this the stories about how one father, when hardening his son in winter, when they had to spend the night in the snow, did not even let him roll a snowball under his head, saying, "Don't get soft, son... From this position Jacob looks less harsh to himself, but it is still a stone, not a soft pillow. When you sleep on your side, you have to have something under your head to keep your spine straight. And what a stone, I myself am surprised, as once resting on a lake, slept on a large flat granite boulder, after which completely gone pain in the hip joint, which for a long time annoyed me then. It was very comfortable, the stone was warmed by the sun, and I hardly rested for more than an hour after lunch, but I could have spent more time there. I didn't think about sleeping at first, but something about it attracted me to lie down on it, and then the pleasant warmth of the stone made me swelter. So, if the stone does not have sharp edges, then sometimes they can be perceived as not very soft, but quite comfortable....
All that had happened in the last days of the house could not leave Jacob calm; all the blunders and infidelity to his own principles in the pursuit of sacred aims and ideals, which did not permit the deceit he had made in yielding to pressure, were depriving him of peace and tranquillity. He realized that he was not leaving home as honorably as he would have done had he done right. His wounded conscience did not promise a blessing from above, and even the blessing he had received from his father did not seem reliable, right, deserved. Yet he had not lost the direction he had originally followed, and he had no intention of straying further from the right road. And God wanted to encourage him that he had not lost His favor, that He saw his longing for his ancestral heritage and God's work on earth.
Jacob saw in his dream a ladder going from the earth far up into the sky, with angels moving in both directions, and at the top of which stands God himself, speaking directly to him. "I am the God of Abraham and Isaac." He promises to give this land, on which, God emphasized, he is now lying (that is, Jacob perceived the whole real picture that he is now lying on the ground and sleeping, which had elements of an added reality not visible by ordinary sight), to him and his children. Jacob will be numerous and in his name and the name of this people there will be good for all the other peoples of[87] Earth. It is through these descendants, whether some people want it or not, that the knowledge of God and the things necessary for the salvation, the restoration of fallen humanity, will come to earth. It does not mean that in other nations there were no lights of goodness and truth, but the main light was still given through the descendants of this race. In the Bible the representatives of other nations are noted as bearers of light, and in His plans a place is given to other nations, and since some time all nations have become in this respect on an equal footing with Israel. Both Americans and Russians claim to be God-bearing nations, and not only. Opportunities are open to all, as long as they truly walk in the light that comes from above.
The speech to Jacob from this ladder ended with the words that God would keep him wherever he went and bring him back to Canaan, from which he was now urgently leaving. He did not say that Jacob should not leave his land; there was a reason for leaving, and more than one. He was to undergo a considerable school, where he would learn lessons that would show him plainly how evil the way of deceit was. But though he would suffer much, yet the damage would not be great, for God had promised to be near him, allowing only those lessons to flow from his own character or actions. If a person delves into the essence and causes of what is happening to him, he will sooner or later see the reasons for it, which will encourage him to improve, purify and develop. This is how God works with us, pushing us upward. Usually those who want to do so, especially if they agree with God about it, but in principle no one is free from such an intervention of heaven in their lives.
This is an important principle that could clarify a lot of things for people. There is such a word in the Bible - "It is not according to the will of His heart that God punishes and afflicts the sons of men[88] " - in His punishments, not His desire, but His necessity is manifested. That is, in what He allows to happen to us, in our troubles and problems, there is only an echo of our shortcomings, which we do not notice or do not realize their destructiveness. He wants to reveal to us, to show us some of our weakness. If we realized our own character flaws, He would have no need to reveal them to us in such unpleasant ways (other methods somehow don't work well, unfortunately...). Even if we were explicitly told about them, until we realize them ourselves, we don't tend to notice or see them. If we would examine ourselves and delve into the origins of our behaviors and cravings for certain things, there would be no need for Him to intervene and allow bitter lessons to be learned. Just about this the following is written: "If we judged ourselves, we would not be judged. But being judged, we are chastened of God, lest we be condemned with the world ".[89]
Many people explain what happens to them by karma, i.e. by what they have earned and worked for. To some considerable extent the Bible in these texts speaks about the same thing, although there is no such word and concept in the sense of "subsequent" or "past lives" in it (as there are no past lives themselves), but it is our present state, our character and our shortcomings that determine the nature of what happens to us. We as if attract them ourselves, or rather, this is the mechanism of life itself, that similar things attract, provoke or generate similar things. The character of a person, formed from his natural qualities together with his habits, generate the same nature of deeds, and around such a person by his deeds and behavior the same nature of atmosphere is condensed, in which other people in life interaction get or are involved, and consciously or unconsciously they react to this atmosphere accordingly... Well, nobody has canceled the purposefulness on the part of God, too - the state of an ignoramus and an ignoramus for Him, it should be understood, is offensive, as if innocent, and for some it is desirable, such a position in the life of God. People who bear His image are responsible for the way this image is exalted or belittled.
The Being, presenting Himself to Jacob, promised not to leave him until He had fulfilled all that He had promised. Jacob, listening to this, might have thought that he had not acquired the firstborn in vain, and that this wealth might have gone to Esau, who did not aspire to it, but if he had allowed himself to think such a thought for a moment, it would have been wrong. Esau would only have been revealed to what he was ready or open to, and most likely nothing of the kind would have been revealed to him. All these things would have come to the one who had an attraction to these high things anyway[90] , whether he was even number two or a wingman. And the fact that Jacob made a wrong move in his pursuit of what he wanted, as I have already pointed out, will be repaid many times over. In the meantime, God has revealed to His sincere adherent a part of His glory, revealing the riches of the lost world.
There was a phrase in G-d's speech, which could be misinterpreted, about "leaving" him after a certain time (when he had fulfilled all that he had promised), but if we look at the conditions when it would come to pass, it would appear that Jacob's life would not be long enough for that milestone. There is a promise of numerous descendants, but Jacob only lived to see his great-grandchildren, and it was still a long way off before his descendants spread to all sides of the world. So Jacob was not abandoned by God during his lifetime, and in this we can see God's peculiar sense of humor. There are many kinds of humor, and I'm not sure which one this can be classified as, but this looks like a pretty mild one. And how much that promise came in handy for Jacob one day.....
At this point James woke up, it was night, everything was almost as it had been in the dream, except for the stairs and those he had seen on them. However, he had no doubt that God was still present. It was possible that he saw God here not because, as he thought, this was a special place, like the base of heavenly powers on Earth, but only because he himself was here at this moment. If he had been somewhere else, further away or closer to home, God would have appeared to him there as well. But he promised that this place would be a special place on this earth, it would be the main or one of the main places of worship of the Creator. And the name of this place was called the House of God, Beth-El or Bethel. It was sufficient, like Abraham, to place an altar to the Most High here, and Jacob did so afterward. It did not become in the days of Israel the site of the temple, only after the split into the northern and southern kingdoms Jeroboam used the glory of the place for his semi-pagan[91] calves, but it was precisely this that Jacob would not have been happy about had he recognized the future. The story of the name of this place shows how people tend to emotionally exaggerate the circumstances surrounding certain important events, when they give importance to secondary details and circumstances instead of the main thing that happened. This is not usually a crime or sin, but it is still not good to stray too far from what God intended. Details and minor things should not overshadow the main thing, much less take its place.
Jacob set the stone on which he slept apart, so that it looked like a stele or monument, and poured oil on it, that is, dedicated it as a sacred object henceforth. In doing so, Jacob also made a vow, realizing that God had not rejected him or been angry with him, at least not so much as to deem him unfit for His great work. When he saw that He would be with him always, in the joy of being part of the salvation mission, he pledged his obedience and expressed his desire for a number of things that would testify that this Being-God would become Jacob's God. Now Jacob is not yet a fully independent entity, he is still in the role of a disciple or just preparing to go out into the world (though he is old by our standards). He is not yet married and is still in the process of settling his destiny, so his vow shows his intentions for the time when he will take his father's place and carry on the work of his ancestors. He makes a firm decision to serve God, and secures by a promise all the aspirations of his childhood and youth. His speech is not to be regarded as a bargaining with God, as it may appear when reading the Synodal translation, no, he lists his needs as one, for if one is unfulfilled the rest are lost. He says (closer to the original) - "if the Creator would keep me, give me clothing and food and security, and I would return home in peace, and the Creator would be my God, and this place would be God's house, and I would tithe to Him[92] " (from what I had acquired by then). These are all requests and wishes, in the original there is no transition from "if" to "then" - here everything is "if only", there is no condition after which he will do something in response - he only repeats what God Himself has said and promised, so this is thinking out loud, a desire to give thanks, comprehension of what has just been experienced, when the soul is overflowing with impressions, when you have not yet looked at everything from afar and in your head has not yet arranged what is what. It is an impulse of the soul, making a vow from the heart, still filled with the magical picture of God's presence, so there was and could be no bargaining.
Rachel, family and troubles
When Jacob came to the neighborhood of Harran, he came to a well in a field. There were three flocks of sheep and their shepherds. Jacob asked them if they knew Laban and learned that they did, and that one of his daughters would be coming here soon. He asked them why they were going to the watering place, for it was still early and the sheep could still graze for a couple of hours. The shepherds explained to him that there was a heavy stone on the well instead of a cover, and only when all the people were gathered could the well be used. Whether this was a condition for sharing the water and not quarreling, or whether the stone was just too heavy, so that the efforts of all the gathered men were needed, is not clear. The latter is more likely, because if there had been some agreement to use the well only at the same time as everyone else, Jacob would not have done what he did soon afterward. Just as Jacob was being explained why they were waiting at the well for all the flocks and shepherds to gather, Rachel came up with her flock.
The fact that a very young girl is herding alone shows that in those ancient times the attitude towards women in ancient, if I am not mistaken, Syria was not rigid. She did not wear a burqa, did not cover her face, was alone in the herd, her brothers or father were not obliged to follow her, and no one even thought that someone could offend her. Perhaps because she was from a respectable family, but even this is a serious argument against those customs that consider it obligatory for women to be everywhere protected by a man, and even with their faces hidden under the cover of a garment or a cloak.
Further events show that Jacob instantly fell under Rachel's spell. When he saw her with the flock, he went to the well and easily rolled away a stone that was beyond the strength of the men who were already at the well. If it was not a matter of the heaviness of the stone, but only of agreement, no one stopped him, seeing his condition he began to woo his chosen woman. Such cases are rare, and to deviate for the sake of such a thing from the customary few would call it an offense. To the smiles and good-natured grins and jokes of the young men, Jacob drank Rachel's sheep. While the sheep were drinking, they were talking at the same time. True, Jacob introduced himself first, and in greeting his cousin, hugged and kissed her. It may not have been customary, but he allowed himself to do so, impressed and amazed to meet such a beautiful girl, especially by right of kinship, being three or four times older than her. Rachel also accepted his attentions, realizing that this was her destiny. Jacob did not break any customs and rules in the future, being faithfully brought up and directed, seeking not pleasure as the main thing in life, but more than that. All those seven years that he had to wait for Rachel to be given to him as a wife, no one reproaches them for their inappropriate behavior, although he lived for a while in their house and later visited there often.
Rachel ran home, obviously the town was not far away. Jacob looked after the sheep for the time being and the other shepherds helped. Laban learned from his daughter the good news that his nephew, the son of his sister (though on the other hand, through their fathers they were third cousins[93] , but in such cases the closest kinship is usually considered), with whom he was connected by the best memories, had come to see them. He ran out to meet him, which shows actual interest and sincerity in regard to his sister and her son. He gladly received him, and listened to all the news from those parts of the events in their family, the good and the bad together. Not all the news was good, and Laban realized that Jacob needed to stay away from his family and decided to provide him with everything he needed, protecting him from adversity. His kinship traits and appearance drew him to provide whatever assistance his nephew needed, even to the point of protecting him by force if necessary. His mood and feelings are evident from these words, "you are my flesh and bone." For a whole month Jacob was a guest in his house, but it was necessary to think about its further arrangement. However, Jacob immediately joined the household, helped in everything, and was in fact already an employee in Laban's house. He brought nothing with him, and only his skillful hands and strength were his good capital. Of course, he had a lot of property in his father's and mother's house, but it could be challenged by his brother or simply taken away with his life, so he had to make good where he was now. Lavan, seeing all this, at first accepted the situation, and seeing Jacob's efficiency, diligence and success, had no doubt that he would not remain a poor relative wherever he turned. Later, however, from somewhere there came a temptation to use his circumstances and his good fortune for himself, which Lavan was tempted to do.
How did Laban become a miser and a cheat, so that even his kinship feelings left him and he became a problem not only for Jacob, but also for his own daughters? Maybe Jacob's gentleness whispered to Lavan that he would never fight back and that he could do anything to him and he would bear it, especially since he had no defense? His simplicity and straightforwardness gave chances (and whispered to take advantage of the moment) to turn him around in a few circles. If there is something unsightly in the Jewish people in the field of worldly cunning, it is from Lavan, not from Jacob, here we see a rather ingenuous simplicity without any creep to pursue their interests. The name or nickname "deceiver" was not undeserved, if we judge from his character and disposition at all times, and not from any conflict with his brother. Some, purely out of malice, speculate on his name, and depict Jacob as some kind of "peddler," but if he had been such, Laban could not have dealt with him as he did - Jacob would have cut off all attempts to take advantage of him from the beginning. If Jacob ever settled down at Lavan's expense (but only his detractors could say so, in fact everything was based on a fair agreement, which Lavan accepted and confirmed without any doubt), it was only by a conscious, willful effort, and not due to his grasping reflexes or his inescapable cunning craving for profit at any price, and he was protected by God, without whose help Jacob would have been left with nothing at all. Laban has no apology for this, and it began somewhere during the first seven years when Jacob was earning enough money to pay for his bride, Rachel. When Laban offered payment to Jacob after a month in Harran, Jacob asked for his youngest daughter as a wife and offered seven years of service. This was a good offer for Laban, which he (who was a bargainer and a swindler) immediately accepted without any bargaining. Seeing Jacob's diligence, he would not fail in any case, and Jacob brought him a considerable profit by the increased number of small cattle. The ransom or kalem was more than enough.
The purpose of kalym was a kind of deposit, providing security, giving assurance that a pretender to a woman's hand could provide for the family. It was supposed to be returned to the young some time after the establishment of the family, but later, perhaps following Lavan's example, some began to withhold it from them, spoiling the custom. When Laban's daughters say that their father "ate their silver," this is exactly what they are talking about, Jacob's contribution of seven years not given to them when they had made a family of their own.
The first tendency of Laban to take crooked ways may be seen in his answer to Jacob's request to marry Rachel to him. He himself had offered to set Jacob a fee for his work on his house, and when Jacob asked for Rachel's hand in marriage, Lavan, instead of a direct and honest "yes," says - "I'd rather have her marry you than anyone else." He blackmails him, showing that he might change his mind if he saw a better offer somewhere. It's as if he's incentivizing his nephew to work harder for him so he won't change his mind. Not nice... It would have been one thing if he had thought it to himself, and that would not have been nice and would have spoken of his over-calculating, but he said it out loud, which scratched the ear not only of Jacob, but also of the heavenly observers who write reports on all deeds and words, as well as thoughts and desires and struggling in us.... In partial defense of Lavan, I can only say that he himself may not have noticed the meaning of his words, the hint contained in them, but later on from an unconscious movement (if indeed it was unconscious) it penetrated further and became an explicit feature, which in time became impossible not to notice. Those who do not notice bad traits are usually told by others that they are going the wrong way, so if a person does not analyze his behavior and actions himself, there will still be some voice, whether friendly or enemy, giving him the opportunity to notice something wrong and correct himself.
Laban did his business at Jacob's expense, exploiting his honesty and simplicity. He saw his flocks multiply under his hand, as Jacob would later say, "Before me you had little, but with me you have much. How nice it would be to keep him with him in the position of a laborer for longer... Lavan's mind came up with an idea how to solve his personal problems in one fell swoop and enrich himself by keeping Jacob on a double contract. The problem was with his eldest daughter, who had some vision problems that drastically reduced her chances of a successful or favorable marriage. With her poor eyesight she could not equal the others in fine work, and Lavan had long been wondering how to get her a good marriage without losing out, because her dowry would have to be high for someone to be interested in her. Although nothing was said about her beauty, which meant that she was not a loser compared to her sister, but her poor eyesight was her problem. So Laban decided to trick her into giving her to Jacob, who would not refuse Rachel either, and having both, would not mind too much. He knew Jacob's character, and he was not mistaken in this calculation. Knowing Jacob's overly, utterly honest nature, Lavan didn't think Jacob would refuse to work an extra seven years for him for Leah. Maybe that wouldn't have worked with the locals, but Jacob wasn't a local and his family was far away, and not all of them would support Jacob. So even if Jacob started to argue, he could easily shut his mouth with the rules that two wives required double payment, and his objections that he was deceived could easily be parried with the phrase that he should have been a little more attentive... Arguing in such conditions would only lead to new disorders, and Lavan takes advantage of the defenselessness not only of Jacob's character, but also of his position as an alien, whose closest and only defender was Lavan himself....
Wedding. Cheating
The seven years that Lavan had set aside to pay the bride price flew by like a few days. He was healthy and strong, the one he loved with all the strength of his unspent soul was there, and she reciprocated, so he was happy. They were far from old age, time did not push them and they could go nowhere in a hurry. Unspoiled mores made unnecessary the hasty intimacy that had become a fetish for many long ago, but they were bypassed by these temptations, it was enough for them just to see each other from time to time. They and through looks, through a smile had more than many, not fully compatible couples have from full contact. Knowing their deadlines, they did not hurry to accelerate them, time flew imperceptibly, especially if you know how to wait. Besides, Rachel must have been very young at the time of their meeting and had just reached the age when they should start a family.
When the time came, Jacob told Laban, his father-in-law, that it was time to take Rachel as his wife. Laban gave a feast, as was his custom, gathering all the people of the city and the surrounding countryside - practically a royal feast. Everything would have been fine, but what happened during the night turned out to be a cruel treachery and abuse of the right of father and employer. In the tent was not Rachel, but her sister... What Jacob experienced is a separate conversation, anyone can try to imagine himself in his place, but there are questions to the other participants of these events. Each of them had to agree somehow, to be convinced or forced to act in such a way, Lavan could not organize such a thing alone. Okay Lavan - he was arranging it for his eldest, who had no prospects, he could be somehow understood, if not justified. Though not very much either - in such cases fathers, if they care for such daughters, give an increased dowry, and in fact it is rare that one is left completely destitute. But we can clearly see here that Lavan was sorry to spend his own money on his daughter, when there was such a favorable suitable from all sides very convenient unrequited Jacob... Also Leah is involved in this, she had to agree to deceive the unsuspecting fiancé of his sister. This isn't a prank where everything comes back to normal after the confusion, here it's serious. She knows this man loves her sister, but agrees to deceive him. She imagines that she may become hated for life, as well as rejected and defamed at the same time, although the chances of that are not very high (Jacob is a very good man), but not zero. However, apparently she herself was counting on it, and also her father had told her that it was not a problem for a man to have several wives, but only a plus, and even if you would not be loved like your sister, you would still be a good man, successful and hardworking. However, Lavan also hoped that Jacob would stay with him twice as long, and his sheep would increase during these years accordingly, but this benefit coincided with the benefit of a settled daughter, who would not have to be given an increased dowry - a win-win for both sides, so it was very difficult for him to keep from this marriage swindle when everything was fitting one to one. But notice - after he made this bargain with his conscience, his character was no longer honorable. After that, he began to oppress Jacob and even his own daughters, and his ways with God parted. His family was no longer involved in the fortunes of Abraham's descendants. So parasitizing on the fortunes of others did not bring happiness and good fortune to Laban, nor did Leah feel happy. She became somewhat of a problem for her sister and herself, having to fight for happiness, but never getting almost anything but children. Although it would seem to be happiness too, but would everyone agree to such happiness? And how it all spoiled Rachel's life... And if it had been limited only to that, but how much it affected the destiny of the nation - how many spiritual losses arose because of it, how low the quality of the people who came out of these conditions was.
Judging by God's delay in Abraham and Isaac's children, and the length of time Rachel had to wait (about seven years - a much shorter time than Sarah and Rebekah, but in an environment where others gave birth easily and effortlessly, looking at her with superiority if not mockery, it was an agonizingly long time; she could have counted one year as three...).), the same fate awaited Jacob - he and Rachel (who alone was Jacob's intended lawful wife) had to concentrate on spiritual growth in order to give their children the best possible upbringing. But other women intervened and instead of two sons, Jacob got twelve, even thirteen children along with his daughter. Quantitatively Israel began in these seven years from the time of Jacob's wedding, but this number was very raw, of poor quality. Besides Leah, the mothers of Jacob's children had also become servant girls in the process of rivalry, and the atmosphere of the family was highly poisoned by things far from spirituality, love, and goodness - rivalry, envy, and resentment. Therefore, the children lacked the influence necessary for the formation of the Messianic people, they grew up in a completely different environment, and until they eventually leveled out, they did a lot of things. But still the father's influence somehow or other brought the sons back to a better way, but since then the younger generations of this nation have always grown up in a kind of rebellion against sound things, unwittingly passed on as a baton from one rising generation to the next. Thus the heritage of Israel came under the influence of darkness from Abraham's vision at the parted sacrifice, and this influence seems never to have been neutralized in those days. That hedge which God had built for Isaac, in which Jacob had grown up, was broken down, and the influence of cruel and coarse manners now constantly accompanied this nation also. When Jacob decided to take the blessing by deceit instead of speaking directly to his father, he could hardly have suspected that through it such darkness would enter into the midst of the holy nation, nor could he have foreseen the trouble which he was bringing into his own house with his own hands.
If Jacob had only had Rachel, they probably would have had fewer children, but they would have been raised very differently. Perhaps there would have been more than two (although I see no problem that the same twelve could have been born, but in peace and quiet) because God had to restrain Rachel because of the atmosphere in the family, as Moses says - "God saw that Leah was unloved, and" gave her children[94] . This was a kind of punishment for Rachel, who found herself, though she did not want to do it at all, but, like her sister, involved in the deception of her own bridegroom, yielding to the entreaties of her father and mother, not breaking into the tent where Jacob had gone, thinking he was going to her, but ended up with Leah, who sometimes hated her sister for it. Jacob, too, since he allowed Leah to be in the family, should have given her sufficient attention and reconciled the sisters, who fought quite strongly, even if not in words, but in deeds. Later God gave Israel a law, according to which taking close relatives, sisters or mother and daughter in marriage to one person was considered a grave sin, which entailed a very severe punishment. But this would come later. In the meantime there was no such law yet, but the evil of this offense already existed in all its power and obviousness. Many things were obvious enough to be avoided or taught as bad things, but as people lost their shores, more and more commandments had to be given explicitly, turning concepts that were not obvious to everyone into tangible commandments and laws.
There is a question for Rachel - what made her give in to the entreaties and not oppose her father, how did she give her beloved into the hands of the deceivers? If her parents had bound her, preventing her from violating their plans, then she would not have been guilty and it would have been noted in Genesis, but there is nothing like that, not even a hint. So she was somehow persuaded by words alone, without physical violence or threats. Though it is not difficult to reconstruct something of it - she was obviously told that she should feel sorry for her sister, not to be so selfish... It was good for her, but what was it like for her sister? In their locality the younger one was not supposed to marry before the elder one, and she left her in this way as if for shame... Though Jacob did not know this custom for some reason during seven years, and neither Lavan, nor anyone else during his stay there, informed him about this pitfall. It turns out that the custom was not so important, so it was possible to break it without pain (after all, Lavan did the wedding of Rachel, not Leah), and Lavan's reference to the custom is only a weak excuse for the unresponsive. Jacob is being treated as a complete fool... But one cannot discount the pressure on Rachel by the authority of her parents - in those times, and still today, it was an important and very significant factor. And she submitted, broke down, just as Jacob himself yielded to his mother's deception of his father. To some extent, the fact that God did not give her children was the result of her not following the path of truth and justice, but yielding to the pressure of an authority that rebelled against the authority of God and His principles. In other words, she chose the guidance of man to her own detriment over the guidance of God, who would have taken much better care of everyone, including poor Leah, had they obeyed Him....
Life sometimes turns out in such a way that the authority of God is in conflict with parental authority, just as it is in conflict with state, social, supervisory, religious authority. And although subordinates should be in a certain harmony with higher authorities, they are still the same people. Because of this factor, superiors can easily find themselves in conflict with God, and then their subordinates get caught in a fork - they have to come into conflict either with them or with God (which is very shortsighted, but superiors seem much closer...). If you yourself choose to resist God, you must also give those under your influence a choice, otherwise you are being unfair by making the choice yourself but limiting it to others....
By the way, this is the principle of freedom of conscience in its purest form - we are not obliged to come into conflict with God if those above us do so and want to oblige us to do the same. If the superiors think that people are obliged to follow them and they have the right as superiors to force them to violate something together with them, then God is obliged or has the full right to stop them and take away their opportunities or power, or even life... And since many superiors cannot accept the loss of power and return to the status of ordinary people, preferring death, we should not be surprised that this is sometimes given to them too....
The subordinates have sufficient rights to decide who to listen to and whether to leave the rebellious boss as boss - no one has such a right to supremacy that is completely inalienable. If He does not take away your free will, then He gives everyone else the same right to choose and to be responsible to Him personally and not to others (we are responsible to others, but within the limits of our ties, sometimes deep but not absolute).
The next day Rachel could not indignantly tell her fiancé how he could have mistaken her for someone else, because she was afraid of the answer - You knew everything and were involved, how come your sister was in your bed instead of you? The only thing left to do was to avert his eyes in embarrassment and nod at his parents. But Jacob couldn't get angry with her, his own problems prevented him from doing so, and the embarrassment was mutual. So they forgave each other.
Laban, when the outraged Jacob asked him what he was doing, did not apologize, on the contrary, he tried to make Jacob feel ashamed that he was a stranger and did not know anything, and that he was teaching him wisdom (when he referred to the custom). He even demanded that Jacob should serve another seven-year term for his second wife. If someone else had been in Jacob's place, he would have replied that they had agreed on Rachel, not Leah, and he could only take Leah as a burden, but there could be no additional contracts. You yourself give me two for the price of one, and that's your problem - the contract was seven years for a wife. I don't need a second one, and if you do, that's your problem, and you're the asker, and I decide. And if it is necessary to work some more, then at completely different rates, not for kalym, but for real payment, so that I could organize my house, because I have your daughters, by the way. And also a big question, what to do with Leah - if I did not want to take her, she will not live with me, if I was deceived, I can and divorce her, for that matter.
But all this would have been good for the tougher people, whom Laban would have been afraid to deceive, for example, if Esau had been in Jacob's place... The independence that Jacob lacked would have been good for him; it would have tied him down. In addition, Jacob felt that he was now responsible for Leah, even though he had no feelings like those for Rachel. Deception is deception, but life is life. All the more so because the guilt of the deception he himself had once committed also kept him silent, and he could not act as decisively as he might have done if he had been free from guilt. James voices almost nothing of what someone more obnoxious would say in his place, even as an alien with few rights compared to the locals, he accepts the situation as it is. Leah may be weaker than Rachel, but as has been pointed out many times, in the eyes of most, it is prestigious for a man to have two. Also, Leah was not indifferent to him, and her father's scam even seemed to be welcomed, though she lost her sister in it, but at the time it may have seemed to her to be a sufficient replacement or a small loss. There is also another reason why he is silent, feeling guilty, because he was not able to distinguish in the darkness that Rachel was not in front of him... By the way, it speaks in favor of him and Rachel, that their relationship was pure from love games, so they were physically unfamiliar with each other, to the touch, why he did not feel the substitution. But he could have just talked to the bride on the wedding night, if there was no light - he would have discovered some inconsistencies right away. But no, they opened their arms and gagged him, and only the morning light brought the cruel revelations. So he was ashamed in front of his father-in-law and the others that he sort of screwed up big time himself, which was what kept him from quarreling and complaining more than anything else. He himself felt that if he started to make claims, he would have been objected to in the first place, that it was necessary to check, to see what you take[95] ....
So Jacob agrees to work once more for the same wife, the same term once more, seven years. He showed respect for the deceitful Leah by giving the labor of the first seven years to her, even though they were devoted to Rachel. But Rachel was given to him not after the end of the labor, not after seven years, but almost immediately, i.e. a week after Leah, probably according to the same custom, as Laban said - "finish this week", i.e. Leah. And already with Rachel-wife, feeling happy again, he worked seven more years for Lavan. During this time he received only some maintenance, but no pay for his labor. Although as a member of the family he did not need anything, he had not yet acquired any property of his own. For fourteen years the flocks of Laban and his sons had multiplied, but Jacob was still only a member of the family. And some were too accustomed to this state of affairs, where Jacob was the generator of their wealth, at their complete disposal... To be deprived of the source of their wealth is generally regarded by all as robbery....
His family began to multiply and children were born. The detailed Genesis account of this is not very inspiring, because these joys were accompanied by jealousy, vain hopes, tears, arguments, and strife, although the relationship itself outwardly looks rather soft, but it did not change the essence of the matter. For some reason Leah hoped that the number of children, who appeared not so much by her merits as by God's desire, would soften her fate at least a little, it would help her to become loved. But human nature does not change, and if people are incompatible, there is nothing to make them closer or happier to each other. One can only endure, which is all one has to do. People are indeed "our wealth," but it gave Leah very little in personal terms. No matter how many children she had, it didn't make her husband live with her or love her more. He was going where his heart was, and nothing could change that. Among all, only Rachel was truly happy, but even her happiness was undermined by her misfortune - she had nothing to boast about in front of her rivals, surrounded by children. Are you saying it's wrong to boast? - That's right, but when others boasted in front of her (compensating for her failure in personal happiness), she still wanted not that to answer them, but that there was at least one child, which really lacked for complete happiness. It was not bragging for the sake of bragging, but simply the nature of people, and this pain was acute with all her other well-being. God made such an equalization, so that since they were through the enemy's machinations in an unsightly, unsettled and disadvantaged state, their troubles helped them to realize their shortcomings and weaknesses, and to break through these thorns to the heights of the spirit. If we have made mistakes or the enemy has managed to mess us up, then these problems themselves are always a means for the development of character and spiritual abilities. This is how evil destroys itself, through feedback, through awareness, patience, restraint and striving to do the right and just, caring not only about their own personal good. Although if people become hardened under these trials, the direction of their development is turned more towards destruction. But this is in general and in general, but in life there are possible variants, although the directions are the same two - to destroy or to build.
The relationship between the sisters is worth mentioning. Both of them had a lot to resent each other, but after observing their conversations and relations, I did not notice any open quarrels or even harsh words towards their rivals. Life itself gave them enough reasons for quarrels and tears, but they always use soft, even humorous expressions towards each other. Even when once Leah did not hold back and said that Rachel had taken Jacob all to herself, it was the maximum she allowed herself. In response, Rachel sort of rented him out for one night, and Leah, picking Jacob up from work in the evening, declares to him, "I bought you for my son's mandrakes," which Reuben had picked in the field that day. Despite the tears shed by some from loneliness, by some from the slanted glances of those (maybe even seemingly) who had children, they do not allow themselves anything offensive... Probably, it was not in vain that these families helped each other by supplying brides and grooms. It is true that Laban's character put a stop to these ties. Jacob seemed to have taken away the last of the good things in this house.
Self-employment - Jacob becomes rich
The years of working for his wives were over, and Jacob was freer to take care of his own household. He still had nothing of his own, and his father's property had probably been contested by his brother, so he should not rely on it. During the years he had worked for Lavan, from what Jacob said, his father-in-law had gotten a lot more sheep and goats. It does not even seem to be a doubling of the number of sheep and goats, but much more, if he says, "Before me you had few, but now you have many. Jacob did not exaggerate, it was not in his character, especially since Laban did not even think of refuting his words when it was said. What was the reasoning behind this is hard to say. Clearly God was behind it, having given this man such a blessing, but it was due to his skills, increased responsibility and constant labor, as he describes his years of working for Laban - "sleep escaped my eyes." All natural losses in doing so were on him if predators did any damage. Most likely, this "blessing" led not to the fact that the flocks magically multiplied under his command, but to the fact that Jacob could not pass by the slightest disorder noticed by his eyes, and immediately undertook to correct it, to arrange, equip, and so on. This attentiveness to the sheep, as well as to the people who worked with him, bore fruit that everything rose and blossomed around him. Unfortunately, not all people responded in this way to his influence.
The first child by Rachel was born after her sister had already had seven (six if you count sons) children, six years before leaving Laban. Jacob's life in Haran totaled twenty years, fourteen of which were spent working for Laban (after the first seven years he had taken wives), and after these "obligatory" years he worked for himself for another six years, after which he left his father-in-law's increasingly less hospitable and friendly home. Thus, Joseph was born to Rachel about seven years after the wedding. This is a long time, though not unlike Rebekah's time with Sarah, but in her case the wait was agonizing because of the situation in their family. If Jacob had not been deceived in his time (even if it was only once, even if the initiative was not his, but his mother's), he would not have been deceived. Maybe Lavan would have tried to solve his problems at his expense, but the circumstances would have fallen into a completely different arrangement, when each of the participants would have probably behaved differently. Leah, respecting Jacob and her sister, would not have dared to deceive, and Rachel would not have accepted her father's decision, and Jacob might have been whispered to by some of his friends about some local customs, so that Lavan would have no chance of luck. And Jacob himself would suddenly decide to talk to his newfound wife about something before coming closer... How many little things can determine the course of events....
It is worth noting, though, that Jacob did not immediately become rich after the years of labor were over. After the birth of Joseph, when the second seven years of labor for his wives had just ended, Jacob wanted to return home. Laban begged him to stay and said words that turned the tide of events toward Jacob's enrichment. He said something like this: How can I get you to stay with me longer? He honestly says, "I see that because of you, because of you working for me, God has blessed me," that is, he notes a substantial gain in the number of sheep and goats. And he said - "Appoint yourself a reward from me, and I will give." This is where he with his character should have thought carefully in terms of his benefit - I don't mean to say that he shouldn't be generous, it would only be good for everyone, and especially for his spiritual interests, but he just wasn't prepared for what happened afterward. Most importantly, his herds did not diminish in any way when Jacob became a wealthy herd owner, the whole problem was that Jacob's cattle were better and healthier, but Jacob's herds Lavan somehow continued to feel were still his, forgetting the meaning of the contract. His words were not entirely sincere, he was playing the part of the good man he had once been, portraying him to his family and other witnesses to the conversation. That was the way it was done everywhere, not just in his locality, letting an excellent worker go, giving him some reward or another depending on his wealth and his merit. Lavan could well have returned to the good path by simply giving some portion from his herds. He could have partially atoned for his guilt to Jacob, but although he did so, it was not with his good will, and he himself, as a result, became even worse to Jacob than before.
The main thing is that everything happened according to his own words - he offered a reward from himself, from his property. Jacob could have been modest, asked for a share and the whole story of Lavan's house would have ended there, and Lavan would not have suffered much, even if he had to give a substantial part. But Jacob decided to go another way, he used a supernatural power to help him. The essence of his recipe is that he took only those lambs that were not like their parents. If the parent generation was mono-colored, he was to own only those with spots or there were other variations of differences, depending on the current arrangement with Lavan. Since statistics and experience stated that the lambs inherited the parental traits in most cases, Lavan figured that Jacob would get quite a few atypical lambs. In reality, however, things went wrong. Laban, seeing how quickly the new generation of sheep was passing into Jacob's hands, tried to change the distinctive features by which the lambs were passed to Jacob, but it was not a matter of spots or uniformity, but of what Jacob himself wanted. The right color always went to the strongest and healthiest animals, while the colors belonging to Laban went to the weaker ones. It was like magic, but there was no magic in his actions. The rods with all or part of the bark removed, indicating which lambs should be born now... It was a kind of wordless prayer or signaling to God - "now we do it this way". And it worked. God's promise to keep and protect was working, He was confirming His presence in his life. And Jacob himself also learned to rely on Him and cooperate with His power. There is a lesson of great importance in this - the cooperation of God and man.
"For thou art my God" are the words of many prayers, this is the consciousness not only of believers in the living God, but also of many Gentiles. God may require worship, and it belongs to Him to lead man and mankind (if they are not against[96] , of course), but the deity also has very large responsibilities. It is usually overlooked by everyone, but in view of God's power and other abilities and man's lack of them, God is as if obliged to help man and cover him where human powers are lacking - just as it happens between parents and small children... The idea "why else would God be needed but to serve his wards with his increased abilities?" is fundamentally sound and true. - is fundamentally sound and true. It is expressed, perhaps, too utilitarian and down-to-earth, but nevertheless the very nature of man is tied and designed for full functioning only in connection with the higher nature... In the case of Jacob's multiplication of flocks, this very function of the deity is seen.
Jacob took the rods, cut the bark off them so that they had a pattern of spots and stripes on them, and laid them at the waterhole when the flocks came there to drink. When the best rams and goats covered the sheep and goats, Jacob would throw the twigs beside them, and remove them from those that were weaker. I don't think in his mind this was some kind of magic act, he was just showing God - we need these now! - and so it was. From animals of any color were born lambs of the color Jacob needed, depending on the current agreement with Laban. God acted, His hand was in this supernatural selection... Of course, an outside observer could easily say that Jacob was sorcerous, but no one would accuse him. There were no spells, meditations, or energy management, just an arrangement with God.
When it was time to leave, Jacob told his wives about the dream in which God told him to return home. There is also a description of God personally helping Jacob with the acquisition of animals by showing him the motley rams and goats covering the sheep and goats, commenting that He was doing this because He "sees all that Laban does to him." I have not been able to figure out exactly when this dream was, whether it was just before leaving Harran or six years before, before the treaty of reward to Jacob.
In fact, Laban's flocks did not diminish when he began to allocate a certain allotment to his son-in-law, and they continued to multiply, except that they did not multiply as rapidly as they had done when Jacob worked for him. But one gets too used to good things, and when Jacob turned his successful laboring hands to the care of his family, it seemed to Laban's sons and to himself that they were being cruelly deprived, that their rightful property was being taken away... They somehow thought that the lambs given under the contract were still theirs, and that was the point. If Lavan had not deceived Jacob at the wedding with his daughters, he would not have considered him as a possible enemy (anyone who is deceived can easily wish for some kind of retaliation, and anyone who deceives understands that this should and must cause problems for himself) and perhaps no enmity or jealousy and no problems could have arisen at all. There would have been no residue left over from that incident, no coma of events would have swirled around that decision... But now it was as it was, and they considered the growing herds, all the more remarkable for their health and strength, of their close relative as a personal insult. They could not do anything, everything was legal, but the relations were not the same and the situation could not be corrected - "a hardened brother is more impregnable than a fortress ".[97]
"And Jacob saw that Laban's face was not the same toward him as it had been yesterday and the third day"... At some point, especially when Laban's sons saw how successfully Jacob had managed the covenant, how abundant his possessions were, and complained to their father, it became clear to Jacob that it was time to end the reward and leave, or there would be trouble. As noted in The Devil's Primer[98] ", "success is an utterly unpardonable sin to one's neighbors." Alas, too many people live by these laws, not by divine laws... As the flocks of Laban began to be pastured by his sons, although they were large, but the hands of these guys were not as skillful and diligent as the former worker, and the increase of sheep was not as great as before. However, new generations of sheep and goats continued to come from Jacob, which by contract did not belong to him, that is, they were born of the same color or of the same color as the parent generation, but to the envious eye of the neighbor everything seemed to be better than their own. They were not getting smaller, but the problem was that Jacob's flocks were multiplying faster at the same time... Laban once wished his sister, Jacob's mother, that her offspring would "possess the dwellings of their enemies." After that it was a foolishness to hold Jacob as an enemy, but he apparently forgot about his blessing, which turned out to be an unpleasant surprise for him. Even though Jacob did not take anything from him illegally, Lavan still feels robbed, but that is only his problem....
Six years had elapsed since the end of the work for the wives, and they had been spent with great efficiency in settling the household. In all, Jacob had lived in Haran twenty[99] years, he was now about 96 (the elder Reuben was about thirteen at this time and the younger Joseph five or six years old), and it was time to return to Canaan.
Return to Canaan
Escape
Jacob called his wives back to his house, to the flocks in the field. Here he told them of his plans to leave and why it was necessary to do so and other current circumstances. In this matter they were all in complete agreement, Leah and Rachel had seen what their father was doing to their husband and they did not like it. Their father had become shallow, infected with the spirit of gain and they emphasized that "he had sold us and even shed our silver," that "he considered us strangers." Besides those grievances born on the night of the wedding, the sisters had accumulated many other, perhaps not so large, but significant grievances against their father and brothers, and now they were ready to leave their kin, establishing their own home with their husband, whom they quite valued. They did not bring their personal problems about how to divide it anywhere, which was a considerable plus to their characteristic and a stabilizer in the arrangement and coziness of their hearth.
Having heard, among other considerations, that God had given Jacob a command to leave this place, none of them doubted the correctness of the plans - "so all the wealth that God took from our father is ours and our children's, so do whatever God has told you to do". Right from here, from the field, they set out on the road. This option does not seem like the best option to me, although Jacob's considerations seem understandable. It seems as if it would have been better to say goodbye first and only then leave, but there were significant considerations of a different order. They all feared that their father might interfere and use force - recent encounters with him had given great reason to fear him and his brothers, who might lay their hands either on the flocks or even on them themselves, forcing them to stay and serve as a source of profit by working for them, that is, turning them into slaves. If there was any chance of leaving peacefully, it would have been better to say goodbye chin-chin, but it seems that at this meeting they judged such chances to be minuscule. They did the right thing in the face of the high probability of trouble, though they did not avoid a meeting with the offended relatives, but it was not on their territory. But the offenses of the relatives were not legitimate - it was their own fault, children and siblings should not be treated in such a way, threatened or antagonized if you want good relations. Lavan's family had no cause for discontent, except envious eyes, but that was their own personal misfortune, nobody was to blame. They made a problem for themselves and others - "how come, you have such big animals, and we have such small ones, and the number is almost smaller than yours" - a very serious trouble... If they considered Jacob as their own, as one of their equals, they would look at everything differently. The fact is that many people consider what is given to their children or siblings as remaining within the family circle - it is not in your hands, but it is not lost at all, and only what is given to an outsider feels not their own or lost. Although there are people who are happy when they share even the last thing with others - and these are happy people, because they have much more reasons for happiness than egoists who are happy only when they personally have something added - even purely statistically altruists have much more reasons for joy... So Jacob for some reason was not considered their own, although it was their sisters who owned the same sheep they so desperately saw lost....
Laban was shearing the sheep at this time, and they, though they went home, might not say goodbye, having a semblance of an excuse that no one was at home. If there was anyone among the servants, they did not pass anything on to anyone. At the same time, Rachel secretly took home gods, pagan statuettes called teraphim. Paganism had reached this family, the work of Abraham and God was almost forgotten and abandoned by them under the influence of their surroundings. I am sure, however, that those teraphim were not yet completely pagan in those days, but rather they were personifications of the Being, the real God, and were like the later icon-images in the Christianity that began to recede, which is why the family of Laban did not mind the presence of these figurines in the house. But in this there was no longer the purity of the ancient original faith of the former patriarchal guardians, the world had gone downhill and had forgotten rather badly the One from whom it had made ugly likenesses of the Living God. Rachel, in taking the teraphim, showed by doing so that they were dear to her. After thirteen years of living together with God's chosen one, she still had not moved away from the wrong standards, had not weighed the rules by which she had been raised and shaped against the light she could receive from her fiancé and husband. James, aware of the presence of apostate figures in the house, seems not to have spoken of them to anyone either. However, it could have been different, even if he did talk about it, Rachel might still have thought and done things her own way. And wasn't this dependence on pagan figurines the reason why God was slow to respond to Rachel's requests for children?
Without saying anything to anyone, Jacob's family left Harran. Three days later, however, someone came to Laban where they were shearing sheep and told him that Jacob had left with everything he had. The Bible says here that "Jacob stole the heart from Laban without telling him he was leaving." Laban was dealt a blow, he did not expect this outcome. Although he had not been friendly to Jacob of late, he was still attached to his grandchildren, and probably his daughters too (even after depriving them of what was rightfully theirs). This was not how he envisioned parting, though he realized that Jacob had not come to him forever. But what was Jacob to do? Laban himself did not seem to realize that he was a danger to them. Now, being neglected and neglected by his children, who had left without saying goodbye, he felt a certain resentment, but did he think about what had caused it, who his daughters and sons-in-law perceived him to be? Who had he made himself out to be in front of them, treating them not as people dear to him, but as enemies or slaves? Did Jacob have to act according to all the rules and suffer him to make the crookedness of his heart obvious to all? I don't think so. Those from whom children leave because they feel threatened, and not because of capriciousness, like the prodigal son in the parable, have nothing to complain of but themselves. It often happens that too accustomed to their position, as if in their eyes they do nothing wrong, saying unnecessary, insulting, threatening, not giving peace and creating problems, tyrannizing indiscriminately because of any small thing. It is necessary to realize that not only small children are capricious, but it happens to people of all ages, and not only subordinates rebel, but also bosses are outrageous. To put in place even a child is not always easy, but how much more difficult it is to do it with the head of the family, when he is driven by the same currents that pervert children[100] . And looking at ourselves with a critical eye is something we all need to do. Adults and the old are more responsible and to blame if they are wrong in their treatment of lesser ones than young children or inexperienced youth.
Was Jacob guilty of running away from his unkind relatives? Was there any real danger from them to his home? God told him to leave, but the way Jacob carried out the order - was it flawless? He inflicted some kind of trauma on Laban - was it justified? Apparently yes, Jacob should not be blamed. It may have been possible to devise a scheme to leave without risk to himself and at the same time not so abruptly, such as leaving his children and wives somewhere private and coming himself with a group of trustworthy men so as not to tempt Lavan to take him into slavery or captivity and to discuss the terms of parting, where to meet to say goodbye. But even if that was possible, one should not demand skills from other realms from a skilled shepherd, no one encompasses all perfection, nor is skilled or knowledgeable all at once. If he did not feel safe and could not devise a better plan, he was right in his terms, even if it was not done in the most perfect way. Moreover, Lavan had achieved his goal and saw his daughters and grandchildren and said goodbye, even if not on his terms, but it was good for all.
After ten days, Laban and his men caught up with the fugitives, whose speed was held back by the herds. Jacob probably realized that they would be caught up and would not be left alone, but he knew that God was there to protect him. He also remembered the stories of his fathers, who had been in the worst conditions, when God had helped them even when they were wrong. He himself was almost completely clean and innocent before Laban, and God was more justified and glorified by this than in similar situations with his ancestors. Jacob was probably not too afraid of being overtaken, he also had men who could handle weapons and stand up for themselves, the main thing was that this meeting would not take place in Harran, where he would have few supporters or intercessors compared to the enemy, and there was also protection from supernatural forces, which did not hesitate to step in. The day before the fugitives were overtaken, God appeared to Laban in the night and explained to him very briefly that not only should Jacob not do anything, but that he should not even speak unnecessary words to him. What is interesting and surprising, it was not worth to say not only reproaches or threats, but even nothing good either... It is clear why it was not necessary to say bad things, and good things were forbidden because Lavan could be insincere in this case - flattery was not necessary and this attempt would look untrustworthy and would strain the suffering Jacob once again, and also such a lie could provoke God to something that Lavan would have to regret later. There is another point - the flattery could have been an attempt to lure Laban to Harran to work on supposedly better terms, but Jacob had to return to his land. He was born free and had princely status, and remaining a disenfranchised butler in the Syrian fields was somehow unwise on all sides. Even if he had achieved a position in Harran, that was not where he belonged.
It was not a good occasion for Laban to see God and hear His words... And he was hardly happy about it, nor could he boast of it. To see God is a dream of many people of all times and nations, and few people achieve it, Catholics may elevate such a person to the status of a saint, and such a person is considered by many to be outstanding, but Laban could hardly boast of this encounter. Though if he took the lesson into account and drew the necessary conclusions that he was wrong, he could. In some ways this encounter between Laban and God was similar to Saul's encounter with Christ, when he went to smash the Christians in Damascus, but that encounter changed Saul radically, which does not seem to be the case with Laban. He did not even renounce his teraphim, demanding them from James. And he did not hold back in his speeches either, he actually threatened Jacob, though Jacob himself gave him some reason to do so, getting heated and telling his father-in-law everything that he had accumulated during his life, giving him an opportunity to speak in his own defense. Therefore God did not strictly charge Lavan for the violation of the prohibition to say bad things to him, Lavan answered with restraint and quite correctly, under the circumstances almost perfectly, although he could not refrain from a hint of threat. But got around it...
Laban begins normally - "Why have you deceived me, taking my daughters away as if they were captives? It is difficult to say that he exaggerates about "captives", he has the right to make such a comparison, suddenly he thinks that Jacob spent a lot of effort to persuade his wives to leave with him. Still, he's kind of the injured party now. He continues - "I would have let you go with music and feasting, with songs and merriment" - perhaps, but before that he and his sons would have ripped him a new one, so that only they would be having fun (and that's why), but not the ones they would have let go like that... It was not for nothing that Jacob feared the interval between the announcement of his departure and the departure itself. Then Lavan is very indignant that he was not allowed to kiss his grandchildren, but in light of the separation procedures in his scenario, even his grandchildren could have been badly hurt, so Lavan is playing the innocent victim here for nothing. But Jacob, as already mentioned, expected this meeting, knowing that they were moving slowly and it was not difficult to catch up with them, so these claims did not touch him much, he could say to himself - "so here they are - say goodbye, kiss, hug, but here you do not have the same power as at home. And here you can only say goodbye, and there you could organize something else.
When Laban made his accusations, after mentioning that God had spoken to him and forbidden him to say both good and bad things, he said something like this - "okay, you wanted to see your father so badly, but why did you take away my gods?". That's where it got interesting to me - he's now sort of agreeing that Jacob had the right to do that. Was it okay to do that, it turns out? Laban, in fact, holds no grudge for running away, he's only concerned with his gods, which turn out to be the most important thing to him. That's where the biggest grievance turns out to be.
The accusation was very serious, and Jacob was greatly indignant at it - how could he have thought such a thing of him? Really, then, who had stolen them? But Jacob could not allow the thought that any of his household could have done such a thing. This unexpected accusation threw him off balance, so he lost his temper and began to say harsh things to his father-in-law. True, not instantly, but after giving his father-in-law the right to search his entire camp, while saying the rash words that could have caused him to lose Rachel, that the one who took his gods would be punished with death. This could have been a very severe blow to him, but God covered him here by positioning Lavan not to drive Rachel from the place where she had hidden those teraphim. And when Laban found nothing, during this time Jacob had thoroughly "warmed up", boiled over, and began to speak. In the Bible there are some speeches of certain people about whom it is said "song", whether Jacob or Moses and others. These are inspired words that sound like poetry, and are poetry, though not in verse. So what Jacob says here is also among the lofty speeches, even though it be but an argument.
And Jacob began to speak, and said to Laban:
"What is my fault, what is my sin, that you persecute me?
You've looked through all my things - what did you find of all the things in your house?
Show here before my kinsmen and before your kinsmen -
let them decide between the two of us.
Here, twenty years I've been at your place--
Thy sheep and thy goats have not miscarried; the rams of thy flock I have not eaten.
Torn by the beast I did not bring to you, that was my loss;
You charged me, whether things were missing by day, or missing by night;
I languished by day from the heat, and by night from the cold, and my sleep escaped my eyes.
Such are my twenty years in thy house.
I served you fourteen years for your two daughters and six years for your cattle.
You've changed my reward ten times.
If the God of my father, the God of Abraham, and the fear of Isaac had not been with me, you would now have let me go with nothing.
God saw my distress and the labor of my hands and interceded for me yesterday."
However, Lavan was not in the right state and not the right person to evaluate the structure of speech and inspiration of his interlocutor, at least it was not favorable for him. It was a pity, something useful might have come out. But he was not on God's side now, and though he could have had inspiration from the dark side, it would not have been a good thing, and could have ended badly for him - the devil would not have done him any good, but here and now God was in control, and it was dangerous to start a big argument. So he answers quite calmly, which is right of him, but he speaks on the edge of the foul. Whether his speech contains an explicit or implicit threat is hard for me to judge, especially depending on the tone, which written speech does not always convey. He replies that everything Jacob has comes from him, Laban. Hence some inalienable rights that could not be denied in any court of law, so that even God considered them appropriate and did not interfere. Jacob also saw his truth and did not argue further. "The daughters (who are your wives) are my children, my daughters. Your children are my grandchildren (who may be considered my children). Your cattle - you didn't buy it somewhere, it's all taken from my cattle... Everything you see here is mine..."
It could be argued, depending on the connotation of these last words, that it was not the whole truth, for Laban had given it all to Jacob by fair contract, Jacob's possessions were his, belonging only to him and not to Laban, if Laban wanted to say that it was really his. But because it was all taken from him, came from him, he is worthy of some respect - it is still true. But no more than that. However, Lavan immediately turns the conversation from dispute to peace, proposing an alliance between them. It is a skillful move - to threaten a little and immediately offer peace, after that it is inconvenient to clarify relations further, and the one who would try to understand further would look like a scandalizer and would be in a losing position. But Jacob is wise and generous, he realizes that Lavan needs these last words to assert himself, and even as a younger man he should leave the last word to his father-in-law, which is exactly what happens.
Everyone must have breathed a friendly sigh of relief at the peace offering. Jacob suggested that a monument be erected in honor of the peace agreement, which he did by choosing and placing a large stone. Then he suggested that something bigger be set up, and everyone gathered stones together and made a hill on which they had a feast. No more complaints or recriminations were heard, the feast was as any feast should be for people going to say goodbye for a long time. Laban said goodbye to his children and grandchildren, and Jacob said goodbye to a bad part of his life.
The place with the memorial pillar and the man-made hill were both named differently, but it became the boundary between the possessions of Abraham's family and his relatives. It so happened that here, where Laban caught up with Jacob, the Canaanite territory began, and Jacob managed to leave before the borders of his land. At the end, Lavan's admonitions were heard - he called the Living God as a witness, saying that he himself would not be able to take care of his daughters and grandchildren, but their God would see them and in case of anything would ask Jacob for any injustice. "This hill is a witness between me and you." He implores Jacob to do good to his daughters and not to take other wives. His concern for his children and grandchildren is quite understandable, and although one would like to ask him why he did not set a good example in everything, he may have already thought what would have happened if Jacob had done as he did to him and his wives, his daughters... Do not his words sound like a plea - "don't do as I do"? The next day they said goodbye and parted for good.
The meeting with Esau
In the hard parting with Harran and its inhabitants there were dangers that were successfully avoided. The meeting with Laban took place under circumstances where Laban had no advantage, which was a blessing even to Laban himself, there being less temptation to unjust action. Jacob was now approaching the Jordan at about its middle course or upper third, where a tributary of the Jabbok flows into it from the east. His spirits were again uneasy. The old concern about meeting Harran relatives had been safely resolved and he could breathe a sigh of relief, but soon enough a much bigger problem lay upon his soul. His twin brother was more dangerous than Lavan, and if Lavan had many reasons to love and respect Jacob, and it did not prevent him from disliking his too successful son-in-law and plotting intrigues, what to say about Esau, who had good reasons to dislike his brother...? Looking at his prospects on human grounds, Jacob had every reason to be discouraged, and others in his place would have looked for any other place on earth where Esau would not go for his soul. His brother's promise to kill him hung before him constantly. But there was another consideration beyond all human calculations and calculations - God's promise to care and protect. Jacob had ample evidence of the fulfillment of this, the latest of which had taken place just a few days before, when Laban himself had told him of God's intervention and forbidding him to say anything to Jacob. So on this side he had good reason not to be discouraged and to hope for a favorable outcome to this encounter as well.
On the road he met a group of what Moses described[101] as an encampment or army of angels, and it was not a small group, for Jacob called the area by the plural word for "camps" or "armies". Such occurrences of heavenly inhabitants on earth are noted many times in the Bible, and this is the first time such warriors are mentioned here, sent to protect, in this case, Jacob. This encounter encouraged him, and he boldly sends servants to his brother to notify him of his return. He returns rich and wealthy, with no claim on his father's property, making a gesture that may reassure his brother at least on this side. It is also a gesture of courtesy and respect to Esau - Jacob does his best to endear him to him. However, when the messengers return, they bring very alarming news, and Jacob is alarmed, his hope of heaven's protection somewhat diminished. It had been reported to him that Esau was on his way to meet him, with a force of four hundred men, all with weapons. I don't think he was weakened in his confidence in his God, but as I understand the structure of man, the point is that every part of our being and everything we encounter has an impact on our condition, on our perception of life. Each part has its own weight and influence. And if the strength and influence of the opposing parts are commensurate, fluctuations from one to the other can easily arise, and if the influences are equal, fluctuations from one mood to another can arise from the slightest whiff. Thoughts of a hardened and vengeful brother were countered by thoughts of God's protection and guarding. While the mind was occupied with the thought of Esau, pictures of his vengeance and fear unfolded in the mind, and this was enough to cause the emotions accompanying these thoughts to intensify and drive hope out of the mind. It is not at all necessary to lose faith completely; it is enough to focus on one side of a case for the emotions to swing in that direction. Often some aspect of a case or some factor is perceived by us as more significant than others, and this dictates stronger emotions. But in these cases it is enough to master your imagination, keeping your thoughts and inner picture on the right side, in Jacob's case it was enough to remember the support from above. He certainly did that, but precautions still had to be thought of too, specifically going into that section of the mind responsible for interacting with Esau, so thoughts often centered on the threat. It wasn't the only way to control emotions, and even thinking about the enemy's actions was a way to be calm, but Jacob had to learn it on the fly - such dangerous encounters didn't come his way often, and maybe not even at this level. The threat was too significant because it was tied to his guilt, and that was what depressed him the most - now the biggest threat and problem of all had come into his life with all the interest that had accumulated in his long absence. The first time Jacob had fled from his brother's anger, but now he had to walk towards him, towards his fear. If Esau had been hostile to him for no reason, Jacob would have borne it much more easily, like the problem with Laban, but the guilt made him vulnerable - he realized that God might leave him to his enemy because of it. That's why he felt insecure, not about God's ability to protect, but about whether He would do so, whether His promise applied to cases like this when he himself was in the wrong. Yes, there were cases when God had protected his fathers even in cases when they were not blameless, but in his case the fault was much more serious - his fathers were at least in danger when they took questionable steps, they did it out of fear, and he, being safe, created danger for himself with his own hands. And, in fact, his fears were not in vain, for God had put him through a severe test, which not everyone can undergo.
But that was for later, but for now Jacob expected the worst when he heard the news from the messengers. However, he had nowhere to run. In principle, he could have gone somewhere far away with his clan and multiplied there, but no fear could make him abandon his calling, which had been inherited from his fathers - to be the guardian of faith, truth, and the sacred land. He was to dwell in Canaan and nowhere else, and running away to live in another land would have betrayed what had been entrusted to him. Having taken up the much-desired inheritance he had strived so hard for all his life, now to abandon it? No, it was not for him. If God did not protect him, he must still remain faithful to his calling, and he could not imagine that God, having promised protection, having recognized him as a covenant keeper, would just abandon him. But even if there was no protection, Jacob would not run away.....
But he does take some measures. And it's not even protective measures... He divides his property and family into groups, putting the flocks first, then the children of the maids, then Leah's children, and last of all Rachel and her only son. In fact, he seems to be putting those less dear to him first, but it's hard to blame him, because he himself went ahead of everyone else. However, this was on the day of the meeting, but at first he divides everything into two camps, crosses the river Jabbok at night, appoints gifts from his cattle and puts them forward, hoping to favor his brother. He also turns to God with a prayer-talk where he asks for protection from his brother. He refers to the promise God Himself made to him, he refers to His promise - "You said - I will do you good, ... I will make your offspring like the sand of the sea." That is, for this to come true, it must come to pass, and God, in order to fulfill this promise, must keep it now, in this peril.
Wrestling with God
That night before the meeting with his brother tomorrow, after he had led everyone across the river, he was alone on the other bank, behind everyone else. He had not yet settled down to sleep, and was about to pray again, tormented by the expectations and fears of the unknowns of tomorrow's meeting. This night he could neither sleep nor rest; something strange had happened. Someone approached him and attacked him. There was no way to ponder or study who it was or why it was attacking him, he had to defend himself. It was unknown how strong Jacob was in self-defense and fighting skills in general. Judging by the fact that shepherds, such as David, could be very good at martial arts, and Jacob was an excellent shepherd, it is to be expected that he was skillful in self-defense in this night battle. If the moon shone, he could distinguish the figure of the attacker and could orient himself. The attack was carried out without weapons, only with his hands. It is also clear that it was more wrestling with its techniques, but not blows, at least Jacob limped after this battle, but had no bruises, otherwise it would be reflected in the biblical text (although I cannot exclude it either), as it was described in the relevant cases. The fight was at the limits of his strength and skill, but the opponent did not exceed Jacob's capabilities. The mysterious silent opponent trying to take him down, the shadows of the night, the glow of the moon on his sweat-glistening skin, the breathing of the combatants... It went on for quite some time, and none of them prevailed. At last it began to lighten, and after a few minutes the face of the attacker could be seen, and he stopped attacking, but first he injured the joint of Jacob's thigh with a touch, showing that he had been playing with him as if he were a little boy. If Jacob had dropped his hands because of the pain, the wrestler would have left, and that would have been the end of it. However, Jacob took advantage of his opponent's lunge and despite the pain in his thigh, grabbed him in such a way that he could not get away. The pain in his thigh was intense, so that tears were involuntarily forced out, and later in the book of Hosea the prophet described this moment, that Jacob wept, and this was largely due to the intense pain, which increased his despair, but he did not loosen his grip. He already realized by some signs radiating from the enemy that it was all for a reason, that he was in the presence of a higher being. He remembered his encounter with the army of angels in Mahanaim and knew that they would not have let any dangers or enemies pass to him, and this was most likely one of them. And the fact that the assailant was hiding his face only added to the certainty that his guess was correct. So when the assailant asked to be released so as not to be illuminated by the morning light, James asked to be blessed. It was more of a demand though, as he held the assailant tightly. He realized that what was happening here and now was a test and responded - "I will not let you go until you bless me." He already clearly understood that he was facing a representative of the divine forces. It is understandable that if the enemy had damaged his joint with one finger, he could easily get out of his grasp, but here Jacob knew that this would not happen, and although his request was more of a demand, it was not arrogant and insolent. What came from Jacob was a plea, a realization of his need and the ability of the one who came to him to help, and it was based on God's past promises. No wonder the Angel of the Covenant could not refuse him.
Could he be resentful for a sleepless night deprived of rest? For the pain and physical damage he had caused? Many of the fantasy writers would have put many harsh and rude words into Jacob's mouth, regardless of the identity of the God who conducted the event, which would have been similar to the behavior of Marfutka from the fairy tale "Morozko", and the case would have ended even sadder then. No, and not by Nastenka, of course, it was worth answering, but Jacob does not feel the enemy in his attacker and does not put up any claims and offenses. And is rewarded. The former adversary asks:
- What's your name?
- Jacob
- You are no longer Jacob ("tripping", "trickster"), but Israel ("wrestling with God", "God rules", "prince of God"). You have wrestled with God, and you will also wrestle with men.
Before that night, Jacob had experienced many fears, tormented by the uncertainty of Esau's behavior, drawing worse pictures for himself. The night attack had given him real experiences instead of imagined ones (not in the sense of futile and mistaken, but just not yet realized, expected), and in this struggle he was not concerned with fear, not with tomorrow's problems, but with responding to the current trouble, and he did it quite successfully. He was confronting God Himself, and although He did not exceed Jacob's abilities, it still shows that Jacob was well prepared. For the most part, Jacob's strength was not so much in his muscles as in his firm grasp on God's promise to keep him, which is faith. God could not disappoint him, could not overcome the boundary drawn by His own promise, because Jacob was firm in the hope of His promise. That is, the inner soft power of man's conviction held even God, who needed just that, for men to believe not only in Him, but in Him and His promises. Developing, it entails striving for the higher, for knowledge, and other development, restoration of man in his former strength and beauty even under the conditions of the rule of dark forces on Earth.
It is worth remembering to all those who have undeserved, seemingly undeserved problems, who have been following the Way for a long time, who hold firmly to the rules of the divine realm - it often happens that some of the problems come not from people or even from the devil, but from Himself, because our development requires it. So it is written - "it is not according to the will of His heart that He chastens and afflicts the sons of men" (Pl.Jer.3,33), that is, our own condition determines the means that we need to apply to us in order to achieve the result that He and we ourselves need. If, of course, we want to achieve the goal.
Jacob wanted to know more about what had happened, he understood that this was a historical moment that he would remember for the rest of his life and even more - for all eternity, that his children and grandchildren would be interested in, that would be told instead of fairy tales and myths, and he asked the Interlocutor about his name, but he did not receive an answer. That is, he received, but not an answer, but a question - "Why do you ask about My name?" Instead of revealing his name, He blessed Jacob with something else, about which the text of Genesis is silent. But from what was happening, Jacob could already quite understand who it was. Some time later, as he left the clearing and limped toward his family, he said to himself, "I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved. These words became the name of the place where it took place, Peninsula. His fears were not in vain, the reservation about preserving his life was in no way accidental, the mark on his thigh confirms it, and it was only when God came to earth incarnated in a human body that communion with Him became physically safe because His power was hidden. However, it is not so dangerous for people who aspire to God - His energy and forces rather guard and protect than damage, but if a person has some curvatures in himself, then damage from the proximity of such energies is practically assured. Moses was in His presence twice for forty days and did not even feel the need for food and drink, only began to glow, but for most people to approach Him physically undesirable[102] . It is true that when Moses asked Him to show him more of His glory, he learned that what he saw on the mountain was only a small part, to see Him in all His power would have meant death for Moses as well. This is one of the reasons why His visits to earth were gradually curtailed as the human population increased and morals declined at the same time - so as not to harm a humanity damaged by the problem of evil. Had Jacob not been as he was, had there been some crookedness or dishonesty in him by this time, this meeting might have ended very differently. It was a moment of crisis, but the preparation of all his past life had not been in vain.
Meeting of the brothers. The denouement
When Jacob came to the camp, he saw from the hill that the crowd coming with his brother was approaching. He divided his household into three groups, putting those dearest to him last, and went out ahead of them all to meet his brother and his soldiers. Yesterday this moment had caused him much anguish, and all he could think of was his eternal guilt before his brother, which he could not make up for himself, and the look on his face and Esau's words about his eternal vengeance. But now somehow he did not doubt or worry. It was not the certainty of the gifts sent to meet his brother that made him serene. He was a different man now. The encounter of this night with its battle, when his opponent had been far more powerful than his brother, had given him so much that his brother, with his petty vanity and unreasonable pretensions, far from being right in his claims himself, no longer troubled him. He had, if I may say so, won a war with God, a very small one, of course, with a safety net from Himself, but nevertheless a serious and dangerous one, more dangerous than a meeting with an implacable brother. After that Esau was no longer a problem. Out of inertia Jacob still took safety measures, but when he went out to meet Esau, he felt and realized that he could not worry about anything anymore. The blessing of the Most High - "You have wrestled with God, and you will also wrestle with men" - still resounded in his memory. This is all a good illustration of the religious term "faith." Jacob had defeated himself yesterday, and therefore he was victorious in his wrestling with God. He had not yet met his brother, but he had defeated himself, not him. And everything went on peacefully. Esau, too, was victorious in the context of his offense, but Esau did not feel defeated.
It is hard to say what was happening to Esau. The Bible does not say that God came to him in the night or any other time and said anything to him as He had to Laban before. Laban was not kept from a couple of rebukes by God's prohibition, and it is unlikely that God's prohibition to harm Jacob would have had that result. Instead, brotherly feelings awoke in Esau, childhood memories, and he realized that Jacob had changed, that he had suffered for all his and not his transgressions away from home and parents. The gentle "homely" Jacob endured life in foreign lands not always friendly, deceptions of relatives, disputes over property, hard labor. The news carried over into those times, even if not as quickly as it does today. Most of all Esau realized the fears that his brother must have felt, knowing that he was marching towards an armed detachment, but not running away from the almost hundred percent probability of destroying not only himself, but also his family... And he treated him as he should have[103] , with those almost forgotten feelings from his former life, and even with some new ones. When he saw Jacob ahead of his children and wives, he himself ran toward him and embraced him, and they both wept. All resentment and desire for revenge were forgotten.
Esau wanted to refuse the gifts Jacob put in his way, but Jacob begged him to accept them because, as he said, "I have seen your face today as the face of God." Who is naturally benevolent, who gives life and its benefits. It was indeed a great miracle to Jacob that Esau was so disposed toward him and forgave him. He could not have expected a greater gift, this had been his life's problem and now it was solved, the knot of his problems, pains and fears untied and he breathed truly free. He knew himself that he was not a malicious pest, but he realized that by his weakness before his mother's council he had made a very large mistake, for which his brother had a right to regard him as a criminal, and little more than that, was ready to destroy him. Now not only was his mistake forgiven and made amends, but the hardened brother became a friend who withdrew all pretensions. We can also say that to some extent Esau recognized Jacob's calling to be the spiritual leader of the family, that his aspirations were not accidental, and although he reached his position with mistakes, but still paid for them and his place is deserved, having the right qualities. Also Jacob showed brilliant business qualities, he became quite a wealthy man on his own from scratch, so he did not need his father's wealth and could leave all or a significant part of the parental inheritance to Esau.
Life in Canaan
Esau invited Esau to come and stay with him, and offered to follow him, but his men were light, and Jacob had too many delicate things to take care of - children and cattle. So he answered Esau that he would come to him later, for he could not travel as fast as his party, because it would be harmful to the animals and children. At this point they parted, and the Bible tells us nothing more about their relationship with Esau, except for a meeting at his father's funeral, some twenty-four years later. They came to the neighborhood of Shechem, where Jacob decided to settle. He housed his sheep in a place called Sokhof[104] . He did not go to where his parents lived, settling[105] now to the north. However, he did not live permanently in one place, fulfilling the instructions given to his fathers to walk and wander through Canaan while he was young and full of strength.
Trouble in Seaham
Dinah, Jacob's daughter, was the last to be born to Leah. It appears that she must have been born six years before she left, but it seems to me that it could have been a year later, her birth is said to have been "afterward," that Joseph was born to Rachel before her. When they settled in Shechem, she was already at an age where marriage could be spoken of (many tribes performed marriages at an early age), that is, they had been going about the country for some time without stopping long in any one place. Now she might have been between twelve and fifteen years old. Had she been older, she might not have fallen into the trap of a more experienced successful seducer. It happened that she had gone out to look at the girls of the place, to make friends if possible. She made one serious mistake - she should not have gone out alone before her family knew everything about the place and its people, who was who and who was what. Also, those living in Sihem hadn't all had time to hear details about their tribe... At least she could have gone for a walk accompanied by someone else, but she wanted to look around on her own. Maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing in familiar surroundings, as it had been in Harran, but not here, and that carelessness of hers (and the carelessness of those who were elders in the house) had gotten her and many others into big trouble. Finding herself among new people, she not only looked at them herself, but they looked at her too, and not all favorably. Her beauty attracted the attention of not the best of people. One of the local prince's sons, Shechem, drew her in with his chatter, and managed to win her heart or talk so that she did not run away when she had to be on guard. At the same time he used force against her, and it is described that he either brought her to his house or kept her there for some time. He hardly considered himself an outlaw, but he was used to acting on his own will, he thought he could do anything, being the son of the chief local person, so he raped her at first. However, he became so attracted to her that he literally lost his head and further he began to act within the framework of culture and the best traditions - he asks both his father and relatives of the girl to marry her. The story, having started badly, began as if to correct itself, he now did everything for her and wanted to be with her legally. He probably didn't expect that a little fling with the new girl would turn into such big feelings for him.
Abraham's lineage should have been known everywhere, yet somehow this city is not honored with the honor of a famous man in Canaan. It was probably Shechem, son of Emmor the Hivite, who asked no questions about anything, concentrating on the pleasures of the flesh, grooming an unknown girl whom he considered to be of the simplest origin, whom he thought he could do with as he pleased, and who should be grateful to be noticed by such a successful hero. Later, however, when he suddenly discovered that she had a kind and delicate soul, and just something close to his soul, with whom he felt better than ever and with no one, he discovered that he was not dealing with a simple villager. And from that moment on, he'd been extremely polite and careful, especially having received some strong warnings from his father as well, who had enlightened him on the nuances when he'd come to him for advice and blessing. Even if Jacob and his sons had not been taken into account, Esau was known to everyone.....
When Jacob found out what had happened, he did not know what to do. His daughter may have been away for a short time, but it was more likely that she did not return home from her walk until the next day, which created a lot of anxiety. She already had Shechem with her, asking him for his daughter's hand in marriage, but Jacob made no response at first. There was anger, a sense of shame, and fear for the fate of his family here, as the family's life had suddenly become entangled with people of a different culture and who did not know the living God, although these are significant limitations, but who were also not of the best quality, capable of violence and unreasonable behavior. Away from such "relatives" is the main consideration in such cases... On the other hand, he was home alone, not counting the youngest and the women, the rest of the sons who were of age or close to it, not bad fighters in case of need, were not at home. Though it was better that they weren't, they might not have been able to resist retaliating against Sihem right on the spot, and it could have turned out very badly (though worse than it turned out later is also hard to imagine). At this point in time the sons of Jacob had a lot of spiritual problems, being more of a gang than well-bred and trustworthy young men, with little in common with the high calling of the house of Abraham and the house of Israel into which they were born. But this is a subject for a separate discussion; for the present we will confine our narrative to current events.
When the sons returned, Jacob told them of the problem. If the daughter was about fifteen years old, the older Reuben must have been twenty-two or more, and the youngest of the successful company was about seventeen years old. As a rule Rachel's son Joseph did not participate in the bad deeds of his brothers, having a different attitude and purpose in life, somehow he escaped the temptations into which the others did not fail to fall. His story is special and he, like most of the brothers, is not involved in the subsequent events of the destruction of the town.
The brothers pushed their father away from negotiations, seeing that he, with his peaceful and quiet character, was incapable of them, and he himself was glad to leave the matter in the hands of his sons, believing that he would have the last word, if necessary. When Emmor, the prince of the town, and his son came again to ask for Dina's hand in marriage, the brothers devised a terrible plan of revenge, burning with anger and hatred for the disrespect shown to their family through their treatment of their sister.
In the songs and poems of many poets, love and blood are close and interrelated things for a reason. Is it only in Russian culture, is it only because it rhymes in our language? Many things have long been distorted, both in human life in general and in orders (there are orders "as it should be", and there are orders "as it is accepted", and which are more popular?). Healthy people do not live according to such destructive laws, their love is peaceful, and blood is shed only in defense of their loved ones and country. But where people's passions are intertwined with pride, disregard for the rights of others, the inability to recognize their true purpose or even their couple, where they compete for the sake of prestige, it is difficult to do without blood. Where the issue of building a family is decided by wealth and prestige, where a woman goes where it is better materially, not where her happiness is, where a man is forced to listen to considerations of prestige and "his circle", there are inevitable losses in happiness and inevitable clashes leading to someone's death, at best to the humiliation of some side. When two meant for each other are forced to take someone else or another, those "others" also have their true pair[106] , so that instead of two happy people, at least four become unhappy. Shechem fell in love hard, he met the one that made him happy for life, however he started out very badly. He thought that he could have any woman he paid attention to, that his father's position allowed him more than the rest of his peers (even if his father had raised him differently), and seeing no signs of special descent in the new girl (at that time medieval opulence or even the more ancient customs of kings and princes had not yet been developed, everything was just beginning and inequality had not taken sophisticated forms) in her clothes, he did not inquire about her kin. Had he known who he was talking to, he would probably have been much more careful, but alas, his arrogance and insolence led him down a different path, preventing him from finding happiness. Dina's brothers had left him no chance.
It must be said that they were prideful themselves, which is why they hated Shechem so intensely. Their plan was daring, but if their trick of circumcision had failed, they would have left the area, fulfilling their threat to leave Seachem alone. But then he would have a chance to somehow endear himself to her brothers. If he had time, he might have hope to see her, or follow their camp and try to talk them into peace. This encounter could have changed his life in so many ways that he might have even joined this family and its calling. But fate didn't. When the sons' revenge plan came to fruition, Jacob cursed (much later, in his last word of blessing to his sons, not immediately after what they had done, which shows the deliberateness and integrity of his assessment) those who carried it out, Simeon and Levi, because what they had done was no better than what Shechem had done to Dinah. There was no need for such cruel actions, and if it had not been for the pride, the carnal nature of the brothers, no one would have even guessed to devise such plans. What was the fault of the brothers burning with resentment? - It is that they treat Shechem as if he had only raped their sister and disowned her, throwing her out of their lives. But any person, though outraged by this fact, usually also considers the subsequent steps and changes in Shechem, who wished to mend his ways, began to regret the wrong step, realized he had done the wrong thing. Perhaps this person for the first time had a lesson reached him. One cannot ignore such movements of the soul. But they ignored, acted as if nothing else, better, had happened, as if there were no extenuating circumstances. This is the fault of those who took up swords, not counting the fact that the blood of many innocent people is on them, not counting the fact that they deceived people who had made radical changes in their lives for the sake of their friendship.
They instantly came up with a cunning plan to offer circumcision to all the men of Shechem for the sake of merging with them. Sichem was willing to do anything for Dinah's sake, and amazingly, he somehow actually managed to get all the men of Shechem to go along with it, starting with his father. And when everyone was incapacitated after this operation, Simeon and Levi attacked the town and killed all the men. Then the rest of the company came up and they took everyone else captive and all their possessions. It is possible that their servants could also have taken part in this action, but if the population of Shechem was small, up to a thousand people, they could have done it themselves.
What could they do without overstepping the bounds of justice, without bringing a curse upon themselves? First of all, they would have to deal with Shechem himself, who alone was guilty before them. They could challenge him, some one alone. Although under the laws and customs of many nations this kind of misdemeanor led to less severe punishments, generally the one guilty before the girl had to marry her and pay her father and family a certain amount of money or property. Exactly the same law of divine origin was in later Israel, and it is certain that their relatives, and thus themselves, had the same custom. But for some reason they make judgment by some unimaginably superior measure. As if they had already tried the case, found only aggravating circumstances, condemned Shechem the son of Emmor to death, demanded his extradition for execution, and were refused - only then would they have had the right to punish his whole town for Shechem's crime, for harboring and complicity. But there was none of this, none of these procedures of justice, without which their actions look and are criminal. When their father accused them of having done something wrong (he just couldn't find the right words, and only described the immediate consequences that could occur), in justification to their father they say - "but can our sister be treated like a harlot?" And these words again show their falsity - they still do not call him a rapist... The rapist does not care who is in front of him, harlots are not raped, because fornication is voluntary and prostitution is paid, not direct violence either. Shechem seduces her, but it is not difficult to seduce a whore, it is the good ones who are seduced. So the brothers tried to distort the case to justify themselves, accusing a guilty man, but not of what he was really guilty of. In general, they acted cruelly, unreasonably, unjustifiably. They were not the first to take such an exaggerated revenge, filled only with criminal pride and nothing else, but since these events were recorded on the pages of sacred history, it seemed to many uninitiated people that it is possible to do so... Somehow people are inattentive - it takes a dozen or two lines to spread the description of the deed and its assessment, and people no longer see the condemnation of what was done... But their father more than once calls their action a crime. He didn't punish them for it, though, either not feeling the power behind him or expecting them to understand something. And the moment was not the best - if the people around them were going to judge them, they would either have to defend themselves, and then the swords of Simeon and Levi could come in handy, or they would have to be handed over to the avengers....
However, as in other similar cases (it is not only Abraham and his children, God has the same attitude towards all other people...), God did not immediately punish or hold accountable those who had gone astray. Especially since Jacob was not guilty of anything here, just two of the sons. Their journey was just beginning, and God did not deny them a chance for correction. In terms of retaliation from the surrounding nations, God did not intervene forcefully this time, as in Egypt or Gerar, i.e. no disease, but still those who might have tried to attack Jacob's family experienced considerable fear of them, so no one pursued them. The severity of the retaliation was shocking to those around them, but people still understood the motives... However, Jacob had to leave the area. God spoke to Jacob and told them to go to Bethel. This place had become unfavorable.
These tragic and terrible events spurred Jacob, who began to relax after the problems of the previous period of his life were over. He realized that he should not slumber, that in his family, it turned out that very undesirable processes were going on in the souls of his children, that he had in many ways greatly neglected his sons. He realized that similar things had happened to his fathers, but they did not have as many children, and the larger the size of the group, the more attention and effort is required to maintain order. Sometimes people in a group can be highly conscious and developed, and then order and harmony are maintained as if by themselves, and their activities flow easily and successfully, but is this often the case? And if the members of this group are in the process of becoming - on whom does it depend what direction and what principles they will choose? Therefore, those who are leading are obliged to manage some things and influence in such a way as to ensure future order, harmony and non-conflict, to ensure the development and future of this group, that is, to nurture. Otherwise, chaotic and uncontrolled processes, having many choices, will simply not be able to get by chance to the constructive paths, but according to the laws of chance the advantage will always be with the destructive processes, even if the youth itself is well-meaning. Weeds grow more easily, they do not need any care.....
Bethel
They went south thirty or forty kilometers, to Bethel. The same place where he had dreamed about the ladder connecting the earth to heaven. After about ten or twelve years of wandering through Canaan, God tells him to settle there and to furnish the place as he had promised God, including building an altar where he and others could worship the living God and learn about His orders and rules. Jacob was serious about spiritual things at this time, after the tragedies at Shechem. Thinking about the meaning of life in general and the calling of his home to educate the world about God and the salvation He offers, he took a responsible approach. When he had fled from Harran he had not thought that his wife would have taken the pagan statuettes secretly from him, but now he was probably aware of many things in the life of the members of his large family. He could easily see the connection between the presence of those gods in the house and what two of his older sons, the cruel Simeon and Levi, had grown up to be. And now that they must go to the sacred place and set it up, he felt the need to purge himself and the family of things that bore the influence not of God but of the forces of darkness and brought a curse. This did not solve all problems, but without it there could be no improvement. He told everyone, even before they were removed, to throw away the gods of others, whoever had what they had. Whether only Rachel had them or the others also is not known, but now everything they found that was foreign was collected and buried under a certain oak tree in Shechem. Together with the occult objects, the household also gave him the earrings which they were accustomed to wear in their ears. Many of these ornaments bore the marks of decay, and the symbolism of many of them was not harmless. It was as if Jacob had spoken only of foreign gods, but the members of his family, who had seen the consequences of the pagan influences that had led Simeon and Levi to do things beyond good and truth, and who had been impressed by the consequences of all this, did more than the master of the house had demanded, and were quite right. Jacob did not return the jewelry to them, but buried it with the teraphim. It is possible that Rachel's example may have inspired Jacob's other wives to acquire similar objects for themselves, so that instead of being keepers of the ancient truth, their family became indistinguishable from any other. Being different just for the sake of being different is not a good idea, but when matters of truth and spirituality demand it, it must be done. And the fear of not being "like everyone else" is misplaced here.
At Bethel Jacob built a monument in the place where he had slept the night God first appeared to him in a dream. Now God came to him again, not in a dream, and spoke to him. He blessed him, confirming all His previous words and assuring him that He would give all this land to him and his descendants.
Many who have developed a particularly negative view of the Jews and their God, who drove the former inhabitants out of Canaan, reading this passage, will find no command to drive out the Canaanites. God told Abraham that "the measure of the iniquity of the Amorites had not yet been filled up"; at that time there was no such question, and it is possible that if Jacob had brought up his children properly, as was still required of Abraham and his descendants, and if the influence of the Israelite tribe had been able to change the moral climate of the land by ennobling their morals, there would have been no need to expel anyone. However, the sons of Jacob were contaminated with evil and were not fit for the task, so that God had to lead them in other, more rigid ways, ennobling and polishing them, and spending much more time on them. But Canaan was left to itself, and by the time Israel was ready to enter Canaan again in any way (frankly, in any way), the corruption of Canaan over those two hundred and more than[107] years had reached critical proportions. That's when the order to expel the former inhabitants of the land was given, which some today blame God and Israel for. But if those critics had been in God's place, I do not think that their plans would have been more humane... As the Supreme Ruler and Judge, God has the right to punish and control the fate of transgressors, to take away their land and give it to others, which is exactly what happened. God is no more to blame here than the judge who passes the deserved sentence of execution with confiscation, just as Israel is no more to blame than the bailiffs... Once again, what was determined for the former inhabitants of Canaan was an event of the same series as the Flood or the burning of Sodom and Gomorrah, only without the catastrophic consequences for nature. The Jews were no more to blame for that war than the waters of the Flood or the fire and sulfur that destroyed Sodom. When the Jews' guilt accumulated, they were expelled from the land just as the previous inhabitants had been.
After this Jacob lived for some time in this place, where his children, wives, workers and servants could be imbued with the special atmosphere of this place, where God had spoken twice to the patriarch. This could have influenced especially his sons, to guide them to a better path, to clarify and straighten their minds and souls, which were already in no small measure warped by pagan influence, by the influence of the shallow maids who became wives because of sibling rivalry, and by the not-so-good relationship between Rachel and Leah - all of which contributed negatively to their formation. It is difficult to judge whether Bethel and its atmosphere influenced them toward correction and improvement. Judging from further events, not very much. If a person is not in the right frame of mind, sacred places alone can do nothing for his righteousness.
Traveling again
After a few years at Bethel, they dismounted again and went south. Rachel was preparing for childbirth at this time, and it is not clear to me what the reason was for leaving, because it would have been better for her to stay where she was until the birth. Whether it was the road or something else, Rachel died in childbirth of her second son. It was a very great loss for Jacob, the one and only love of his life was gone. Her children were left, to whom Jacob had devoted all of himself, and it turned out that in this concentration on two sons out of twelve he had again made a mistake. The other children needed his attention and counsel very much, for they were on the wrong roads at that time, but he, deep in his grief, gave these two an excessive amount of attention. While for the younger Benjamin this excessive care was appropriate because of his small age and did not cause any complaints from the other sons, it was fatal for Joseph. The older children were left without the necessary attention and continued to stray from the path.
For a time they settled in a place called "the tower of the flock[108] ". If this is what is now known as a hot springs resort place, it means that they went beyond the Jordan, to the southeast of Lake Tiberias. Was it outside of Canaan? As if yes, in which case it could have been some sort of rebellion by Jacob in response to Rachel's death. But that's just a guess at the worst case scenario, and even if it did take place, it was not long-lasting and had no continuation. Unless, again, if it did happen, there is one extremely bad incident that the Bible reports - "while in that region Reuben slept with Bilhah, his father's concubine". Reuben was already twenty-three or twenty-four years old at the time, and general decay had affected him to such an extent that he had lost the concept of honor and was weak before temptation. Nothing is said about this side of the life of the bad guys at that time, only from the description of Judah's life, as from this point in Reuben, one would think that they could afford to break the seventh commandment as well. Seven woes, one answer? - perhaps they might have thought so, though others might have kept to the way more strictly than these two. Jacob recognized this, but how he reacted to it and what he did, we don't know. On the one hand it is easy to understand that his hands were dropping and he could no longer act with them by force, not the right age and capabilities. If he himself (if there was such a thing) was in claims to God at that time, having withdrawn outside of Canaan, that is, evading the command of God to live and walk in that land, he could see in the incident with Reuben his direct guilt, that he gave a personal example of leaving God, even in a small way. And then afterward he decides to return to Canaan, where he knows that God will be on his side and will help, including with the raising of his sons. He kept hoping that God would somehow bring them back to reason, at least in time. It did happen, though not so quickly. For now, he only seemed to focus even more on the younger ones, who were showing a very different spirit. The younger one obeyed his father due to his age, and he tried to keep him safe from all the influences of the older ones, never letting him go anywhere with them, Joseph was a special case. And all his father's hopes seemed to center on him as a worthy successor to the work to which he was called. Besides, he was the son of Rachel, Jacob's truly intended, legitimate wife by all accounts. The rest were more or less problematic, not receiving the full blessing of mothers who were not in God's plans, gained because of human passions, deceptions, and rivalries.
But before turning to Joseph, we must note an important event concerning the life of this house. At the end of the thirty-fifth chapter of Genesis it is noted that Isaac, the father of Jacob and Esau, died when he was one hundred and eighty years old. He had lived even longer than Abraham. At his father's funeral, Jacob and Esau met again, peacefully seeing his father off and also spending time with each other peacefully. Esau had once threatened to kill his brother in the heat of hatred when his father died, and now his father was dead, but he no longer reminded his brother of his former guilt. At one time he had been about to do away with his brother before the appointed time, but then some of Jacob's circumstances had changed, and even Esau had changed with them... Now, at his father's grave, they were a hundred and twenty years old (they had been born when Isaac was sixty), and the years that had passed had long since made Esau reconsider much of his youth. This moment in their lives is more recent than the events of later chapters. And ten years later, Jacob will move to Egypt to join Joseph, who is lost to him at this point a dozen years ago, and will be found just ten years later.
So far I have not calculated the years of Jacob's life , the Bible does not seem to give direct indications about the time of certain events, but there are enough pointers. The first time the timing is mentioned is in the account of Esau, that he married when he was forty years old. It was not long after this that Jacob also went for a wife. Comparing Joseph's years with Jacob's arrival in Egypt, we get that Joseph was born when Jacob was ninety years old[109] (91 years to be exact), at the time when the second seven-year term for Rachel was over, and there were six years when Jacob worked for himself, taking cattle with the coloring they had agreed upon by contract with Laban. Then Jacob, who came to Laban "to earn money", turns out to be seventy-six years old, leaves Harran at ninety-six, and by the time his father Isaac dies, he has been wandering around Canaan for about twenty-five years, trying to get his straying sons back on the right track, and in time he succeeds. It all fits together pretty well, although in our time ordinary people start such things at an earlier age, but we are dealing with the heirs of a line of long-lived people where the customs of temperance, abstinence, and other things that were part of their culture yielded the unusual fruit of better health and longevity for most. Isaac was about to die at the age of one hundred and thirty-five, which was the beginning of many of Jacob's problems, but he lived about forty-five years after that. It is thought that if he had not hastened his blessing, because of the sense of his approaching death, how many things would have gone differently. It is also to be thought that his shock at the theft of his blessing helped him to wake up and rethink a great deal about his condition, which seems to have prolonged his life considerably. He realized that Jacob was supposed to be the heir, but he, as a spiritual leader, had missed it and caused problems for both his sons and God.
After Jacob's settlement in Canaan, Esau apparently still had some property in the south of Canaan, but earlier he had already taken possession of Seir from the Horreans, where he moved, seeing that his and his brother's property was large enough, leaving the land of Canaan to Jacob. And from some time he decided to go completely to Seir, and the area where he lived there became called from his nickname "the land of Edom". Subsequently, Esau's descendants lived as if quite peacefully with the Horreans who remained there, becoming practically one people.
Joseph
What ran between Joseph and the rest of the brothers is not hard to guess. However, it was still surprising how much they disliked him, it was not normal. He was not so far removed in age from the other younger ones, growing up on an equal footing with them, but for some reason he was of a different mold. Where everyone was happy to pick up something bad from each other or from adults and make fun of it, he did not participate, but when he shared it with his father, he literally absorbed from him all his advice and praise or disapproval of the amusements that the merry company of the younger, led by older brothers, was capable of. He was accustomed, like any child at first, to share with his father and mother all his experiences, experiences and discoveries, but if most people do not like the admonitions and objections (because of which later many begin to distance themselves from their parents), there are some, among whom Joseph was, who perceive the admonitions not as a negative, not as disapproval, but as a signal for the better, a hint about something even more interesting than what has already been done. Then there is no conflict between fathers and children, then good ties between generations are preserved, and life flows much more harmoniously. Without the rest of the company, perhaps, Joseph would have had an easier life, but brothers from other mothers, who, if they were concerned about the upbringing of their sons, still did it, it must be said, with a lowered aim - "it will do just fine, no worse than people", not according to the standards that should rule in the house of princes of God. The dark forces did not fail to take advantage of the gaps in the spiritual defenses, and the temptations of the children of Jacob were ten times stronger than those that even the Gentiles around them would be subjected to. They were greatly helped to seek and find temptations, and Jacob alone could do little against the influence of rival wives (which was also a considerable factor in the unkind moral climate of the family, and the fact that the rivalry went on without overt conflict and scolding was still a source of trouble to the children, who were keen in feeling and thought), and he too often felt that he was not keeping up. The main thing was that he did not immediately recognize the trouble that the children were unmanageable - he had not had much experience, he was not tempted himself, and his brother Esau was not far behind in comparison with what had befallen his sons. There would have been a knowledgeable and strong tutor for each of the boys, but it was just one father against three women, few of whom had any idea of their husbands' high calling. Perhaps only Rachel was able to fully understand and support Jacob, but for a long time she had no authority in the house because of her barrenness, and the older children had already reached adolescence before she gained any status with the other women. And a little later she was gone. The older brothers seemed to have more influence on the younger ones than all the mothers and fathers combined.
By this time Joseph was seventeen, so Jacob was one hundred and eight. This confirms the expression "son of old age" that Joseph was to his father. At that age, Jacob could have already begun to think, as did his father, Isaac, about the time of his departure, but Jacob did no such thing. Isaac could have been weakened by his failing eyesight and the resulting prolonged sedentary behavior that led to a certain amount of moping and depression. But Jacob was not concerned with that. The children were not yet all settled, especially as regards their upbringing. As ordinary people they were quite prosperous, but when the vocation of their home was considered, Joseph was the only one who pleased him. All his attention was given to him and to the younger Benjamin, and in this he was imprudent. The immoderateness of his affection he expressed in dressing for Joseph by making him something special, which aroused the dislike of his brothers. They already disliked him, especially when he reported to their father their affairs, of which not all were commendable. It turned out that his father had organized a hothouse environment for Joseph, in which the formation of his character was in some danger. For some reason the anger of his brothers did not hurt Joseph much; he still went to them, sought their company, sought their approval, but his impracticality and lack of understanding of the real complexities of life, together with other factors, made his presence in the company of his brothers unwelcome. He had a good mind, but he was not yet adapted to the complexities of life. His naivete at that time was excessive.
Joseph once had a dream where he was shown his destiny to be the leader of his family. As a rule, such dreams have unusually strong feelings, and he rushed to share them with his brothers, which finally alienated his brothers from him. He dreamed as if they were working in a field and suddenly his sheaf straightened and the sheaves of the others began to bow to his sheaf. The destiny of being first was clearly indicated to Joseph, but how much his brothers didn't like it... It says that "they began to hate him even more because of this." Yep, "success before your neighbors is the unpardonable sin" as the Devil's Dictionary says. Joseph realized that his brothers didn't love him, but he was too simple-minded and didn't know what to do about it.
It should be noted that the brothers did not doubt the meaning of his dream, which means that somewhere inside they believed in his great future, seeing his honesty, openness and following the Way and instructions of his father, which they themselves often neglected, although they did not reject completely. In their dislike of him, they had missed the point that he did not create his dreams, and there was nothing to hate him for. This dream of his stirred up in them an even greater dislike, though he never set himself above them or separated himself from them. Even though he was singled out by his father, he didn't get cocky about it, though if it happened to any of them, some of them might be tempted to immediately put the others in lower places and either try to command and rule, or despise the others and gather a team of chaperones.
A little time passed, probably not long enough for the first dream to be forgotten by the brothers, and Joseph had another similar dream, which he again, in spite of the obvious irritation and dislike of his brothers, could not refrain from telling everyone (he valued their company too much), and which determined his fate... And the brothers, hating him for these dreams, sinned against the One who had given this dream and fate to their brother. This time he saw the sun, the moon and eleven stars bowing to him. This time he no longer saw a detached picture where he no longer saw himself as the protagonist but only his sheaf, now the worship was directed directly toward him. Interestingly, he told it all with a simplicity that excluded any pride or arrogance, not even trying to apply any greatness or importance to himself, not even calculating why he should have such a revelation about the future. Was he preparing to be a king or a leader? Not in the slightest degree, and that was clear to the others as well, but that didn't help either. If he really had the inclination to command and control everyone, the animosity would have had at least some reason. And not only did his brothers grow in hatred towards him, but even his father could not resist reprimanding him (as if Joseph had thought it up himself), as it was not good for parents to bow down to their son... However, the dream did not express the fact that the son would become superior to his father, but only the fact that even his father would find himself begging him, as it turned out later. Anyway, when the time came, everything came out exactly as predicted.
Abrupt changes
Soon after these dreams Jacob sent Joseph to visit his brothers who were herding cattle in another place, Shechem. After Shechem was destroyed by Levi and Simeon, the place was settled again after some time, as often happens when a place of settlement is convenient. Excavations of many old towns show that people returned there many times after it seemed to have disappeared from fires or wars and settled again. A couple years have passed since then and it is unlikely that anyone would avenge those killed, yet Jacob wants to make sure his sons are okay. Interestingly, Joseph has a fairly easy and unburdensome job - he's sort of like a clerk to his father, keeping an eye on order or the progress of things, probably not doing the usual chores that might have further hardened his brothers. Though he was rather engaged in everything that was in the household, the very life of those times demanded skills in practical matters. It is inconceivable that Joseph was allowed to loiter in the house, rather he learned various wisdoms if his father wanted to give him an advantage in inheriting his vocation. This, too, was envied.
Not finding his brothers in the vicinity of Shechem, he traveled to Dothan to the north from there, at the prompting of one of the locals, and found them there. But the encounter turned out to be very uncool. Perhaps they were sitting on a hill watching the herds from there, or perhaps his road passed over a hill, but they saw him from a distance, and in the time it took him to reach them, hatred had been stirred up in them, and, especially inflamed by his recent dreams of him in some of them, had planted in them the idea of killing him. Their rebellion against God's laws was at this time at its peak, they were at the height of their strength, but not of sound mind, and, as is often the case, at such times the sea is at one's knee. At the same time they were curious how God's prophecies about Joseph would be fulfilled if Joseph was not there... This challenge to God was born in them at that moment, and they were well aware of it, and nevertheless they agreed to make this terrible experiment. On the contrary, normal people in their place would have listened to the signals from above and kept the chosen one of heaven as their special hope.
Such a challenge to God is in the spirit of spontaneous atheism, although such atheists do not challenge God, who according to their ideas cannot exist, but those who believe in Him. But atheists are forgivable, at least it is consistent with their beliefs. But Jacob's sons were not them for a moment, and they could not be atheists, because they heard from their father many stories about personal contacts of God with himself and his fathers, and from Isaac they heard the same stories. They themselves, personally, must have seen and remembered the inhuman guards at Mahanaim when they returned from Harran. But religious faith and knowledge alone do not determine the qualities of a person. There is still a decision to be made, a choice as to whether he will follow the path prescribed by God. And this is the second dimension of religion, which depends little on the first (if at all, because there are some who make a choice against what they know, even to their own detriment). Many even agree with God's rules and laws, that they are not bad, but they themselves are not personally ready or even going to adhere to them completely, limiting themselves to those that are more profitable or pleasant, leaving it up to their own discretion whether or not to adhere to these life-protecting principles. Most "good" people follow the way of partial obedience, and wonder that God can have any claims to them... Often people think that if they have done something good, heaven and God already owe them. They think that if they fulfill one of the Ten Commandments, it already creates some merit for which there should be a reward, most likely in the form of forgiveness of violations of the others... It is as if they are not obliged to observe safety, but God is obliged to protect them in any case, and how great is their disappointment in Him when it does not work out that way. In principle, there is some sense in this approach to some extent, but it only applies to rewards for works and merit to people. But if we are talking about salvation, i.e. "entering into life" or "becoming sons of God," that is not enough, not at all. For "salvation" one must become affinity with God at least[110] , so that He takes the central position of government, as man was originally created, and which was lost with the fall of Adam and Eve. It is more than doing good and right works, and much more than not doing sinful works-it is the state of mind out of which works, deeds, and character are generated, and it is in this that the secret of the success of good works and their fullness lies, when the falsity and distortion of human insufficiency are not mixed in.
Many deeds that people consider good, good and right, even formally conforming to the laws of God, contain in them sprinkles of evil inherent in our nature, and these drops (and sometimes buckets) of tar spoil this good, turning it into evil. Such defective deeds of apparent good or mixture of good and evil cannot be counted as righteous, cannot be included in the list of deeds for which there will be a reward after the end of this world. In life such deeds generate a lot of evil and misfortunes, many reasonable people see them as a source of problems when someone tries to cover his unhealthy nature with such not completely good deeds. No normal person, analyzing his life and what he has done, such half good deeds cannot count as his asset, he dislikes what he has done incompletely, it is his pain and from this he strives to escape to a new level, so that he would not be hurt and ashamed of his half goodness and imperfection. The goodness or correctness of an action can be judged only by the full range of motives, and if the leading motives turn out to be aspirations of profit or blackmail, enslavement of someone or other hidden evil calculations, then a seemingly good deed turns out to be not good at all, and its consequences for many will be destructive.
No, it is not all bad. Our world is not left to the will of the enemy of the human race, and the divine Spirit permeates all of us, drawing us in the direction of good, and many even evil people at times follow this call, doing truly healthy and good things from the heart, not half-heartedly or pretentiously. But not always... Thanks to this influence of the light and the fact that there are still people who let it pass through them into their lives and into all their affairs, our world has not yet perished. But still people must sooner or later make a conscious choice in one or another direction. Even if they make mistakes, they are given enough time to do so, to be among those who have entered life and will live forever. But among those who once made a choice, there are too many who later turned back and never told anyone about it, not even themselves. Therefore, in the society called the Church there were, are, and for some time will be those who do not bear the light, and through some of them much more evil comes into the world than through direct and open supporters of evil, so that sometimes Satanists are nervously fuming aside... So the sons of Jacob were so blinded by the enemy that it seemed that God's plans for a special nation of light-bearers lay in dust and ashes, shattered by these young men.
If Joseph had suddenly appeared before the brothers, there might not have been time to form any plan about him. At most, one of them might have said something witty or expressed his attitude toward him. Of course, the situation had come to a head, their dislike might be looking for a way out, and even with his sudden arrival, if he had stayed with them for a day, they might have had time to form a plan. However, while they waited for him, a plan of action was brewing in the exchange of phrases. To one, "here comes our dreamer." To another, this word about dreams reminded him of a question that had been in the back of his mind before - if Joseph was eliminated, then his dreams would not come true, would they? What about the prediction and the God who gave it...? Is it possible to destroy God's plans? Such were the experimenters and researchers... And someone suggested it to everyone, and in the air hung - "let's kill him and see how his dreams will come true?"... And for some reason some people liked it, the others were as if not against it, and the agreement was already reached, but the oldest, Reuben, intervened. He sharply put a stop to this sentiment. He seemed to be the only one of them who had more or less grown up. Having once given in to the urge, he had ended up in his own father's bed and that lesson had been the moment for him to come to his senses and reevaluate his life and everything he had done before. He saw his father's reaction and his brokenness about it, he realized that in another family this could have ended very badly for him, and since his father's instructions about the Way were not just a sound bite to him (as they were to others), it was time to think about whether I was living the right life, and with such relaxation, what would I get out of it? Higher goals came to him, and little by little he began to turn away from his former thoughtless life. He grew up. If Joseph was seventeen, he was twenty-four - it would have been high time, but apparently the others' fascination with the mirages of entertainment and the former brotherly affection did not allow him to completely leave the usual rut.
Reuben had authority, and the plans for murder were abandoned, but as he did not dare to oppose the others completely, he offered to satisfy their eagerness to show Joseph his place by leaving him in some pit, hoping to recover him from their hands later. Reuben left the company on some business, and when Joseph came to them, they treated him roughly, stripping him and throwing him into a rather deep pit. I'm probably not alone in thinking that in the process some of the brothers may have hit him a couple times, taking out all their emotions. I don't know how Joseph reacted, I don't have the full picture yet, although I can partly judge from the brothers' later words - "we saw the anguish of his soul when he begged us[111] ". He took it like so many others who grew up in hothouse conditions, who had not seen serious hardship and distress - it was a shock to him. When Joseph begged his brothers not to do such cruel things to him, they laughed it off, as such people often do, not feeling the danger in an unequal confrontation, but his emotions still got to them later, so it is not in vain that frightened people try to show their feelings and suffering... Sometimes it even works right away. But it didn't work for Joseph and he had to taste drastic changes in his life, but behind these changes were not only his brothers or the devil who wanted to eliminate one man who disobeyed his will, but also God who turned his problems into benefits of a much higher level.
Joseph learned betrayal, the price of dislike, the law of accumulation of trouble, and realized that he had been too naive and careless in his actions, saw that his father could not protect him everywhere. He realized that the insults and threats that his brothers had expressed to him up until now had turned from insignificant to extremely significant things. In one day he had become a slave with no rights, a property that had been paid for and now had to serve someone else. He was naive but not spoiled, his ideas about the world order were still quite sober, thanks to the wisdom of his ancestors, but it was one thing to know about problems, another to find himself in them. In a way it was necessary for his development, his fathers had gone through some lessons too, especially grandfather Isaac, who found himself for a while in the role of a victim and learned what she was experiencing. Some might even say bliss in this regard for Joseph, who plunged deeper into the problems that come from the dark side of life than any other before him. Usually, such knowledge is the best defense against evil, it opens the mind and heart to its essence. It is true that many people become hardened because of it, but this depends on subjective things - mood, perception, choice, not on circumstances.
While Reuben went out, the others sat and ate, probably without sharing anything with Joseph. While they were eating, the brothers saw a caravan of Ishmaelites, their relatives, passing by, and Judah had the idea of selling his brother to them, which seemed a good way out of the problem with Joseph, whom their older brother had forbidden them to touch. The problem arose from the fact that if they did not touch Joseph, how could they explain their rough treatment of him to their father, for he would tell everything and hold nothing back... They felt that their father might also reach a certain point, as they had reached, and what they wanted to do to their brother would bring their father to some measures that they might not like, especially since he was his favorite son, whom they dared to touch. But it was hardly as they had pictured it, for he had given them no reason to think of themselves in that way, but rather as they themselves would do to their own kind... Today they had reached a line beyond which some terrible destruction had begun, and if it had not been for Reuben they would have crossed it, and thereby brought themselves under some action not only on the part of their father, but also on the part of God, who at a later time had destroyed two of Judah's sons who were too unfit for their ancestral vocation. The same could have befallen them, and so Judah offered a compromise that seemed to be a win-win for them on all sides: Joseph would disappear from their lives and they would not be guilty of murder, and the latter seemed very important to them - yet even though they were ready to cross the line, they breathed a sigh of relief that they had avoided it. On the other hand, Joseph could not complain to his father at that. On all sides the plan turned out to be very good, except, of course, for Joseph. But the brothers might have thought that he should still be grateful to them for staying alive. Yes... Of course, they had not miscalculated their father, and they were not prepared for his reaction.
As the caravan drew nearer, the brothers pulled Joseph out and hastily bargained with the Ishmaelites, who were not afraid to trade in human beings, and they were probably not the only ones. From that time slavery - complete, powerless slavery became part of the customs of many tribes, and it is useless today to denounce them for it, and the social order had nothing to do with it, on the contrary, the acceptance of such things gave rise to slavery... This is the case when evil, the subjective beginning in man, predetermined for many centuries some features of society. Not all people strived to be obedient to the laws and statutes of heaven, so the orders of people included everything that could produce a consciousness that departed from the Way. To think that a nascent tribe that was meant to bring the light of life and better orders to the people was taking advantage of the status quo without even trying to justify selling their brother. If their orientation to good and truth had been more serious, this nation could have been an example of successful life and economy without all those negatives that the other tribes and peoples of the Earth had managed to master. Joseph was sold for twenty coins or standard pieces of silver. In later times the price of a slave in those parts was thirty coins, clearly it was the same at the time, yet any buyer, especially a wholesale buyer, seeks to drive the price down. The Ishmaelites saw that the one being sold was very similar to those who were selling him, and having probed the situation, they realized that those who were selling their brother did not want anyone to know about it. So they easily brought the price down to twenty coins, and the brothers agreed to even less than that, as long as Joseph was taken, so the price was agreed upon and both sides were satisfied.
Joseph traveled on this long journey without his outer garment. The brothers tore it and dipped it in the blood of a lamb to make it look as if Joseph had been killed by a beast of prey. For themselves they thought they had succeeded in everything, solved all the problems with their brother, except the question of his dreams, whether they would come true. But this required time, during which they would lose interest in the matter. In fact, when that time came, twenty-two years later, it did not occur to anyone to reproach Joseph for his exaltation. The brothers, on the other hand, were crushed by the weight of memories and all the foolishness that had once guided them. But that was a long way off; they had much more immediate problems ahead of them. Having solved the problem with their brother, they had anticipated their father's reaction, but they were not prepared to see it.
When Reuben did not find Joseph in the ditch, he thought at first that his brothers had not listened to him and had killed Joseph, and this grieved him greatly. He had already come out of his fascination with this world, had had time to reconsider his behavior and principles, and this was the last moment when he saw clearly and distinctly how games with evil end - sooner or later it ceases to be entertainment and leads to the death, if not his own, then someone else's. Of course, it was explained to him, and he had to accept the game of the others, because he still lacked the spiritual core to continue Joseph's work, to tell his father the truth. Maybe later, seeing his father's suffering, he thought about revealing the case to him, but he did.
When they came home (and they did not come home soon from their watch), they indifferently presented Joseph's allegedly found outer garment to their father, pretending that they were not sure that it was his. The father, seeing the bloody pieces of clothing, concluded what anyone in his place would have concluded, that Joseph had been mauled by some predator. When Rachel died, Jacob, left virtually alone in the midst of the other wives and servants, felt his loss all too keenly, having lost what was dear and important. There remained, of course, her two children, who had become his mainstay in life. Joseph had lived up to probably all the best expectations, showing the best traits of his family (with their flaws, such as increased naiveté, but this was a temporary trait of youth). The loss of Joseph hit Jacob hard, much harder than he could put into words. And the sons for the first time, perhaps, saw their intrigues in a different light. They saw the light, the interest in life, and the liveliness of spirit go out in their father, whom they still respected and loved. He tore his clothes, dressed himself in vestments, and for a long time refused to be comforted and mourned. All the children gathered together to bring him out of his sorrow, but they failed. And if it had not been for Benjamin, the last remnant from Rachel, he might indeed have faded away from sorrow in time. Subsequently, when they found themselves in a situation where they were conditioned to leave in captivity or slavery Benjamin, upon whom all the father's love had closed after the loss of Joseph, they were willing to be in slavery themselves rather than see what would happen to the father after the loss of Benjamin as well. So they were not lost people, but there was a period when they lost the Way under the influence of the temptations of this world, its way of life. They may have stayed on a bad path, they may have gotten too carried away and not found their way back, but still their father's work on them, slow and imperceptible, and his requests to G-d for them were not wasted. One should not think that the craving for the pleasures of this world disappears by itself in time, it is far from always so, there was a long and painstaking work that lasted for years. The example of their fathers' lives also worked to bring them back. Too strong were the examples of their lives, their faith and their teachings that they all knew. What drew them down the path of permissiveness was not so thorough. There was no strong foundation beneath their retreat, only their own windiness (though without their father's efforts, this alone would have been enough to cause their degradation and loss). But as they grew older and discovered the meanings of things, they saw more and more the solidity of their fathers' teachings, and gradually the husks of their former nonsense fell away. Their father's shock at the loss of Joseph, which they witnessed, shook them, and from that time, it may be considered, their return to the Way began. In his grief, Jacob may not have wondered why his sons had suddenly become quiet and abandoned their former mischief. He might have suspected that there was something wrong with them and with his son's disappearance, and then, by careful questioning of all the circumstances, he might have discovered the real state of affairs, and his grief would have ended sooner....
Egypt
The road to Egypt was not comfortable, and the unfriendly gaze of strangers made it impossible to dream of escape, which naturally came to mind. His heart was torn for his father, for his home, for himself, surrounded by unfriendly people who consoled him only by the fact that he might be lucky with his hosts. And thanks also for teaching him, as much as they could, the Egyptian language. During the journey, however, Joseph recovered a little and began to adjust to life under new conditions. He had it worse than his fathers, any of them, he was not in danger of life, but severely humiliated. He wouldn't have a will of his own, unless he was completely unlucky. But as if that shouldn't be a hindrance to their God, and having learned from his father that God doesn't abandon them, he might have thought it was his turn to test His abilities. He could now personally ascertain Him and His power. These thoughts gave him some encouragement, and he was reminded of his dreams that they were not accidental
Finally the caravan arrived in Egypt and Joseph was bought in the marketplace by a man from Pharaoh's security service, the head of Potiphar's bodyguards. However, not for the needs of the service, other people were recruited there and not in the slave market. And Joseph didn't have the right skills, even if they were interested in him from there, his training was of a different kind. Though if Simeon or Levi had been in his place, they might have had a chance to get into the guard... But Potiphar needed a household worker at this time. Seeing a handsome young man with good muscles and an energetic look, he thought that in these hands things might go more cheerfully, and he was not mistaken. Joseph, though shaken by the betrayal of those whom he loved and respected, and whose company he sought, did not break down. Far from those who could protect and help him, he knew that there was still the God of his fathers, of whom he had heard so much, who had shown Himself to be the patron of their family. Joseph was quite aware that all this power and wisdom was ready to come to his aid. For those who do not despair at the sight of unkind realities, it is clear at such times that it is the right time to turn to the possibilities of another order. It is especially good if they have also turned to them at a favorable time, then they are not deterred from calling them for help in a difficult moment. However, even if something was missed before, now is the time to call them - they are waiting there... Although God created man no small measure to be His instruments for influencing the world, He has a reciprocal responsibility towards us. "What else is God for but situations like this?" - that's worth thinking about when no other options work. While it is wrong to judge God from such a utilitarian position or to evaluate Him in a consumerist way, the idea is basically correct. And Joseph, though he had not received assurance from God like his father (the promise to Jacob had not yet been fulfilled because it spoke of a great nation that did not yet exist, so he correctly felt he was also entitled to the promise made to his father), relied on Him. And felt that it would work. So he began to look forward to the future with interest, knowing that he would have security and help for any eventuality. He had heard of Abraham and Isaac's fear issues in foreign places, how they feared for their lives, and now he himself was in the same place as his great-grandfather, and in a much worse situation. But he has no fear at all, and God liked that. His work to improve the character of His chosen people was finally beginning to bear fruit. Isaac was still repeating Abraham's faults, but Jacob, and now Joseph, had shown success in this respect. All these men had otherwise had worthy traits of character, and now their serious defect of fearfulness was overcome in their descendants. A great thing.
Potiphar's
Joseph's master was a reasonable man, at least his position obliged him to be, and no random person could be appointed head of the guard. He was quickly convinced that his first impression of Joseph was fully justified; every task was easy in the hands of the new servant. He put him in different areas, and whatever he entrusted him with, even if it was unfamiliar to him, he coped with everything brilliantly. In those days people had not yet lost their natural instincts, and Joseph was not the only one who attributed his success to the favor of the Almighty. To have a man favored by the higher powers is always valuable for any small-minded master. If you put him at the maximum height that he can "pull", you can have success and prosperity in everything that comes under his hand. Potiphar did just that, put him over his entire household and he did not fail. He was very pleased with Joseph's honesty and the fact that his house and farm had become successful with such a manager, literally blossomed.
It could have gone on like this for a long time, and Joseph could probably even have gotten his freedom and later entered a higher circle, having such a good acquaintance in the royal court, but it often happens that success brings problems. Joseph was still very young. Potiphar had not yet given Joseph someone to marry, apparently believing that he deserved a higher destiny. He did not consider it necessary to give him any of the slave girls or servants now, thinking to solve this issue later, when he reached greater heights. Joseph himself was not a promiscuous or preoccupied young man, being healthy and strong, and did not have the slightest "need for a woman," whether "for health" or because of the "harm of abstinence," as any sensible man who had not fallen into the net of false ideas. The healthier a person is, the easier it is for him to stay away from unnecessary excitement and not be enslaved by passions. The culture of constant excitement and feeding of excitement was still forming (although in addition to this "culture" love of pleasure and enslavement to passions existed long ago, but so far everyone got entangled in them independently, there was little outside help in this compared to later times, and not every nation equally formed such customs), and if you do not fall under its influence, a person usually easily owns himself and does not feel "preoccupation". But this is if one is lucky enough to have an upbringing or circumstances that keep one away from places where this topic is already supported by the very order of things, customs and conversations. Potiphar's wife, however, was of a different mold. As the wife of a very influential and wealthy man, she did not let the possibilities of a fun life pass her by.
She had her eye on the successful worker and tried to seduce him more than once and more than twice, but Joseph avoided such communication. However, the capricious society lady decided to get her way at all costs. If Joseph was like the ordinary majority in his principles of life, it is unlikely that he would be in any danger from his master, he spent most of his time in the service, which by definition does not allow weekends, and if you are careful, it is unlikely that anyone would know, most likely Potiphar's wife had a lot of experience in hiding their secrets from her husband. Finally, she began to demand affection and attention from Joseph in plain text, seeing that hints were not working. He could not betray the path he was following. He honestly and openly told her that this was unacceptable to him and described to her that such behavior would be a breach of honor. He was vested with great trust and simply could not betray his master; to touch his wife was unthinkable to him. For a while such honesty and simplicity cooled her impulses, but there came a moment when there was no one in the house and she turned to force - simply grabbed him by the clothes and demanded to lie with her right here and now. Staying would be wrong, fighting her didn't mean defeating her, he might have feared he might still give in. So he simply ran away, leaving his outerwear in her tenacious hands. Even if he hadn't left his clothes there, a shadow would have been cast over him by the mere statements of a mistress angry at his refusal.
I think it would have made more sense for him to have told Potiphar about his wife's harassment a long time ago, at least Joseph would have had a safety net in this moment of crisis. Potiphar would then have been more inclined to believe him, and maybe even resolved the issue by giving him another sphere of work outside the home. But as it was, Joseph was probably listened to, and I think Potiphar quite believed him, but he could not leave the matter as if nothing had happened, his reputation was at stake. Many of these people have a difficult temperament and even the shadow of the unprecedented could ruin the reputation of a high courtier, so Potiphar had to react in a way that protected his name and position. So Joseph went to prison as charged by the woman who was offended by the rejection. But not to the scaffold, which could easily have been the case if he had not been of such high principles and character, obvious to all, in which case Potiphar would hardly have had reason to distrust his wife and trust a motherless slave. The prison, however, was also Potiphar's domain[112] , so that Joseph's superiors were practically unchanged, except that there was another immediate superior, the superintendent of the prison.
In prison.
Probably, in places like this, they always and everywhere are interested in what a person got there for, no matter whether he was really guilty or not. The story heard from Joseph, the warden of the place, was probably quite amusing. Having been under Potiphar's command, this man must have known his wife, and he was quite taken with the poor young man's story. He had been sent here in exile away from the worst trouble that might follow if he stayed in the house as if nothing had happened. Joseph had an excellent reputation among those who knew him, and Joseph's jailer continued the tradition of entrusting him with every possible trouble in setting up and running the prison, and, like Potiphar, did not regret it at all. The prisoners did not suffer from malnutrition, cold or lack of anything, the prison was in exemplary order, and even the atmosphere was not so hopeless or dreary as is often the case in such places, because of the presence of divine influence, of which the young man was the guide. The organization of the work of the prisoners was also under his direction, and this economic activity could even be profitable, which affected the prisoners themselves. Joseph, it is true, was confined to the confines of the institution, though it is not improbable that he could go to the markets or to the workshops of the city on business (but this depended on the conditions set by Potiphar that he should not show his face anywhere, which is very probable). But he was in many ways powerless, and his only home was the prison, though there he was constrained to do almost nothing. Many might well have envied him, and it is unlikely that he himself was very unhappy with his present position, having a place to put his hands, seeing his success and the appreciation of all sorts of people. It was only his lack of freedom that made him sad at times, as can be seen in his request later to the cupbearer to remember him, the poor dream interpreter, imprisoned for nothing.
One day events occurred in the palace that led two of Pharaoh's servants to prison. Either they had failed at wine and pastries that day, or they had made an unfortunate joke or behaved improperly at a reception, but both of them were guilty of one thing (it was hardly the Pharaoh's bad mood, who began to pick on trifling matters; judging by his ability to choose sensible people, he was a reasonable and not a bad man) and were imprisoned in the same room in the courtyard of the guards, where the prison was located. A nobleman in prison is still a nobleman in prison, and the warden put Joseph to serve them. These men had not yet been condemned or deposed, and could return to the palace again, so the governor of the prison would not want to spoil relations with the inhabitants of the palace, so they tried to treat them better than others in the prisons. Joseph, with his courtesy and good fortune, was the right man for almost any occasion, so that the governor was hardly in doubt as to whom to put in charge of the baker and cupbearer.
One day Joseph came to their room and found them confused and puzzled. When he inquired what had so impressed and saddened them, he heard that they had dreamed dreams which in all probability had meaning, and not only that their dreams had been on the same night both of them, but they were similar in some elements, and that these dreams had left a strong impression on them, which meant that they were not accidental. But they couldn't read what the symbols of their dreams meant, which was something that had long been typical for people who had lost their ancient culture and knowledge. Joseph did not hesitate to volunteer to help with this matter, and he was the one who should be the interpreter, because of his status as a member of the lineage that should preserve much knowledge about life and the world, bringing help and light, including prophetic light, to both nations and individuals, which clearly characterized God as a support and quick help for each person.
Joseph offers his help without the slightest doubt, though he does not refer to himself, but to God, from whom, he tells his clients, all explanations of the incomprehensible come. He has a confidence that the vast majority of those who believe in God do not have. This speaks of his experience with God, of some direct relationship with Him. It is quite possible to think that he had many dreams about himself and his surroundings and now he can read them as an open book... He had considerable experience of finding help from above, and even if he did not have a separate prophetic channel of access to God, still the experience of his life in Egypt, to which he got even without knowing its language, and all his success and luck, received from above, gave him great confidence that he will know what these people need. Which did not fail to happen as soon as the dreams were told to him. God sent answers to the questions of these courtiers, raising Joseph's authority even higher, but for one of them the answer was not favorable.
The dream of the cupbearer, who volunteered to be the first to tell it, was of a vine with three branches. Before his eyes they blossomed, bloomed, and bore berries, which immediately ripened. Pharaoh's bowl appeared in his hand, and he gathered the bunches, squeezed the juice from them into the bowl and served it to Pharaoh. The baker's dream was similar to the number "three" and also contained elements of his work - on his head he saw three baskets filled with all kinds of baked goods, which were pecked by birds. Although we are not prophets, we can trace Joseph's thought process in deciphering the meaning of dreams. Or perhaps he simply "read" them, as we read words made up of letters. Or, rather, as we read hieroglyphs, they are closer to dreams and prophecies because of their greater information load.
So, these people were waiting for the judgment or decision of Pharaoh to decide their fate. The decision could have been soon, and the "three branches" on the vine and the "three baskets" on the head can easily be understood as indicating the three days in which Pharaoh's decision on his guilty servants would mature. This is the easiest thing to assume in this situation, if we consider that God wants to give an answer to the current situation. If we make some abstract assumptions, then, of course, the field of probabilities expands and we can guess long and fruitlessly, although due to the commonality of many things of this world it is possible to successfully guess to some other events, about which even the author of the dream did not mean anything. The timing does not seem to be difficult. But how does Josephus read the favorable end of the cupbearer and the sad end of the baker? Until now I could not understand it myself, but now I have noticed the active position of the former in his dream and the passive position of the latter. The cupbearer not only sees the bunches of grapes, he personally picks them, squeezes them and serves the cup to Pharaoh - does his usual work. The easiest thing to assume here is that he returns to his post and at least has a good outcome. Josephus, too, draws the same conclusion. The baker, seeing that the brave cupbearer has gotten a good answer, also reveals his dream, but his dream is different in character - he is not an acting figure in this dream, but only looks at what is happening to him, what others are doing to him. He sees birds pecking at his bread, flatbread, and other products, and he cannot even drive them away. He has to serve his produce to Pharaoh, and these birds spoil it, but he only sees it from the outside without being able to intervene. It is also significant that his produce is not taken for Pharaoh, he does not touch his baked goods, they are used by the birds... Also, the theme of "breaking bread" comes up many times in the Bible, especially in connection with Christ's sacrifice for the human race - "eat, this is my body, which is broken for you".... Although these examples were still far away, and the Bible had not yet begun to be written at that time, but to read the symbol it was enough to notice the shutting down of the dream figure and the fact that the birds were pecking at what he had made, to understand or read in these symbols a threat to the baker's life. After the same three days his body was hanged and the birds pecked his flesh.....
Here Joseph made an attempt to break out of his prison, and addressed a request to the cupbearer, which, though naive, showed that Joseph was absolutely certain that his interpretation would be fulfilled. "When you are well, think of me, tell Pharaoh about me..." He hoped that he might be released for this favor, but were the circumstances favorable for his release? Was the task with which Providence had sent him here accomplished? Were the brethren ready to receive him, to surrender and repent of what they had done, when he would return home? Would they not have done something worse to him if he had returned to them as an ordinary man in the same surroundings as before, in which he had no place? But the cupbearer did not think of him when he "got well." And come to think of it, was the favor great? It wasn't Joseph who got him out of prison at all; he merely explained his dream to him. For even if no one had explained their dreams to them, they would still have come true and become clear later. However, a good man would not forget a smaller favor, would not forget contact with something larger behind a man like Joseph. And if the cupbearer had forgotten the experience, then perhaps Pharaoh was not so angry with him and the baker for nothing. And if we consider the will and plan of Providence, we can think that the cupbearer was pardoned more in order to remember Joseph in a couple of years at the right moment, when Pharaoh himself needed advice of the same kind, than because he was not guilty of anything....
Meanwhile, in Canaan.
Judah was by no means the worst of the brothers; in some respects he approached even Joseph in the eyes of his father. But under the influence of the others he also engaged in pranks and mischief, until these increasing misdemeanors reached a certain point. When he offered to sell Joseph instead of killing him, he saved his brother and also saved the others from very bad things. But he did not, like Reuben, stand up openly and honestly against the others, apparently also having something wrong in his heart toward Joseph. In company with them he kept silent about Joseph's fate, not sparing his father, only to conceal the crime of his company, but gradually his consciousness accumulated signals that all these amusements were not so amusing, but could end rather badly. His father's lessons about God's will for their family and God's laws and orders were gradually reaching his mind. Perhaps he broke away from their company before the others and began to live with his own family, finding what he thought was a suitable girlfriend. During Joseph's absence, some twenty-two years, he had three sons, which means he might have married sometime in the same period when they sold Joseph into slavery. He was about three years older than Joseph, then at the time Joseph was sold he was about twenty-one years old, and by the time Joseph was found he was forty-three.
He was unlucky with his sons, the first two. He had not yet begun to build his family as a spiritual man, he had too many unhealthy beginnings guiding his life, he had not yet acquired a higher aspiration, and the example of his father and his ancestors had not yet been appreciated. He had nothing to pass on to his children spiritually, because he started a family more to show his independence than to feel that his time had come and that he had found true love, and he had barely begun his personal search for the Way. But without completing the search, one should not live as a person who has achieved something... I mean that one should or even should start a family not only when one is ready to be responsible for it, having reached physical and mental maturity, but when one has gained understanding of things, has matured spiritually. Disciples in some cultures were forbidden to form families and were heavily dependent on the teacher until they were mature and out of the teacher's power. Judah held to none of this, so it is not surprising that his children took only the worst from him, so much so that his firstborn was destroyed by God personally. This, too, was a great lesson to Judah, who saw his own influence in his destruction, having failed to give him what he had long rebelled against himself. His wife Tamar (or is it Tamar?) was left of the dead firstborn, and Judah, according to custom, ordered his second son, Onan, to marry her, so that the firstborn of Tamar might keep his father's name. Onan obeyed, but only half-heartedly... He did marry, but because of his youth and the general attitude of the whole company to violate any prohibitions that seemed either too strict or simply wrong and artificial, and for some reason not wanting his brother to keep his name on the Earth, he did not bring the matter to a normal end, but performed the well-known operation of interrupted coitus, excluding the conception of a child. Although Onan disliked or disrespected his brother for something, what he did was no better than what his brother was guilty of, and in the eyes of God this son of Judah was also unworthy to be included among the people of God to be created, and he too died. Judah was left with another son who was still young. Since marriages, unlike in Abraham's family, were considered by most to be normal to create as soon as adolescence was over, Tamar had not long to wait for Shelah, a few years.
She waited, but Judah himself, who did not look deeply into the fate of his dead sons, somehow thought that his daughter-in-law might be to blame for the deaths of his sons. When the time came for Shelah to take Tamar, Judah delayed the matter in every possible way, neither summoning her to his house, nor sending anyone to invite her. Instead of putting aside superstition, instead of simply asking God about the reasons, he became afraid that his youngest might also die, even though he was better in character than the first two - Judah, having realized his blunders on his first sons, managed to correct something in the upbringing of his youngest. It is not strange - although Judah had once saved Joseph, he did not, like Reuben, look for an opportunity to save him, but only took advantage of a chance. In doing so, he allowed his father to suffer for many years from the loss of his son as an animal and did not reveal the situation to him, allowing his father to exist for a long time in a false reality in which his son died. Doesn't the real loss of his sons seem a fitting retribution for leaving his father to suffer imaginary things? Most likely he understood this and did not murmur, but at the same time in the most foolish way instead of repenting for his deeds he casts his suspicions on the undeserving girl.... This happens not only to him, but to any person, when instead of regretting what they have done and then correcting what they have done (or even repenting, but not correcting it when they could do it) they stall for time for some unknown reason, trying to keep silent and hide uncomfortable thoughts of personal guilt from themselves, and it automatically begins to be assigned in their subconsciousness to other people[113] . After all, if Joseph had not been found, Jacob would never have learned of his sons' latest crime. Were they afraid he would curse them? And the longer it went on, the harder the confession seemed? - It was not that to be feared, not their father's displeasure, whatever it might end in, but that their souls were weighed down with the uncorrected. Their father did not curse them when he found out, but willingly forgave them, because he was not an enemy to them, he was looking for a way to make them people of higher quality (however, some people can be terrible, but that's another story). Not trusting him, they imagined him not to be what he was, distorted his image into something hostile and evil, although it was they themselves who were like that at that time.
After the death of his sons, Judah's wife also died, apparently unable to bear the loss, and the character problems of her sons were weighing heavily on her. He was left alone again, and only the youngest son remained of the family he had. She did not die of old age at all, if she had been much older than Judas, but at that time many people were already weakened enough for such premature deaths and serious illnesses to occur from time to time, even in children. Weakness and sickness were accumulated by parents living according to their whims, weakening their nature. The loss of two sons was therefore particularly severe. But Judas was also greatly to blame. He had been called to a higher life according to all principles of truth and order, but in his rebellion he chose to reject everything that displeased him, which none of his ancestors had done or even thought of doing. This was the first generation to rebel against the plans of God, though not openly and openly, not consciously, but only because they had thoughtlessly adopted the loose and seemingly free morals of those around them. In this first generation the straying was fortunately short-lived, but it opened the way for the following ones, in whom it became a tradition... But it should not be thought that God was aloof from their fate. If the children of Jacob had completely decided to deny God, whom they could not deny in any way like the atheists of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, to whom science had created a very convenient platform for this with all sorts of justifications (scientists might have doubted atheism, the scientificity of which was weak, but for everyone else the proof of atheism - "Science proved it!!!"), looked like ironclad atheism. - looked downright ironclad and eternal; this evidence was well organized and had support at the level of the system, which provided the basis for such mass confidence in "science", or rather in atheism supported by "science"), then God, in such a deliberate departure from Him, might well have left them[114] . However, not all of them were finished men, it was a temporary unconscious rebellion without denial of God and His ways. They recognized the principles of righteousness, did not deny walking in them, but simply built their personal paths on amusement and convenience for themselves. This led them into evil deeds, and they almost killed their brother. The commandment "thou shalt not kill" does not apply so much to war (I mean the defending, right side, the wrong side is responsible for it), but it protects those who are not at fault, who did not raise arms first, so Abraham's fighting in defense of Lot is not evil or sinful. The defense of one's country is not a sin before God. The actions of Simeon and Levi in avenging the Shechemites, on the other hand, are in a different category and are a sin, yet have at least some shadow of validity because of the grievous offense, even though the punishment meted out by them was excessive and unjust. All in all, relatively good guys somewhere deep down inside could be lost in the wilds of evil, but God did not abandon them by intervening in their lives. One example of such intervention (also because of their father's requests for them) is illustrated in the life and circumstances of Judas.
Left alone again, Judah had a chance to build his life anew, taking into account what he had experienced and understood. He was at an age when his father had not yet thought about family, had no concrete plans other than the most general ideas, if he thought about them at all. It is true that Judah, as the events show, still lives too much by inertia, but after the surprise from Tamar, he changed so much that it seems he never married again[115] , although he was still young. Enough...
When Judah, after mourning for his wife and family, was about to go to shear his sheep, someone informed Tamar that her father-in-law would soon be passing by. She was no expert on the rules of life, which ones were safe and which ones were invented by humans, and may have acted without rules at all, though in terms of concepts it looks as if adequate - let your son evade the law? - then, since the responsibility is still on your family, do it yourself... The logic is ironclad.
She was young, led a rather principled life, after her marriage to Judah's sons she did not seek men or anything else, and this cannot be characteristic of the inhabitants of Canaan, one of whose tribes was called the Amorites, known for their commitment to love entertainment. Isn't this where the "cupids"[116] - winged children with bows, shooting "Cupid's arrows" - arose from people who consider the carnal side of love, or even just the pleasures of this sphere, to be the most important factor in life? That is why Tamar's fidelity to Judah's family looks especially praiseworthy (although the mores of those peoples were very free, but in some families fidelity could be maintained for various reasons by rather strict measures; next to the freedom for men there are often prohibitions of the same for women, although without them men would have been left without a chance for these entertainments - sheer contradictions and double standards). Something drew her to these people, and although Judas had deviated from the Path, he had not abandoned it completely, and this gave him and his entourage a certain aura of increased goodness that should accompany any follower of the living God. Perhaps she was acquainted with Judah's father and then it was no wonder she became attached to these men. Realizing that Shelah would not be given to her as a husband, she decided to exact her duty, personally, from the chief offender.
Dressed like a corrupt woman and covering her face with a veil, as was the custom for this kind of women, at least during "working hours," she waited for him at the gate of a town he was to pass by. And when he passed by, she set herself to attract his attention and create desire, "turned on" a certain efficacy of her nature, which sometimes women can abuse, and against which many find it difficult to resist. Abuse[117] these, however, is regarded as abuse of magic or sorcery, and punished accordingly, if used not in the family circle ...
As Judas walked by, he saw the woman sitting there waiting. We can hardly know what was in his heart or mind. Did he hear her call, or did he seek a certain kind of comfort? Had he had experience of this kind with women before? In principle, it can hardly be ruled out that he had - when one does some bad things, they involve others of the same kind. Folk practice has long reflected this in a simple logical chain - "if you smoke, then you also drink". Although one cannot be entirely sure of this, it may well have been in the company of the brothers that they were bold in some one offense, but by no means went against the seventh commandment - Reuben's case may have impressed others to stay away from it. And if they wanted to gain quick manhood, they, like Judah, simply got married. It happens too, a person violates a lot of things without remorse, but suddenly stops before something forbidden to him, "holy". It is unknown. Many people feel that it is impossible to violate everything, it is necessary to leave some corner in the soul for the "holy", otherwise one can sink, lose self-respect and degrade, slip into the abyss. Be that as it may, Judas had already come to his senses after the death of his wife and sons, began to live again and look at other women, could think about a new family - even if he had been of ascetic convictions at that time, marriage would not have been a violation of any rules. But here is the situation - he threw out of his mind the problem of Famari, who was waiting for him to give her a younger son as a husband, did not care about her, her soul, her happiness, and himself allows himself illicit entertainments, especially at a time when the children are still unsettled. What did she think of him when he approached her with the proposal... Did she forgive him in advance because she herself had not acted better? Did she know he wouldn't pass her by? She was acquainted with him already, and if he really was not a superior man, she would hardly have sought him for a family. Then, seeing that she wasn't being given Shelah as a husband, she would simply ask him directly about his plans, and if he refused to let her marry his youngest, he should have given her complete freedom to live as she liked and marry whoever she wanted. Rather her calculation was based on the fact that she knew his weaknesses and was a wise woman who knew how to influence him. The reason for Judah's fall in this case was primarily because he was already guilty before her of breaking his promise to give her as a wife to his youngest son, and when a man breaks something, his moral stability at that time decreases and he is weaker in other matters.
This is important for all those who want to follow God's ways, to serve Him, but think that they can allow themselves to be guilty before Him for a while, and then return to Him again, repent, because of the well-known philosophy of "sin and repent". If anyone seriously thinks that with this approach it is possible to achieve something in spirituality, to be saved, it is a grave mistake. To be saved in the end is possible, but first understanding the destructiveness of this way, because intentional, conscious sins sharply weaken, if not completely break the connection between God and man, the presence of wrong intentions sharply weakens the sanctifying effect of the Spirit[118] , without which there is and can be no righteousness, so a person at such times is vulnerable to temptation much stronger.
Most likely she understood and considered it. The only thing that justified her in her own eyes was that what she was doing was a kind of compensation or penalty for his fault to her. She felt that she was in her right, though under the present rules this was not the right thing to do, such a claim having to be dealt with openly or directly (openly by bringing in other people to influence her father-in-law, and directly by talking to him personally, with or without witnesses). *
She demanded that he secure payment by pledging his valuables - his seal and cane and bandage - so that she could prove that she was not the only one to blame. But she did not take the payment - when later they tried to give her the lamb, Judas' friend could not even find any trace of her in the place indicated. So the time she spent waiting for Judah was so well calculated that none of the villagers had time to notice her.
Three months later Judah was told that his daughter-in-law had been unfaithful to his family and was pregnant with an unknown child. Different tribes might have different customs about protecting the family and the honor of the home, so Judah acted according to the strictest standards and ordered her to be burned. Since it was his house, his authority, no one argued. Tamar was then living in her father's house, but her father could not intercede for her, or was unwilling... As has been said, even in the days of Abraham his tribe was highly respected, and though the sons of Jacob did not always lead honorable lives, yet they were strong, which is usually highly respected in this world. But here came a circumstance that Famaria planned in her defense, for she knew how the case might, or even how it should turn out. As she was led to the place of execution, she was told to hand over to Judas, who was nearby, his belongings that he thought he had already lost - his cane, his personal seal, and his bandage. All this took place before the eyes of the people, though the crowd may have been small. He gave his cruel order with a hardened heart, angry at Famar, angry at the circumstances and at everything around him - realizing that his fear for the younger man was superstitious, not real, but he couldn't help it - he wasn't going to give him Famar anymore, that is, he was a trespasser, but her breach of loyalty was very much to his advantage. If he took the moment to get rid of her now, he would no longer have to worry about his son. How silly - the older two died not because of her, but because of their personalities and deeds, and if you are so worried about him, raise him better, not keep him away from Famari. But here they bring him his things, handed over from the one whom he had condemned to a cruel death, with a question in their eyes - how to understand it... And then Judah was shaken. It shook Judas very violently, so that all his former liberties, as well as his excessive strictness toward others, were cut off. He saw himself not even from the outside, but through and through, naked and insignificant. His whole life was worthless, everything he had valued before and lived for was nothing. His "righteous" order to burn the apostate was given by an unworthy sinner, her guilt was part of his own. He had not even lived "for" something, but had been driven by the lower interests of his nature, thoughtlessly and carelessly, for company, and now suddenly he had gone from being a prince in charge of the lives of those who trusted him, to being an idle talker, guilty of other people's sins, because he had led his daughter-in-law into sin, and he himself had taken part in it. In fairness he should have been on the fire with her, if not instead of her[119] ... First of all he saw his guilt before Famaria, though he had previously repelled the thought that he might owe her anything. And all those people who had come to watch the execution were now standing there looking at him. And he's not hiding, he's confessing, saying, "She's more righteous than I am." Not that he has justified her, but he blames himself and admits that he should be burned at the stake... He was not afraid to say in front of the people that his guilt is greater than hers, that he is to blame for her guilt, that he brought her to such an act, and if she is guilty of something, he is more guilty. Her sin is only a consequence of his deception, the cause is him personally. And although her sin looks shameful in the eyes of society, and his sin (of deceiving those who trusted him) is from a different sphere, not from that of intimacy and natural shame, but his plausible deception gave rise to this naked shame of intimacy... And he himself turned out to be the one who made her pregnant, a party to her shame. This realization pierced him with all clarity, and from that moment his soul found real values in this confession and self-denial. God had finally gotten his way.
Moses wrote about him that he was no longer with Tamar. But she was there for him, for she raised his sons, twins born six months later. He cared for her, yet he seems not to have touched her or any other woman, and he had no other children. It may seem incredible to some, but those shocks and discoveries he found in his sad experiences made him a different man. The example of his ancestors, whom God had chosen to carry out a high and noble task, stood before him as a challenge and a calling, and he "arose, and went beyond the threshold[120] ". He could have married, no one forbade him and there were no such laws, but he, realizing the value of the family, the importance of raising children to be sound and complete individuals, and especially obedient to the Way, focused on it. He saw the emptiness and evil of the way of life that their company led in his childhood and youth, and analyzing the reasons for it, he tried to keep his children from such things. Jacob always liked Judah in some way, and in him, as in Joseph, the best of their family was concentrated, and his father was happy to see his son beside him on the Way. In his blessing to his children on the threshold of death, in the Song of Jacob, he emphasizes Judah, endowing him with the qualities of a lion, which was also his name. "The young lion Judah, my son, rises from the prey" - only the prey was his victory over himself, over his lowly part, put under the control of the higher forces of soul and mind, the meaning of life found....
Joseph is towering
Two more years passed after the cupbearer's release from prison, and then it happened that Pharaoh dreamed dreams at night, and was greatly disturbed by them. Great significance was felt in them, and as they were shown to the first person of the country, it might concern all Egypt. He sought with whom to consult, who could explain to him the meaning of the dreams, but those who dealt professionally with matters of the spirit, and who were the guardians of much of the wisdom of Egypt, somehow found themselves confused about the details and could not give out anything definite. It is very likely that the outlines of a considerable change were guessed by many, but the priests could contradict each other, so that the matter was only more confused. Pharaoh had two dreams, one of cows, the other of ears. There were two groups of both, two groups of cows, one very good and healthy, the other very thin and sickly. Similarly with the ears. Then the second group would eat or devour the first group. Usually in such cases, when God sends even to people who do not believe in Him such revelations about the future and the threat to their well-being that can be warded off, as a rule these warnings are clear and do not require special interpretation and interpreters. But when His representatives are around, He grants this honor to them, and complicates the signal sent, so that few can read it except these persons. Hence, though dreams seem uncomplicated after interpretation, yet before that they prove a hard nut for any who try them. Joseph was in Egypt, and he was the only one who could help Pharaoh and Egypt.
In the events coming upon Egypt the plan of the Super Being to further His designs for His representative nation is seen. It was evident that this nation, which had barely begun to become a small tribe, had stumbled and strayed from the best paths, and, though the children of Jacob had been greatly reformed as they matured, yet not all to the required degree, as Judah had been. Also the younger generation as a baton passed on a great deal of dissembling and unfaithfulness to the boys and girls who followed them. Therefore, if the tribe of Jacob became a nation in Palestine, it was guaranteed to go in such a way that God could not protect and help them against their enemies. And they would have made enemies easily, and God could not have helped them the way He had helped Abraham and Isaac, because they were too different people who did not have the same aspirations as their fathers. So God decided to take them away to another place for the time of their formation, just as He had told Abraham that "in the fourth generation they would return here", the fourth since leaving Canaan. In Egypt they had to learn lessons of humility, of dependence on God and on the quality of their works, and there they had to feel themselves clearly dependent on others, to see how God's favor was directly dependent on their obedience. It was too costly to do this kind of educational work in Canaan - if the Canaanites saw God punishing the Jews, they would despise them, and while this was not so harmful to education, it was not the best thing for God Himself, His image and authority would suffer. That's why He created the famine and the unusual harvest before it, and sent a warning for Egypt, and to all this He also sent Joseph to manage it all... If Jacob's sons had accepted Joseph's primacy without hostility, and had obeyed God's voice and warning, his influence would have smoothed over many problems and they would have been different people and a very different story, with no need to make such moves, just as God could have worked with them more gently. But their hostility to their brother led God to lead them in a different way, less pleasant but adequate to their condition.
The following scheme of God's work with those whom He will save emerges - their troubles and troubles in life and all the other things called trials are caused by their character flaws. I am 99% sure of this. You could say that there is a direct connection between this and that, and problems act as a corrective feedback, straightening out (forcing to straighten out) a person's flaws. Problems that arise in people serve as the very means by which their flaws are highlighted, helping them to notice and realize their personal imperfections. On the nature of a mental flaw depends on what problems and temptations will fall to the share of the bearer of the flaw. I have noticed more than once the correspondence of the character of a person and his circumstances of life. However, just look at these expressions of the Bible and compare them - "It is not of His own will that He ... grieves the sons of men[121] "; "When God pleases man's ways, He reconciles even his enemies with him"; "To those who love God ... all things work together for good". In the first case it is said that God sends problems to people not because He wants to, it is not His desire. But if it is He who sends them, which is stated directly and explicitly, then there is only one reason why He does it - it is necessary, and it is determined by circumstances outside of God, in man himself.
Although this cannot be said with certainty about all people, because in the lives of the vast majority of people the elements rule, that is, God has no direct right to rule there due to the lack of an agreement between such a person and God, since they did not set themselves the goal of serving good and truth, returning to God and being saved. Since they did not enter into His covenant agreement, He has no direct right to interfere in their lives (I should note - for the purpose of salvation, otherwise no one is guaranteed against the interference of the Master of all things), nor does He allow dark forces to interfere either. God by default tries to direct all people toward these goals, so all can have this component, but to a lesser degree. But those who are going to be "saved", they will go through anything that just touches what is wrong and bad about them that they carry within them. Any slightest flaw that is unacceptable to God, He will have to, simply must, remove from those who are going to live forever, and if man will not allow God to purify himself for whatever reason, then salvation is out of the question. No "favorites" in this regard can exist, there is no one whose sins God would look leniently upon and allow to have them in any lasting way, all are required to undergo purification from the slightest falsehood and evil, even its germs. To allow for the sake of any one the existence of the leaven of evil in His kingdom means by His own hands to allow the seeds of some other rebellion or discord, means the danger of new upheavals. He did not allow Lucifer and all his supporters to reveal themselves in deed, He did not allow evil to oppress everyone and everything on our planet to allow some rot to begin again. He had a situation - to destroy the evil with its carriers without explanations and get the eternal problem of misunderstanding and murmuring, or to give it a chance to reveal itself to the end, but to solve the problem completely. In the second case, the evil had to remain quite uncontrolled, and one had to give it every chance, leaving everyone affected by it at the risk of suffering and hardship. But no one following the Path was left without hope, all those affected are compensated afterwards, so that in this world of evil even the worst situations are not hopeless, in the light of subsequent compensation.
If anyone thinks that God allowed Abraham and other special people to have some sins, they have this impression only because God did not react immediately ("judgment is not swift in the judgment of evil deeds"[122] ), and they do not notice the subsequent retribution because of a very selective reading of their stories. But that's why I'm describing all this, to show the close connection of works and their consequences in the lives of all those "favorites" of God. In fact, they were asked even more than ordinary people.
So, Pharaoh, having seen the dream with cows, woke up, then fell asleep again and received the continuation of the dream with the story about ears. When he woke up in the morning, he realized that it was a dream. One dream, although it was as if there were two. And then his mood deteriorated sharply, these dreams confused him and disturbed him. He saw that the dreams were not accidental, that there was an important meaning here, so he gathered all those who only had to do with things invisible and spiritual - priests, priests and scientists, although it is better to call them sages because of a different specificity of the direction of thought and because the modern directions of science at that time had not yet been raised. As already noted, no one could penetrate into the meaning of the dream. And anyone who would interpret today, could have problems, considering the plot, where the ears stand next to each other and as if the weak absorb the strong ears. All seven pairs interacted as if at the same time, which thwarted the interpretation of a sequence in time. These searches for the answer to the riddles of the dream continued for a long time, and then the cupbearer came on the scene, and in his hands there was the key to the answer to almost all questions not only of Pharaoh and priests and wise men, but also of Joseph, and with them of all Egypt and many people in it and around it. Let us not forget also Joseph's brothers, to the education of whom and their offspring all this calamity was devoted. If Egypt had been ruled and governed by the same kind of people who today set the tone in the West, Egypt would have started a trial against Yahweh for "interfering in the internal affairs" of Egypt, and even in the interests of "unfriendly persons". At the same time, instead of God, the defendant would be His representatives - Abraham's heirs, Jacob's family, Joseph. Sanctions, deportations, contributions - a plot for comedy-farce... However, God could well appear at such a trial, which would have brought a not comic note to the process. A couple of hundred years later, this is exactly what happened when Egypt tried to deny God and clamp down on His people, but was confronted by their Advocate, who also had the power to restore order. It must be said that at the end of time such a thing will happen again, and God will appear again at that judgment - this is about Armageddon and the end of the world. In Revelation in the message to the last Church the words of Christ "Behold I stand at the door and knock" - of course this is addressed to Christians, but it can also be read in application to the rest of the world, and the stress of the coronavirus is the "first call" from the Son of God about to visit our world with the last judgments.
But it was still a long way off, and now the cupbearer intervened in the course of the learned assembly. The confused and bewildered assembly stared in surprise at the tsardar, in whom they recognized the cupbearer, who timidly appeared in the field of vision. What does he want to say - maybe he wants to offer everyone to refresh themselves with some drink to make them think more easily? Come on, pour... However, he replied that he was not in his specialty at the moment and apologized for interfering, but he had some thoughts that might help. And so he told Pharaoh and the assembly of the spiritual rulers of Egypt about his long-standing offense, his punishment and his encounter with the man who had easily predicted to him his fate, shown to him in a dream. Not only him, but also a fellow inmate who was a baker. He said that everything happened exactly according to the words of the young descendant of Eber[123] - "as he interpreted it to us, so it came true". Under the circumstances in which the servant's story was told, who had intruded into a conversation into which he, if not by rank, then by specialization, should not have been involved, there was no doubt in anyone's mind that the fellow should be urgently summoned to this council in order at least to assess the extent of his abilities. In the conditions of some impending threat to the country it was not up to ranks and titles, and it was just very interesting to hear from an eyewitness that there are still people close to God (or gods, as pagans thought). So the participants of the "brainstorming" at Pharaoh's place, who had listened to the cupbearer with complete disappointment, grasped the opportunity to get some answer at last.
Pharaoh immediately sent for Joseph. Knowing where he was being summoned, he prepared himself thoroughly, but he was welcomed by those who sent for him and was not hurried too much. It did not take him long to cut his hair and change into more suitable clothes. And here he was in the palace in front of the Pharaoh and the meeting of the most authoritative clerics of the country. It must be said that this Pharaoh from the biblical texts does not look like an authoritarian person at all, on the contrary, he is friendly and open, and most likely wise. He easily addresses Joseph - "I had a dream, and there is no one to interpret it. And I have heard of you that you can interpret dreams." Joseph responds in the same vein, deflecting unnecessary honor from himself - "It is not mine, God will give the answer for Pharaoh's benefit." It is interesting that the servant of the living God says confidently and unequivocally in advance, before he has even heard the story, that there will be an answer and that it will all be for Pharaoh's good. Even if the dream was threatening and negative, the very fact that God sent knowledge of the future to people who did not know Him meant that God was favorable to them. From the information received, it would be possible to know how to avoid the future problem or at least minimize the consequences - even partial help could save the country and many people.
Afterward, Pharaoh recounted his dream. He emotionally emphasizes that he had never seen such bad cows and ears anywhere. Joseph, having listened to the narrative, without apparent delay for thought, almost immediately answers him - "seven cows and seven ears are seven years, a single dream," about the same event. For seven years there will be unprecedented abundance, and then there will be another seven years of crop failure and famine. Josephus emphasizes that this dream shows that the former years of abundance will be forgotten, so severe will be the famine. "And that the dream is repeated twice, it means that it is not accidental, but takes place according to the plan of the supreme powers, and is sure to be fulfilled. After this he proceeds at once to the advice to take some measures. He proposes to collect a tax on the crops of the first seven years, to establish the office of keeper of abundance, designed to collect a portion of the superabundant harvest to compensate for shortages in years of famine. It's as if the peasants of Egypt weren't enslaved at the time, and might not have been in the mood to give their grain to the state, but I think there was a public awareness campaign to make sure they understood what was being done and why, so there was no outcry. It was not for nothing that Joseph suggested that the post needed a wise person who would act without causing outrage among the people.
All of the above - both the interpretation of the dream and the suggestion for a way out of the situation, though simple, was liked by all those present at the council. All were impressed, and unanimously supported the proposal. Pharaoh saw that there was no better candidate than the prisoner who had just spoken to them, and he suggested that Joseph himself should take charge of the matter. It could well be that there were no reliable people among the courtiers who already held various positions, or they were already in important positions... Moreover, he gave Joseph not only ministerial powers, but actually put him even in charge of his own household and house. Pharaoh is wise - he sees that Joseph is great, and great not just in himself, but because God is behind him. And He not only stands behind Joseph, but He reveals Himself in Joseph - "since He has revealed all this to you, there is no other man like you, only you are wise and intelligent enough to do what is necessary" - that is Pharaoh's thought. A person who has been entrusted with so much power and skills from above is the one who should be entrusted with the management of all the circumstances that have come to light, unless there is a separate order from above, because sometimes it may happen that one person is given the talents of foresight and another person should manage it - in large and serious organizations the second variant is more likely to happen. Seeing all this, Pharaoh puts him second after himself and says - "without you no one will move a hand or a foot in all Egypt". He himself says to him - "with the throne alone I will be greater than you," thus placing him above all others. On that day Joseph ascended (today we would say "rose") to a great height in a country that was, if not the first in the world, then one of the strongest and most developed countries at that time.
Neither Pharaoh nor anyone else at that meeting was confused by the fact that he had come to them straight from prison - Joseph's qualities and his subsequent activities erased any possibility of suspicion or underestimation. I think that a little later (or perhaps even before the appointment) Pharaoh could not help but wonder how and because of what Joseph had gotten there, and I wonder what conclusions he drew about Potiphar and his wife. It is unlikely that Potiphar suffered as a result of this, but one can guess about the fate of the capricious beauty that she had it worse.
Pharaoh tried to find Joseph a wife from the best beauties of Egypt, not forgetting the nobility, it was the daughter of the priest of the city of On[124] . Before the years of famine came, two sons were born to him. Years of abundance came and Egypt prepared for it - under Joseph's leadership powerful grain storages were built. Somewhere we have seen pictures of those still impressive constructions, where there were no cracks in the walls, for such a quantity of grain for a long time of storage could easily be attacked by mice and other pests. But thanks to thoughtful and careful technology, these storages were reliable, so that they have survived to the present day[125] . These were in some cases cellars, in others above-ground structures, the size of an eight-to-ten-story single-floor house, where quite a lot of grain was placed. In years of plenty, it took a twenty percent tax from the peasants, and that was enough that eventually the bread being loaded for storage stopped being counted. Mathematics probably allowed counting, but there might not have been enough educated people to do it, so the bread was stored without counting.
Meet the brothers and reunite
The seven years of plenty passed and there came days and years when the people, judging from some details[126] , did not even try to sow anything. The Bible does not tell about the causes of the crop failures, nor does it speak of natural conditions from which the cause of the problems could be deduced. However, there are evidences from the modern findings of archeologists[127] , that the Nile did not leave its banks during those seven years. Vagaries at the great River happened earlier and later, but that seven years in a row, such is not known anymore. At first many people still had their own stocks, made according to the example made by the authorities of the country, but soon the majority of people ran out of stocks and went to Pharaoh, knowing that the state had collected a lot.
Pharaoh sent a delegation to Joseph, who was to be in charge of distributing the supplies. He opened the doors of the storehouses and began to sell bread to the people. He sold the grain to the people, not gave it away, because the grain was not considered the property of the people, but of the state or Pharaoh. It was surrendered as a tax, which people were used to, so what was surrendered to the sovereign people they no longer considered as their own. Maybe there was some injustice in what happened afterwards (because of lack of money people began to sell themselves into slavery), but though Joseph was influential enough, but not everyone is given to change the customs and orders of society. Besides, only the inhabitants of countries with experience of socialism could think of such social justice; in many other places, especially in ancient times, such an idea could hardly arise. For the first time in history, large masses of people had such a large-scale strategic food supply (Nimrod might have tried to realize such a thing or planned it, but there was not enough population in his time); previously, due to small population and undeveloped states, people survived natural disasters mostly alone or in relatively small groups. Now the situation was different - thanks to divine intervention a large and well-organized country had a chance to go through a severe famine with minimal losses, and without God this famine would have led, perhaps, to the extinction of Egypt - the people in it would have either died out or gone very far beyond the zone of crop failure. And the spread of the famine was not insignificant, neighboring Canaan was in the same problem, and for grain or other food there went not to the north or east, but only to Egypt. Clearly everyone within a radius of up to a thousand kilometers, or even more, had the same problem. So Joseph could not distribute grain to his fellow citizens, it was impossible in those conditions. The ruling circles of Egypt did not grow up to consider the citizens of the country as a single community, in which everyone is protected and everyone takes care of everyone, at that moment they received the maximum protection possible in their time, and not without help. If we take the world community as a whole, even today the world has not reached such a point, only in some parts of the modern world such ideas are realized. So he sold to everyone who came and no one complained about the price. But the population did not have much money, and from some time Joseph agreed to exchange grain for cattle. This was enough to live on for another year, but then the people had nothing left but the fields. They themselves came with an offer to Pharaoh to buy them or they would all perish. This turned out to be a turning point in the history of the country, after which the population was owned by Pharaoh, as well as the land. It should be said that it was as if people were not oppressed and after some time the population looked free again. But at that moment the belonging of the population to the state or to the house of Pharaoh made Pharaoh to feed his newfound slaves, so people had a lot of care about finding food - the state serfdom took care of it. Subsequently people were able to redeem themselves, pay off their debts during the famine, apparently that's how they got free. A hundred years later, the Jews will be slaves, while the Egyptians look like free people, i.e. this condition, which arose because of the famine, was not fixed forever (it seems that Joseph's wisdom was also reflected in this, as Pharaoh turned out to be not a bad guy either). The threat of starvation and the rampant elements seemed to have impressed the powers that be and tempered the appetite of those who might not mind (and could it be that such thinking among the powers that be had not yet developed into a general trend?) warming their hands on the people's misfortune, and again, there were worthy people at the head of the country, so that time the evil did not pass....
Canaan soon realized that a famine was coming as soon as the weather showed that there would be no harvest. For the herders, a grain crop failure did not seem to be a big deal, but bad weather could cause a shortage of grass for the animals, too. But it is not known what kind of weather conditions or what caused the crop failure - whether it was cold weather due to the eruption of a volcano that changed the climate for a while, heat and drought, or some other factors. But it is known that even cattlemen do not mind to use the products of agriculture. So Jacob, when he heard the news that Egypt was not poor, sent his sons there to buy grain. They all went together, except the youngest Benjamin, whom his father would not let go far, cherishing him as his last attachment. All ten of them went, for more people could bring more goods, and a small group could tempt the robbers with the hope of a successful raid. A large family, if it is a friendly one, is always a winner.
And so they came to Egypt, to the place where Joseph himself was in charge of the trade and was himself present from time to time. He might not have been personally involved in such matters, but I think that he was waiting for the brothers, they could not fail to come... He knew that his dreams were prophetic and waited calmly for this meeting. Outwardly he had changed, instead of a homely naive young man he was now a hardened man, a successful official of the highest rank, and even if his face had changed little under the influence of age, his psyche had changed greatly, and this, along with his clothes, had changed his appearance. It was now difficult to recognize him, and so it was. When he came out to the people, among whom were his brothers, they bowed to him to the ground, as did the others in the crowd. He recognized them easily. Once he had longed for fellowship with them, had valued them highly, had not taken offense at their dislike, repulsion, and ridicule-he had really loved them with all his pure heart. But now, having gained a lot of experience - and in problems experience is usually gained much faster - he is not in a hurry to open up to them, on the contrary, he wants to know what they are like today. Have they learned something, have they changed? If he had remained the same naive young man and revealed himself to them from the moment he met them, and if they had remained the same unkind people they were in their youth, they might have tried to pull him under themselves, and they might have seen his high position in Egypt as a convenient excuse to enrich themselves, or even to manipulate him under a high roof, they might have threatened him or exploited his softness by pulling strings. So he prudently tests them first. Besides, he had serious doubts about them - they didn't have Benjamin with them... Hadn't they done something similar to him too? So he was even obliged to check their circumstances and current state. Did he cross the line in his tests? - I don't think so. They had learned a lot of lessons and could not take offense, knowing things about themselves for which even greater retribution many would not consider excessive.
Although the question of the right to test another is quite relevant. Sometimes there are people who, in response to accusations of some kind of mischief, say "I was testing you". And it is not difficult to understand that the right of such checkers is very doubtful. They usually don't even realize how wrong they are being and take a big risk by only increasing their problems with such a statement. Others may realize that they are walking on the edge, but expect to slip on the dope, that the other will swallow it in excessive simplicity. However, the question of reliability, why you have to vet people, is also far fetched. But I think it is not difficult to notice the difference when one "checks" a person who has done nothing bad to anyone, and when one wants to be sure about someone who has already shown himself in a bad way. Or when there is no need at all in "checking", which someone just covers up his character problems, his harmfulness. Also, problems with the rights of the person being checked are compensated by his bad fame or his specific guilt, when it is clear to everyone that it is not for him to be indignant in this situation, whose cow would have mooed... This is between people, personal matters.
If the matter is not in interpersonal interaction, but, for example, in government bodies or high-tech production, where there are increased requirements for reliability, then there is no point in objecting to inspections, the very nature of things dictates it.
Joseph spoke harshly to them. He decided to play the role of an arrogant, short-tempered, power-hungry man. He first asked them where they were from. Then he unceremoniously accused them of being spies - "Hailee Laikli" was not invented yesterday, however - and forced them to justify themselves. They, stunned by the pressure, began to give details of their lives and circumstances, something with which they could be verified and authenticated, because spies are usually given a cover and a legend, passing them off as someone else. Had they been at home in Canaan, anyone would have easily confirmed their identities, but here they were not at home. In principle, Egypt, finding itself at a huge strategic advantage for the duration of the famine, could indeed fear attacks under the envious gazes of its neighbors, and Josephus plays this card in front of everyone quite reasonably. After listening to the brothers' account of their family, he is even more hostile toward them, saying that their excuses and the family's plausible story only increase his suspicions about them. And it is true that if the boss thinks someone is wrong, the very attempt at justification increases his anger and suspicion, unless the boss is a bad person, of course, but that's exactly the role Joseph has taken on... If he "wants" these people to be spies, then it is better for them to become spies than to prove they are not guilty. The fact that his father was alive gave hope that Benjamin was also alive, but how well they were doing was not clear from the information available.
Finally, having reached the top of his "suspicions", he kind of propitiates them and gives them a chance to prove his point - let their younger brother come here, if there is one. And he arrests them all first, leaving only one of them to go after Benjamin. However, when he said that he would let one of them go, he arrested all of them for some reason and kept them under lock and key for three days to make them feel the truth. We can imagine the despair of Jacob's sons when they tried to imagine this picture - one of them comes to their father, explaining that all of them were arrested on suspicion of espionage, and to get out of there, we must also bring Benjamin to that evil Egyptian who suspected everyone. Even if their father would not be upset with them and their families' hunger, he would not let Benjamin go, so the prospects were very unpleasant. If the Egyptian was so suspicious, in his paranoia, he might turn Benjamin into a spy, and that would be the end of their family. Or starve to death a little later.
On the third day Joseph summoned them all to him, pretending to soften his anger and suspicion - "All right, I fear God, in case you are innocent after all... Go home, all of you, your families are waiting for bread after all. But one of you stay here and wait for your little brother to arrive. And without the younger one, don't even try to come here again."
After these trials and troubles, they could not help themselves and began to remember the guilt that still lingered in their souls, that still kept their father in ignorance and great grief, and because of which they now put Benjamin under attack, and with him their father. It is interesting that they do not malign "that Egyptian" with a single word, but in all these troubles that have come upon them they see only one fault of their own before Joseph. They said to one another - "Surely it is we who are being punished for sinning against our brother... we saw all his suffering, he begged us, and we had no pity on him - now we are reaping all this". They saw justice in what was happening to them here, though to them there was no outward connection in these things! People with a tarnished soul would be embittered here, but they find that their former debauchery is over, and that all their father's lessons and endeavors have not been in vain, their consciences have not been dulled or extinguished.
They spoke among themselves in their own language, thinking that the Egyptians around them did not understand them, but Joseph listened to it as the best music to his soul, seeing that his brothers had changed for the better since then. However, his plan for them was only just beginning, and it was too early to reveal himself. It would also be a sign of complete conversion from their evil ways to reveal the whole affair to their father, but it was clear from their account of the family that they were sticking to the false story that one of the brothers was missing, as they said, "one was gone." But it made his heart boil and he had to step back to hold back the tears. Having calmed down, he returned and took Simeon into custody, whom he ordered to tie up immediately in front of everyone. It is likely that Simeon (second in command after Reuben) was the most wicked of the company when they plotted against him, and had caused Joseph much pain and offense. Perhaps he did not seem particularly remorseful now, and he caused more trouble than the others - the superior's eyes stopped on him, his finger pointed at him, and the soldiers came up and bound him and led him away, making the others sad. He was to be imprisoned for a year (or the next time they were going to Egypt again) in a foreign country whose language he probably didn't know. What if his father didn't agree to let Benjamin go? - Then he would be imprisoned forever. Joseph could not provide him with special conditions compared to others, maintaining his image, but Simeon was quite capable of standing up for himself in case of need.
While all this was going on, the manager of Joseph's house was discreetly putting the money they had paid for the grain into the grain sacks of Joseph's brothers. Joseph, acting as a bad man, at the same time wanted to reassure his brothers at least something, and found no better way than to give them a surprise, which could not be solved by a simple man - in this world of theirs it hardly ever happened that someone returned the money for what they had sold, especially when relations were not good, and in Egypt they were treated badly, everything testified to it. At last he let them go, and they set out for home. On the road at a rest stop, someone opened one of the sacks to feed the animals and found their silver right among the grain. This puzzled them enormously, and in light of all the circumstances that had happened to them in the last few days, they could not be happy about the money. Others might have gloated a little, saying, "We may have been treated so badly, but they did not get the money..." But they did not seem to feel this joy, but were greatly embarrassed. When they arrived home, the story was the same for each of them - all the money they had paid for the grain was in their sacks. Again, their thoughts turned with questions to God - "what is it that He is doing to us?" - so they said among themselves. This was a very good indication of their condition, saying that they had begun to pay much more attention to God, associating Him with every event in their lives, not as they had before. He may not always personally do the things we ask Him about, but in this way we have a better chance of getting an answer, and of reaching a higher level of understanding of life and the universe....
Perhaps if there had been someone among the brothers with a more tenacious mind and keen observation, he might have been able to match the unnaturalness and naïveté of the official's behavior with this returned money, and estimate that Joseph's trail in Egypt should not be completely lost... But there were no such people at the time. It is possible that Joseph was giving the brothers a chance to discover him in this way, through exploratory thought, it was acceptable to him, would also be a good characteristic for the brothers. Was he playing such a sophisticated game, was it a purposeful act?
Jacob, having seen with his own eyes the evidence that something strange was indeed happening to his sons in Egypt, also saw it as a threat. He was told everything, how "the ruler of that land spoke harshly to them", how Simeon stayed there, and it upset him - "you have deprived me of my children - Joseph is gone, Simeon is gone, and you want to take Benjamin, all this is on me". This was his response to his request to let Benjamin go with them to Egypt next time, to show him to that chief to let Simeon go. They thought of turning around quickly, but their father forbade them to even think about it. So Simeon had to wait longer in prison until the grain they had brought ran out. Reuben tried to persuade his father to let Benjamin go with him on his own recognizance, but he chose the wrong way to guarantee his safety. He offered his two sons as a pledge, but such an offer could have gone to someone else, but not to Jacob, the quiet contemplative and lover of peace, though he had been through fire and water. To pay with the deaths of his children, and even his own grandchildren! - This was rather an insult to Jacob, but he did not reprimand Reuben. He probably realized later that he had been in a hurry and had come at it from the wrong side. So Jacob replied - "Benjamin will not go with you, he is the only one left after his brother... If a misfortune happens to him, you will bring my gray hair into the coffin with sorrow." Again, it was as if the father had set his other children on a lower bar than the children of Rachel, but they were no longer jealous, and they themselves realized something from their family-building experiences. They had indeed changed for the better. The bread they had brought was probably enough for a year or so. The next time the brothers met Joseph, he said that only two years of famine had passed.....
When the bread he had brought was finished. Jacob was again going to send his sons to Egypt, but it was not an easy task. His sons reminded him that they could not go without their younger brother, who had suddenly become a key figure. So Jacob had to face another difficult task. He had learned many lessons before, where he had learned to trust God and rely on His help. And now in his old age, when he was already 130 years old, he was again placed in a situation where relying on human or earthly forces alone could be wrong, and even criminal for him - for him who had experience in this. He might, on the basis of his age and respected position, have demanded the impossible, showing that he had become feeble-minded in his old age, capricious in this, demanding of men and of God - "how long can these trials go on!" or "leave me alone at last, let me go in peace." But having trusted God in these circumstances, having realized that people cannot control everything in the world, he thought, very rightly, that God, who had protected him before everywhere, would not leave him now. True, his faith might have been undermined by Joseph's disappearance and seeming death, but he had just managed to overcome that doubt. He took a risk, he let go of what he was inclined to grasp frantically and trusted once more in his heavenly Friend (and if he had not, it would have been unfriendly to Him, distrustful at the very least). Jacob had already had a moment of severe, even extreme trial in his nightly wrestling with God, and in his old age he confirmed his previous spiritual attainments in an equally severe situation where he was able to shift his problems onto others by becoming the head of a strong clan. This too was faith, this step, though it is not described by Paul in Hebrews 11 along with other similar cases . [128]
It also helped that Judah, the most authoritative of the sons, spoke to his father. Judah spoke confidently, and the influence of the Spirit from him broke through all Jacob's fears for Benjamin, dispelling his cowardly expectations. Judah saw with some upper vision that the task before them was not a difficult one, and his senses told him that their perplexities and problems must soon be dispelled, and that the situation in Egypt with the high official was unnatural and must be resolved. He did not swear success, he did not offer his children as collateral, as Reuben had done, but in the simplest words he allayed his father's fears - "Let him go with me, and we will rise and go, and we shall not die, but live... I am responsible for him, out of my hands you shall claim him"... And Joseph believed, Judah he could believe. He painted a picture of confidence and success that his father was able to trust. It is great when children strengthen their fathers, when they fulfill their best hopes... Judah even added some rebuke, not harsh, of course, but a more sensible one - "if we had not delayed, we would have gone twice already", which distracted the aged father a little more from his fears and sobered him up. They were in danger of starvation all together, and in case of failure only he and Benjamin were at risk, and it was necessary for the father not to lose sight of such a consideration - two against about seventy men (the families of the sons). This was the finishing touch of his recovery, of overcoming his despondency and depression by simple faith, by trusting in Providence, which required him to go against all circumstances and moods.
Sometimes there are discussions about the "role of personality in history," but choosing the right person to do many things is indeed very often the key to success. Here and now, it seems that only Judas could have reached his father's mind and heart; all others would have failed and made matters worse. Often moral qualities are important, e.g. only Joseph of the whole family was fit for the work he did in Egypt, and how often some special quality or combination of qualities is needed, without which many necessary things may go uncompleted in all the need of the time and the demand of the situation. The Bible indicates more than once that God is usually situated to act in crises only through a select people or group of people. Why? I think it is obvious that at any given time not everyone is truly ready to meet the challenges facing people, only a few have the full range of qualities to carry out a fine-tuned line of procedures or influences on the environment, they are a kind of catalysts for solving most of the problems of the moment. The rest are almost bound to fail or do things that they would rather not have started. Human resource departments, or whoever is doing it now, are far from always correctly assessing the complex of factors that create success in a given moment. When men who were faithful to God ruled, they asked God before they started battles about who should start them. About the times when people who were not set up to follow the rules and serve God ruled, He says - "they set up kings without Me, and princes without My knowledge[129] "... That is quite often both for a person and for a society there is a serious question to God - "who should take this post?" and "who should do this job?", "who should be at the head of research?" in order to achieve success and maximum efficiency. Regardless of the religion or atheistic views of the society - by choosing unsuccessful candidates, seemingly superior in education and even experience, they will lose out to those who are seriously seeking those who are truly equipped with the right abilities and vested with valid credentials for the time being. At another moment, on another case, on another call, it will be necessary to look for a different person, the former chosen person may turn out to be suitable only for the case for which he was put before. It is true that "personnel decides everything".
There was a special tool for inquiries to God in the time of Israel - on the garment of the high priest there were two stones - the Urim and the Thummim, which gave the answer - either the Urim shone on the right, meaning "yes", or the Thummim dimmed on the left, meaning "no". The questioner had to construct the questions sequentially, breaking them down into logical segments if the question was complex, and this allowed a lot of clarification by getting the answer directly from God. This, importantly, did not require a prophet, the very design of this accessory of the high priest's garments was prophetic in purpose. Though through the prophet it was all much easier and more convenient. In patriarchal times prophetic opportunities were present to many far more than is seen today, though it must be said that people did not abuse it at all (I mean they could have used it far more), while He would have wanted to communicate more closely with us. Though when people go far away from Him, He too can cut off communication and stop responding through the prophets and even the Urim and Thummim. I think I personally would use this connection too much, maybe that's why it's not given... Many would also abuse it instead of working with their head, also a big problem. We can't burden or "overload" God with too frequent and prolonged connects, but many would pry into Him with unhealthy attitudes. However, God has hardly limited people in prophetic abilities on purpose, it is people who have limited themselves and only their passions are to blame for the fact that the higher abilities turn out to be unclaimed and therefore undeveloped. Often those who deprived themselves of these abilities, in turn, out of malice, cut the wings of the next generation, forcibly "closing" their natural abilities....
Having completely reorganized himself in a matter of minutes, having cast off his despondency, Jacob now orders how best to pack for the journey, what gifts of Canaan's valuables to bring to the steward of Egypt's strategic reserves - to take honey, balsams and incense, nuts, and to return the money they had in their sacks. And he saw off his sons with the words "if I am destined to be childless", if suddenly Benjamin is not lucky enough to have children, "I will be childless". The fact that he humbled himself before the circumstances, which he could not influence, is good, but pessimism is not good for him here, it would be worth remembering the previous "living help", how many times God helped and protected him. But still his attitude is rather positive, sounding like "we will endure whatever happens" than "something bad will happen again".
The sons set out on the road again, and now they meet again with the official who had caused them so much trouble. Joseph, noticing from a distance that Benjamin was with them, told his steward to take them to his house to dine with him. When they were brought to the rich house of this fatal Egyptian nobleman, the brothers were afraid. They seemed to have done everything right, but who knows this man of great power who suspects everyone? They hastened to confess to the steward of the house the money they had found in their sacks for past purchases, for fear that they might be arrested and enslaved for non-payment. But he assured them that their money had been received long ago, and that the money they had found in the sacks was a gift from their God... This calmed them down, they realized that they would not be accused of anything right away, and a little later Simeon was also brought to them, and this calmed them down a lot, and the stress that had not let them go since the first time they came here subsided.
At noon Joseph arrived. The brothers welcomed him with the gifts they had prepared for him and again bowed down to the ground. Joseph did not care for this worship, he was not the kind of man who needed to necessarily see the submission of others, but now he saw the hand of God as what had been foretold to him long ago in his dreams was being fulfilled. His brothers bowed to him as a ruler, placing him far above themselves by such a bow. They themselves belonged to a house that could claim considerable respect and nobility, and the higher the weight of their bow. In answering the question about their father, they also placed him below Joseph, calling him his servant. In this way the father and their mothers were put below Joseph, as if they were bowing down to him. And how angry everyone was when they heard that dream about the sun, the moon, and the twelve stars.....
Joseph is not playing the bad boss - they have fulfilled his condition and now he simply asks them about their father. After answering his questions, they bowed to him again, again confirming the power of Providence. Joseph then allowed himself to look with both eyes at his younger brother, whom he had not seen for so many years, and to whom he was particularly attached. Previously, so as not to give himself away, he had avoided fixing his gaze on him-"is this your little brother of whom you spoke?" And who had caused so much trouble for everyone... He wished him divine blessings, and felt that his composure was leaving him, his face was no longer obeying him. So he left the room abruptly, letting his feelings and tears flow in a distant room. The others noticed this, but had no way of understanding the meaning of what was happening, because they could only understand it if they knew that their brother was in front of them. But he had changed in more than twenty years, and he was not dressed in his usual clothes, and he did not speak their language, there was an interpreter between them. Even if they recognized familiar features, the brothers could only think it was a coincidental resemblance, the same type of appearance, too improbable to penetrate their consciousness.
Then dinner began, the food was served, and there were three groups of people in the room. Each sat apart from the others, because of the different cultures and everything connected with them. The Egyptians, recently freed from the nomadic Hyksos, either hated the pastoralists or were still in the habit when segregation was introduced to reduce ethnic friction, and Joseph, who came from a similar tribe, had to sit separately, although his high position also had an impact. But there was no former enmity between the native Egyptians and the herdsmen; the people regarded it rather as a custom, and looked at the difference in each other's orders with all their eyes, wondering that the sons of Jacob were seated according to their seniority, not at random. But it was as if the strangers were also watching the Egyptians, marveling at the freer orders, and perhaps at the unfamiliar forms of certain things on the tables. Dishes of food were also served to the brothers from Joseph's table according to their seniority. The Bible notes, however, that Benjamin was given five times as much as any of his brothers. It might have been surprising how much the younger of the two was liked by this Egyptian ruler. Joseph was also checking the reaction of his brothers to the preference given to someone other than himself, to see if the former envy of the undeservedly fortunate favorite of fate would not manifest itself. But he did not notice anything of the sort, for the brothers had really changed: neither look, nor gesture, nor tone of voice showed any dislike for Benjamin, as they had once done for him.
As if Joseph had checked everything and more, he could have revealed himself to his brothers, but he decided not to hurry. It is not known whether everything had been planned beforehand, or whether it had occurred to him only now. But Joseph had one more check in store. Whether the brothers provided him with some more suspicion, I do not know, I do not see yet in what else they could "puncture" in front of him. Or did the timing just not seem right? More likely there was a reason why he set up another test for them. In some ways it was God's will that this last one, designed by Joseph, should serve as a test, like the ultimate tests of faith of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as well as Joseph himself. The brothers had done many bad things in their lives, and it was necessary for them to be tested. Usually people have no right to deliberately do such things to each other, and when such things happen, it is unforgivable before their neighbors, and is a sin before God. It can only be authorized by Himself, or by some special account between individuals. The brothers did not say a word of complaint against Joseph for the last trick, which could have damaged the minds of those who were not so strong in their nerves. But it was this inexplicability of the situation, the undeservedness of it, the fact that they had not been involved in a single thought in what they had been accused of, that was their last test. In the future they were to live a rather successful, prosperous, comfortable and cozy life, and it was wrong for them to enter such a life with untied knots from their past bad deeds. So God was really behind it, influencing their minds and consciences during their final trial. Though they were guilty of nothing of what was attributed to them, yet they still bore no punishment for their past deeds, for what they had done to Joseph and their father, which their father, who had suffered a calamity that did not exist, was still unaware of. They still carried it within them and could not repent to the end, because to repent of it meant also to confess to their father what they had done. It was clear from their own accounts that they still played out scenes of innocence before their father about Joseph's fate, even though every time they saw their father they saw his undying sadness. So Joseph had read everything, and by inspiration from above he found an adequate means of influencing his brothers who were lingering on the threshold of salvation.
After parting with them after dinner, he gave orders to the servant about the brothers. There was both good and not so good. They were loaded with bread as much as they had the ability to carry, and the money was again in their sacks. But in addition to this, Joseph instructed that his favorite silver cup be placed in Benjamin's sack... And then he sent pursuit after the brothers and accused them of insolent and lowly theft of a thing of great value. The steward of Joseph's house said that the stolen bowl was very valuable to his master, that he divined on it and in general was very attached to it. Those bewildered as to how such a thing could be thought of, signed that whoever dared to do such a thing was worthy of death, and the rest, if the cup was discovered, would be slaves. This threatened the death of Benjamin and great trouble to all the others, but Joseph's servant showed leniency, saying that he would take into slavery only the one who found the master's cup, and the rest were free. And it's clear who was found to have it... Everyone was just killed, crushed, smeared. They couldn't prove anything, everything around them was against them, the whole world was mocking them. Their family was doomed, by the spell they had cast on themselves, their children were deprived of their fathers, their wives of their husbands, their father, the guardian of truth and righteousness on earth, was doomed to fade away in great sadness, deprived of the last comfort in life. This was what they saw in their imagination. They could not understand or explain anything - how could all this happen? They should have checked their bags, but they were not allowed to go far, and could they have guessed the next surprise? Was Benjamin really so different from what they all knew him to be that he had stooped to stealing? No, it's not like that, something's not right.
In tattered clothes and feelings they returned to Joseph's house, but what were they to say? As they said themselves - "God has discovered our unrighteousness"... Joseph, coming out to them, again "turned on" the autocrat, satisfied with himself and his power over them - "How dare you? Did you not think that a man like me would surely guess?" Their strongest argument, that they had brought money that somehow didn't turn out to pay for the first purchase, was useless and their honesty played no part. He trolled them blackly, but waited for the right signal to end this tragicomedy, and finally calm down himself, and bring peace and happiness back to everyone. And the brothers show that the lessons of life were not in vain. From what had happened, they could be about to guess what had been faked with the bowl and who had set it up. Though at this moment, from grief and distress, their minds had not yet deduced it, the realization might soon dawn on their confused souls. But Joseph led them on a slightly different path, not letting them guess the set-up with the cup, not letting them realize that he was their brother who knew everything about them, all of which could be realized later, but he needed to reveal their dedication and humility, their confession of the wrong they had been guilty of before. And that's what they're saying when they said this - "God has found the unrighteousness of your servants." They say by this that there is a higher justice in what has happened to them, that it is retribution for something for which they have not yet received retribution and which they have not confessed to anyone until now.
Joseph then let them go home, but said he would keep Benjamin, which was totally unacceptable, and then Judah, who had vouchsafed his younger brother to his father, began to speak. His speech, full of the Spirit's influence, struck Joseph to the heart - although he believed that his brothers had become better, he himself had not expected such power, such revelation and openness of heart. Some time ago Judah had been able to persuade his father to let the younger one go with them, and the unthinkable had happened; his father had softened and put aside his fears. Now Judah spoke out of even greater despair, not believing, perhaps, that this cruel man would have mercy, but he could not help speaking, and he spoke from his whole soul all his concern and pain for his father, not feeling the power of his words, not believing that they would reach this pompous, snobbish nobleman, but each of them shook Joseph.... Now he could compare, and the brothers, if not now, then later, saw the similarity of the situations when Joseph had once begged them for leniency, but they had not taken pity on him and were ready to kill him at that moment, and now they themselves were in a similar situation, when they might not be listened to, and all their sufferings might be valued as nothing, and they themselves might be neglected and abandoned to the elements.
Judah told Joseph in detail all the problems of their family and father, his affection for Benjamin, his father's own words about his beloved wife's children, his fears - all this was news to Joseph about the events of the house after his disappearance. Judah in his account again sticks to the version of the loss of one of the brothers without mentioning their role in the affair, relaying everything in the words of the father as he saw the matter (and the father in turn spoke what he heard from his sons). Judah, of course, could have done even better - confessing that they were to blame for their father's trouble and their brother's disappearance, but that might have been unnecessary in this situation; this Egyptian was a stranger to them to confess long-standing matters. Joseph could not expect more from them, he had experienced them already prohibitively, and he himself could not hold back either. When Judah said that he could not see the trouble that would happen to their father if Benjamin did not return, and wished himself to take Benjamin's place, to go into slavery in his stead, only that his father might be well, what could not touch the Egyptian official broke Joseph. He shouted for all outsiders to leave the room and revealed himself to his brothers. At first he just wept and his tears prevented him from speaking, but barely able to catch his breath, he told his brothers in his native tongue - "I am Joseph, is my father still alive?"
The brothers, embarrassed by all their recent worries and problems, fell into a stupor at this point. The way things had been going so far, it was logical for them to expect a contemptuous "I don't care about your father, if he wants to see his son, let him come here himself" or something like that. And while that would have been very bad, it would have been in the flow of events, understandable and logical. So now they were confused and just stunned. They had once sold their brother with the inner question of how God's plans for Joseph's supremacy would be fulfilled if he were gone, if he were sold into slavery, and now they were suddenly seeing with their own eyes that the one they had so detested, despised and hated, was really the second man of a powerful country... And they bowed to him, calling their father his slave, depending on his moods. Joseph, seeing that they were firmly inhibited, began to stir them up, bringing them out of their shock - "come here, to me." And when they slowly approached Joseph and Judah, who was standing next to him, he repeated to them once again, enunciating each word - "Come here, to me.
"I am Joseph your brother, whom you sold into Egypt."
Watching them come back to reality, he began to comfort them, because for them, most likely dating someone they had once mistreated was hardly a celebration. Will he not continue to punish them in the same way? And he tells them the unprecedented, unlikely thing, that by doing him evil they have in some way done him good, because of which he is not angry with them or even offended. It was God, he says, who sent him here to preserve their lives. That if they had not sold their brother into slavery, there would have been no reason for the famine, nor for the migration to Egypt, Joseph did not say, and perhaps he did not even think about it. But he wanted to reassure them that they would not regard him as an enemy, or as an avenger who had offended them and was now dangerous. He wanted the hearts of his brothers, and he does everything for that. By this he does not want to tell them that it was not their fault, that there was no need to repent, especially since they were long past it, the mere sight of their still suffering father was enough for them. He says "do not grieve or regret," but he does not say "there is no need to repent." He presents it to them as a case where evil (or rather, because of evil, as a result of solving a problem) is followed by some good (although it does not justify the evil).
Sometimes religion is mocked because of such cases, when something useful or good comes out of evil by teaching lessons. These are proverbs such as "if there was no happiness, misfortune would have helped", and "for a beaten man you get two unbeaten men" and other similar ones. It is also biblical examples like the one just described or David's words - "before I suffered I was lost, but now I keep Your revelations". We can name many more, but it can seriously confuse someone who thinks too formally - "can't there be good without evil"? The Apostle Paul expressed this mockery of religion to the utmost in his criticism of some critics of Christianity who parodied Christian teaching - "Shall we not do evil that good may come out?" But for it to actually be so, for good to actually grow out of evil, you would need some other God, another Creation, and another reality altogether. By the way, the devil is not suitable for this role - he is not a god at all, i.e. he cannot and cannot create, he is only dissatisfied with the existing order and strives to remake or break it. And if after his evil something sometimes comes out better, it is only due to the force of goodness or grace acting on our world and counteracting evil, because someone restores what has been destroyed. In life, good does not grow directly from evil, but by means of lessons and reflections, from the fact that people learned by misfortune learn to avoid evil and because of the forces of restoration and healing of damage. Somehow such a state of affairs does not confirm the beneficial nature of evil.
The important thing is that people's minds are able to understand and appreciate good and goodness without having to face trouble and evil. To some extent this did become a problem after the fall when sin entered the world and began to blind and dumb people, but before that people's minds worked better and more fully. Even today's people don't all need a problem to appreciate the good. Sin was not necessary to appreciate the need for evasion. This may look unsubstantiated for now, but the thesis of the necessity of evil is no better substantiated.
He says, "two years of famine have passed, and now there are five more years of famine to come. In all that has happened to me and to you the hand of God is seen, "who sent me before you to preserve your life". In short, "it was not you who sent me here, but God." Now I am "father to Pharaoh" here, he is the one who put me in charge in all Egypt. So he reassured the brothers, and they finally believed in the reality of what was happening, and the former heaviness fell from their souls. He asked them to tell everything to their father, that he should come here to him with all of them as soon as possible. Then he hugged Benjamin and cried, having finally gotten the opportunity to do so. There were many hugs and conversations where their former differences were resolved and peace came. Not a single shadow of the past remained, not only in their relationship, but also within each of them, their past follies were over.
Rumors of Joseph's unusual experiences with some aliens spread quickly, and Pharaoh, who admired Joseph and was happy that his country had such a man, was glad that he had found his family. It's great when we feel good, but if what makes you feel good makes someone else feel good, then you have good friends, and that's even better. It's a shame if something breaks the harmony of relationships, and that there aren't enough good people. How would we increase their number?
From then on, Pharaoh himself took part in the gathering, and he ordered that not only supplies but also transportation for the resettlement be provided. He promised them the best of his country, and even added that they should not be sorry to throw away any things that were difficult to take with them, promising to supply them from himself. He literally began to regard Joseph's relatives as his intimates. Joseph might have been a little wary of these sentiments, for he knew that not all of the brothers were truly sensible people, no matter how Pharaoh might be disappointed afterward from too great expectations, for he did not seem to be aware of the history of Joseph's getting into Egypt. So after the arrival of the brothers, when Pharaoh gave them a reception at his palace, he instructed them what and how to tell Pharaoh about themselves and their profession, so as to be both in business and at the same time not to be too close to the court....
Joseph, by Pharaoh's order, gave them supplies and transportation, adding much of his own, so that they carried much more back to Canaan than they had intended to bring. At last they reached their father, and from the doorstep they gave him the good news - "Joseph is alive, and he is ruler over all Egypt!" At first, however, Jacob, who had grown accustomed to his grief, found it difficult to accept their news, so they had to tell him much about the whole story, including confessing their long-standing lie about Joseph's disappearance and what had really happened. But after the storm of Joseph's trickery that had shaken them, they were not afraid to confess to their father, especially when everything was suddenly resolved so favorably. In principle, what Joseph arranged for them was very natural, in order to help them to evaluate things more sensibly with such a shock therapy (but I would not advise anyone to arrange such a thing for his neighbor, not having special rights and powers), to help them to get rid of fear of man, to give place to the real fear, which is the only worthy thing to have - the fear of God. And, by the way, if they had overcome their own fear of confessing to their father about Joseph's disappearance, he would not have had to put the brothers through this ordeal....
The fear of God. Some are confused, some are outraged by this expression, but usually in vain. Because it does not mean exactly what they perceive it to mean, missing its real meaning. The point is that many people perceive only one summand. There are hardly any languages where there is a separate word for every phenomenon, and Russian is no exception. Therefore, many things are denoted comprehensively, not by one word, but by two, if not even more (so many of today's words consist of two or more words of the ancient language, at least this very "today"). Other things have to be stated in whole paragraphs for the other person to understand what we are talking about. And usually in such word combinations each individual word can change its basic meaning under the influence of another word, which modifies it. For example, on wind instruments, if you close one hole, you will hear one pitch, and if you close the other hole, you will hear a different note. But if you close both holes at the same time, you will often get a third note, which is not sounded on either of the two holes separately. So what is left of the concept of "fear" in this expression is not fear itself, not of God, not of His power, not of destruction for sin, but something else - the rejection of things that displease God. It is also the fear of things that might separate one from God, just as a child does not want his mother to turn away from him because she does not like his behavior, lest she be disappointed, angry, or reject him. If something is unpleasant to him, foreign to him, it is unpleasant and foreign to you as well. Are you avoiding contamination or defilement? - this could be called "fear of defilement," and it would be a close analog to "fear of God." Is fear of uncleanness a fear for us? I don't think so, although there are so-called psychologists who declare it to be the same fear that one fears death or threats of physical violence. Yes, an ordinary fear, which is for one's life, in relation to God may well be, but it is simply fear, even if it is of God. But it is not God's fear, but an ordinary fear.
There is another good analogy that describes the other side of this fear of God. I think many people have stood next to a moving train. How does it make you feel? For me, it is the thrill of power multiplied by speed. Yes, there is some fear in it, when the consciousness draws what this power could do to someone who gets in its way. However, there is no usual fear, unless a person has very weak nerves, in which case he can be really afraid, but this is another case. This is also a very close analogy of the fear of God. Therefore, when you read in the Bible the expression about "the righteous who fear God", try to imagine their feelings in the light of the above-mentioned, and not the trembling for their lives....
Jacob was a righteous man, but not the kind of "righteous" man who pokes everyone in the face with rules and regulations, demanding compliance with everything, expressing constant displeasure at any violation, and looking forward to the ones yet to come. This is absolutely not the kind of religion God wanted to have on earth. Such a "religion" makes rules out of His rules, but puts them on completely foreign ground - in this "religion" man can only rejoice when he has complied with everything, not before. Or, even worse, when he has caught everyone in violation. Since people are imperfect, there will always be a reason for dissatisfaction of the "older", and there will never run out of reasons to annoy the "younger". And the "juniors" take out their emotions on those like them, who got caught or framed. But the path of endless demands is a false path. Instead, a person should be encouraged (not by gifts and benefits, of course, but simply by kindness and joy), so that the incentive and interest in life and improvement would not be extinguished in him. It is possible to demand and sometimes it is very necessary, but pickiness in religion is introduced by the evil one. It is more difficult way, pickiness is easier, but otherwise it is impossible. Pickiness is born from scarcity of soul, mind, spirituality ...
Jacob may have marveled at the story, he may have appreciated what was going on between the children and within them, but there was nothing to be upset about now; they had straightened their ways, they had seriously changed. He had seen changes for the better for a long time, and now he saw the confirmation of that. He didn't scold or scold anyone, especially since it wasn't him who had caught them in a bad deed, but they had confessed it themselves. True, they had confessed when it had become impossible to hide the past any further, but that would have been bad if they hadn't been reborn by then. He understood them, though he himself was not so guilty, but at least he understood how difficult it was for them to confess, when he himself appeared inconsolable before them because of the loss of Joseph, and by this he showed partly that he did not appreciate them. He was partly to blame for holding them back from confessing... And in encouraging them, he cheered them up and cried out, "Enough! (I think the implication here was "stop being sad") Joseph is still alive! I'm going to go and see him before he dies!". I know from childhood experience how joyful it is for children, how powerful it is to see their parents rise from illness or despondency. My mother was in poor health because of a series of injuries, we were used to it and as if everything was normal, but one day she went to the south to visit her brother and after a month she came back a completely different person - the Sochi fruits had worked a miracle on her, although not for long. We looked at her with delight and felt that she had become what she was in our dreams about her. We jumped into her arms with a sprint, and she held my sister and me with ease. It was an unforgettable sensation... The sons of Jacob saw their father straightened up and on his feet, as he had been long ago, when there were no troubles in their lives, and he was a hero and a model for them. For parents, they say, children are forever small (true in some ways), but it is also a dream for children to see their parents always healthy and full of vigor, as in their childhood. As time goes by, this is less and less often seen, but if we knew how to keep healthy, which is not so difficult, the rules are simple, but somehow not known to everyone, then strength and beauty would not leave old people for good or far away...
Relocation to Egypt
They gathered themselves together, put their things in the chariots sent for them by Pharaoh and Joseph, settled the children or those who were weaker, and set out, but not yet to their new home. First they came to Beersheba, where there was one of the altars for the worship of the Being from the days of Abraham. And there Jacob offered sacrifices along with a request for help and direction and guidance. Maybe not everyone thought about it, but at least Jacob thought about how long they were going there for. He sensed that he didn't have long to go, he was proving to be not as strong as his fathers. But if the famine lasts for another five years, then after that it is as if they can go back to Canaan, because this is the land where they will live, as God willed them. And he can live for five years, but for some reason God no longer requires them to stay in this land of wandering all the time. On the contrary, when God appears to Jacob in a dream, He tells him not to be afraid to go to another country, thus testifying that his family should stay there. In principle, he knew from Abraham the timetable of events, that his descendants would be "strangers in a strange land," and that there was a clearly marked period of four hundred years before his people would acquire the promised land, and it was time to go to that "strange land." God promises him that He Himself will bring him back, but at the same time tells him that he will die in Egypt, and his favorite son will shut his eyes. That is, "I will bring you out" means "I will bring out your descendants," who will carry his body with them.
More than once or twice people have wondered how to distinguish between the direct and figurative expressions of the Bible, when something is meant literally and when it is meant figuratively or indirectly and symbolically. The task is not an easy one, and I'm not sure I know the question completely myself. But something seems to me that the matter is not so difficult. The Bible contains above all the history of the lives of individuals and nations. Therein lies the main meaning of everything, accompanied by the comments of the prophets or God. Everything there is on the surface, you just have to read carefully. Where there are second layers of meaning, one can see from further explanations, where appropriate descriptions are given, that this or that refers to the Messiah. And there are prophecies, some of which are given in the simplest words and meanings, while others are given in symbols which are not easy to understand. But symbols are not alien to us, they are fundamentally simple as well, we are just not used to working with them.
First of all, it is worth to understand one thing about language and speech as a means of communication and information transfer - words use a certain code, which designates not just one object, but binds (or can bind) together different layers of meanings, which has a sign denoted by this word. For example, Adam gave names to animals - he named them according to some characteristic for them (God at their creation put into their character and nature some design-formula-matrix). The name of the animal reflected this characteristic, which was already embodied in something already existing... That is, the names of animals were secondary, following some patterns already existing in other spheres. This is the simplest example of why it is difficult to separate simple and clear things of the world from images, which should also be operated. Many of us have problems with non-letter meanings because, as a rule, quite often human development was not encouraged, but rather suppressed, and even in development we were sometimes cut off from volumetric things, allowing us to expand in a limited way, in a plane, figuratively speaking. Christ, being on the Earth, very often used unqualified expressions, confusing His disciples and other good people, but it was not for the sake of confusion, but for the sake of human development. Although He came close to people and spoke seemingly simple words, but at the same time He Himself pulled people up to His level. The riddles of the wise men, "dark speeches" and ambiguities of ways to express a thought are meant to develop man, to pull him up to the level of heaven, and not vice versa, so that heaven would adapt to our abilities, which are lowered by evil. Solomon writes that sages are characterized by riddles - and it is impossible otherwise, otherwise people will weaken completely. Instead of volume there will be flat, instead of comprehension there will be repetition of another's. Reading meanings is no more difficult than reading words, you just need to expand the area where you need to read the signs of meanings. As one comprehends this high-level literacy, reading symbols becomes almost as easy as reading alphabetic text. You can see from Joseph's example of how he interprets dreams twice with ease and without error.
But not only dreams are filled with symbolism with some meaning, so are prophecies. They use the same alphabet - the symbolism of the things of our world. Not everyone is given to be a prophet, to see in symbols or directly the destinies of individuals and whole countries, but everyone else could be involved in them too, understanding them or trying to understand the meaning of what is revealed. It is difficult, but it is the vocation of man. "Oh, if only everyone in the people of the Creature were prophets!", Moses exclaimed when his assistant wanted to forbid the prophecy of two men who had not joined the other seventy[130] , chosen to help Moses by remaining in the camp.
As they approached Egypt, Jacob sent Judah ahead to bring Joseph to meet them, and with him they went to their place of residence. However, the meeting took place in Goshen, the region to which they were going. They had been given guides, and now Joseph himself arrived. The meeting of father and son took place, the dreams of two people bound to each other by friendship, kinship and the memory of other loved ones, more compatible than other relatives. Jacob said - "now it is okay to die when I see that you are still alive." The text literally says it a little differently, but it sounds that way to me for some reason. But he was in no hurry to die, he lived for seventeen more years, happy and forgetting all his former fears, worries about his children and suffering because of Joseph.
Israel in Egypt
Living in favorable mode
Having met and given his relatives a place to live, Joseph got ready to go to Pharaoh. He realized that court life had its subtleties, and it would be a good idea to introduce some of his brothers to Pharaoh so that they could be fitted in. Not only are the benefits of proximity to power important, but also how his tribe can benefit this country he serves. What is interesting is the instruction he, as an experienced courtier, gives to his brothers who have just arrived in a country where social life was at least an order of magnitude more complicated than life in Canaan. He tells them to present themselves as herdsmen, which they were, though they had experience in farming. However, the agriculture of Egypt had its own peculiarities, and the pastoralism of Egypt also had its own problems. After the invasion of the Hyksos (sometimes it seems that it was just his time, Egypt was ruled by a cattle-herding people, alien to the Egyptians) a certain complex of problems was formed - for the Egyptians still any sheep herder and cattle breeder was, as the Bible notes "an abomination". Even though people had animals and someone had to take care of them, few people seem to have volunteered to be shepherds, not wanting to become a pariah. And the livestock industry of the country was clearly in trouble because of this prejudice of society, and there was nothing anyone could do about it. Joseph envisioned taking these positions, which could untie the current problems with the care of livestock, and on the other hand put skillful people in places where they could benefit more than just themselves. Being a privileged official with almost unlimited powers, he could place his brothers in any possible places, even create some bread-and-butter positions for them from scratch, but he does not take such steps, does not even think of making them rich idlers living at the expense of others, does not push anyone away from the trough for the sake of his relatives. He only puts them to work, but not to money and power.
Also, this business that he is fitting them into coincides with the fact that the pasture land and the cattle are just concentrated where they have come - the land of Gesem, the Nile delta. Pharaoh called it "the best land in Egypt," he lives somewhere nearby too, and this is where they will live and work without going far from home. There is plenty of grass here, which is convenient for animal husbandry. In the events that follow, we can see that when Moses went to Pharaoh to negotiate for his people, these trips back and forth did not take long. Joseph is going to speak to Pharaoh about their plight, and wants his words to match what the brothers themselves will then say. Pharaoh may perceive them as Joseph himself, as very good and trustworthy people, but Joseph doesn't want Pharaoh to be disappointed later on, that would cause unnecessary problems. It is important that the brothers declare that they have come to live, that is just for a while in these parts, this would leave them free to leave Egypt when they see fit to do so. The fact that they would be herding cattle, which would make them a nuisance to the Egyptians, should protect them from unnecessary contact with paganism.
Then Joseph came to Pharaoh, bringing with him five of his brothers, and introduced them to him. Everything went as Joseph had anticipated and prepared the brothers for, so that something unnecessary would not interfere with their settling in here. Pharaoh really wanted to have the best care for the flocks and these coming kinsmen of Joseph's were just right for that purpose. After the brothers, Joseph also brought his father to Pharaoh, who made a great impression on Pharaoh. He asked Jacob about his age, and he spoke of his one hundred and thirty years as being a far cry from what his ancestors had been - "my days are short and miserable". Jacob really felt that he did not have long to live, not like Isaac, who began to prepare for death many years before his actual time. Jacob had only seventeen years to live, the effect of the sorrows and grief he had experienced because of his sons who had hidden from him the real fate of his favorite son. Could he not indulge in grief so much? - Perhaps he could have, and even should have, but this does not lessen the guilt of his sons. In addition to the trouble with Joseph, he had been treated unkindly by his father-in-law for many years, and had seen trouble between his wives, which was no joy either. And almost all of this was the consequences of a wrong deed when he had deceived his father. It was all the more bad for him that he himself was not inclined to deceive, the greater his responsibility. If he had been really a deceiver (then his patriarchate would have been out of the question) by nature, by character, his retribution would have been more direct and open, probably not so long, but from him "to whom more is given, more is asked" - since he had claimed to be the patriarch of righteousness and the servant of God, he had to live up to it. He was not in sin as its author, nor did he conceive the way of deceit, but he was an accomplice. He was drawn in, as Eve and Adam were drawn in, but his responsibility was made heavier
The children's character problems were not punishment for weakness, they were consequences in the chain of consequences of his crime and payback. It is clear that it was probably impossible for him to avoid the trap of his father-in-law's marriage to both sisters, but why take more servant wives? It was hard not to give in to Rachel, who had to "open an account" at any cost, she practically forced him to marry her maid, but when Leah, who already had four children, began to do the same, he should have stopped and said "No". The question, "Where do you want so many?" came to mind, but Jacob did not ask it, only waved his hand. Common sense should have made him tell Leah that her wish made no sense, that Rachel did it out of desperation because her sister already had four children and she had none, and that her following Rachel's example was simply harmful (despite the delicacy of their relationship...). He realized all this afterwards, of course, but now had to bear all the consequences in the characters of the children who were affected by all these things. One joy that at least a lot of things were realized and healed afterwards. But God had to spend time and energy on things that could have been saved and dealt with much more important things. The development of God's work on Earth was slowed down by the necessity of internal works, elimination of defects and distortions inside instead of expanding the work outside.
After speaking to Pharaoh, Jacob blessed him, the king of a great country. Whether this was a simple wish for blessings, or whether it left a mark on Pharaoh's fate and life with his country, I cannot judge. But it raised no objection to Pharaoh, who, like so many kings of any time, may have been sensitive to a breach of his honor, imaginary or real. But it is usual for men to feel one another, who is the greater or stronger, whether in physical strength, mental or spiritual. It is not for nothing that the apostle Paul remarked a thousand and fifty years later that "without any objection the lesser is blessed by the greater." Pharaoh felt honored to see the heir to the line of great men of the past, whose number of generations in the same historical time is much less than that of the vast majority of people of his time just because of the longer life span. Before him was a "dinosaur", to speak in modern slang, a man of the past legendary times, the heir of those who in their time had already been deified, just due to their great physical and spiritual strength, skills and perfection. And this descendant of giants complains that he has already become shallow ...
The last days of Jacob
For seventeen more years Jacob lived in Egypt, surrounded by peace and prosperity. Feeling that he had not long to live, he called Joseph for an important conversation, for which he gathered his strength and sat down to talk about what was important to him in a position befitting the occasion. He asked Joseph to place his hand on his leg as he sat, on the top of his thigh, as Abraham had once conjured a servant in the same way, and asked, before stipulating "if thou art disposed to me," that he would not leave him in Egypt, nor bury him here when he died. Though he had lived a long time in Egypt, Canaan was his homeland and he was drawn there. He specified the place where he was to be buried, where he wanted to lie, although to many people today such a wish does not seem understandable. But people originally had information that the dead would come back to life in due time for judgment, for retribution or reward, so the place where they would wait for that to happen somehow had emotional content. Desecrating graves was a very bad thing, and this was not a prejudice, but comes from the original times. It is clear that it is not difficult for God to collect the necessary molecules from anywhere to restore from the parameters stored in His registers any person who was eaten, burned, blown up or whose graves were vandalized, but there is a romance in a resting place for the departed. Even though the dead, as it is written in Solomon, "know nothing," neither do they "feel" nor "have any part in anything that is done under the sun," yet while they are alive they have their sense of it, and as they gradually withdraw in dying, they feel it especially until the last impulse in the nervous system is extinguished, and with this sense they will rise when the time comes... The prophet Balaam once said this - "let my soul die the death of a righteous man," and these are not mere words. They go into a peace comparable to what one thinks of as nirvana. This peace is present in the lives of those who have a direct relationship with God, and even in their death.
Joseph promised to do according to his father's word. Jacob asked and swore, and Joseph confirmed his promise with an oath. Receiving the assurance, even though he had no doubts about his son's faithfulness, Jacob leaned back on his bed reassuredly. He knew that sooner or later the Jews would leave Egypt, but he did not want to linger here for hundreds of years, but to be carried home at once, and to have his favorite son do it personally, without delay.
With this expression "leaned on the pillow", on the top of the bed, there is an interesting distortion in the Synodal Russian translation, which sometimes confuses some attentive people. However, apart from the error, it contains nothing special. The translators translated the expression "bowed down" as "bowed on the top of the bed", which causes bewilderment - why, what was there? The imagination draws some pagan symbols, to which the patriarch allegedly bowed, but still it is not difficult to see here a simple movement of transition from sitting to lying down after a difficult effort for an old man. But the story of the "bowing" is not over; in the letter to the Hebrews this place turns out to be "bowing on the top of his rod". However, James did not actually "bow" to any objects, but only lay down in the first case, and in the second case other translations (in the Synodal also should have added the italicized word "leaning on the top of his rod") indicate a bow to God, made with the support on his rod, on the top of the rod, of course, since rods are usually held by the upper part when leaning on them. It is true that in the book of Genesis itself in the description of the blessing of Joseph's sons or all his sons in the next chapter nothing is said about the staff, in both cases Jacob "bows" on the bed, returning to a lying position, but about the staff (and bowing) could have reached the oral tradition of the Jews, or again here is an error.
The "appropriation" of Ephraim and Manasseh
Jacob was nearing his end, and Joseph, hearing that his father was weaker than ever, decided not to put off one thing - he wanted his father to bless his sons. So he came to him and took his sons with him. Someone was constantly tending to the patriarch of the family, and Jacob was told that Joseph had come to him. The man gathered his strength and sat up on his bed. He already had something to say to his son, and when Joseph and his sons came in to see him, he told him of the blessing from the Almighty, who had promised him numerous offspring. And he went straight to his idea of promoting Joseph's sons to the status of his own, from grandsons to sons. On their mother's side they belonged to the highest priestly class in Egypt, and Jacob felt that they might be tempted to choose their fortunes in Egypt with the prospect of being at the very top. He told him that "these your children will be mine" like the other twelve, and the new ones Joseph would have after them would be considered his. Such an elevation of status was probably never practiced anywhere else, but now Jacob felt it was important and necessary. Ephraim and Manasseh were becoming from nephews to brothers to the other heads of families, princes among the princes of Israel. Joseph, who wanted a blessing for his sons, received quite a surprise. Symbolically, being the father and educator of Manasseh and Ephraim, it is as if he, together with them, also acquired a higher status of elder among the other sons, similar to that of Jacob himself. To some extent, of course, but for those who like to measure status, this would have been an extremely valuable gift, allowing them to regard the others as inferior to themselves. Jacob added to this that Rachel had left him too soon, and he wanted to compensate for her loss with this acquisition.
Then Jacob looked closer and noticed that Joseph was not alone, but since he couldn't see very well, he asked who was with him. When he heard that they were Joseph's children, he said, "Bring them to me and I will bless them. Then he hugged his grandchildren, who were now sons, and said to Joseph - "I never hoped to see you again, but now I see your children"... Happiness.
Then Joseph took them away from their father and put them in order of precedence, Manasseh to his father's right hand and Ephraim to his left. He brought them close again, but the father did not behave according to the plan. He crossed his hands, placing the right hand on Ephraim's head and the left on Manasseh's. In this he showed sensitivity to the voice of God, not like his father, who at one time relaxed and encouraged his wife to act hastily, which in turn involved Jacob in an unhealthy venture. Also, Isaac was shortsighted when he thought that there could be only one blessing, and Jacob now found a separate one for each one. It is true that of Isaac's sons, indeed, only one son was worthy of it, but still Isaac's mindset of a single blessing served as an unnecessary cause for conflict with Esau. If he had blessed Esau alone, Jacob would have gotten nothing at all, and his requests would have gone unanswered - however, this is all by human consideration if things had gone without God's plans and will; God's intervention could have changed the situation with both Esau and Jacob, reducing Isaac's inspiration for Esau and filling him with unexpected inspiration for the younger. Jacob had drawn the necessary conclusions from his father's weaknesses and now knew from revelations from above that Ephraim's destiny was bringing him ahead of his older brother, and unconstrained by custom, blessed the younger as the elder, retrospectively setting an example of how his father should have acted as well. This action of his father seemed completely wrong to Joseph, and he even tried to shift his father's hands "properly", but he stopped Joseph's efforts - "I know, my son, I know" what I was doing, and told him that the younger would overtake the older. Joseph should have realized this, he himself had become the chief, being second in seniority from the end, and he did not deceive anyone or make the slightest effort to do so....
Then Jacob added something else to the gifts he had already made, saying that he was giving Joseph ownership of the land he said he had taken by force of arms in Canaan. This story was unclear to me, there is no description of Jacob's military actions in the Genesis story, except in the case of Shechem. However, the city of Sychar, mentioned by John in his Gospel as the site of the very plot given by Jacob to Joseph, is exactly where old Shechem was, which Jacob, according to the rules of olden times, should have considered his own after the city was ravaged by Simeon and Levi for his sister. Abraham and his descendants were commanded to wander through Canaan until the time, not to put down roots in one place, but this did not deprive them of the right to have personal possessions - so it was with Abraham's Bathsheba in the neighborhood of Gerar, the burial-place near Hebron, bought again by Abraham, and now Joseph inherits a tract of land from his father.
The Song of Jacob
It is not known how much time elapsed after the conversation with Joseph and the blessing of him and his sons, but probably not much. Jacob called all his sons to him to say goodbye to them everything that was on his heart, to summarize the results of his life and his personal successes and failures in building his house, in bringing up his sons, bringing them to the Way. It was also his advice to his children, hints on what he should work on to perfect what he had started or to correct a wrong situation. He had a lot on his mind, which he asked to express in an inspired speech, and all this was supported by revelations from God, who had indeed never left him until now, although He did not seem to interfere directly in the routine of life. In this respect, Jacob is a hero-father, who, out of the heap of children he inherited from four very diverse, to put it mildly, women, managed to forge something worthwhile, though not immediately and not soon enough. Natural inclinations and not the best upbringing from spiritually undeveloped maids, who did not have the best influence on their own and on other people's children, confused the company of teenagers, who walked sometimes dangerous roads. But his efforts eventually bore fruit and his sons (although it is hard to say for sure about all of them) changed completely or very much.
All this, revealed to him by God, overwhelmed Jacob, and he called them to express to them all that concerned him, to share the revelation both with those to whom it was intended, and with all to whom the record of divine works was accessible. Probably anyone can observe that such passages, where one is under such an influence, are always expressed in some sublime syllable, which retains its peculiar sound in all translations. Hence many call such inspired speeches in the Bible songs - the song[131] of Jacob, the song of Moses, the song of Moses and the Lamb, and other similar instances.
Gather yourselves together, and I will declare to you what will happen to you in the days to come.
Come together and listen, sons of Jacob.
Listen to Israel your father
Then he addresses each of them separately, giving their characteristics, brief, but describing their achievements or weaknesses. To the firstborn Reuben he says that he will no longer be first among his brothers, because of the time in his life when he let his passions lead him astray by defiling his own father's bed. All sins are forgiven to men if they are willing to be cleansed from them, but the consequences of them cannot always be removed in this life, there are some things that leave indelible marks and scars. He especially expressed his indignation against Simeon and Levi, whose cruelty had apparently not been completely eliminated even at this time, or rather they had not fully realized the depth of their wrongdoing and still needed more knowledge of themselves as well as of their divine attributes. Cruelty and hardness as qualities of character are not necessary qualities of God's followers, although many people sometimes think that it is possible or even necessary to act cruelly with some categories of people just for the sake of God, but it is a big mistake. To be tough situationally and to have toughness as a character trait are very different things. Self-will in these things is unacceptable. God created this nation to spread the knowledge of Himself and His indignation at the excessive cruelty of those who claim to be His followers already says that their character must be different. Yes, God commanded war on one occasion or another, but even David, seemingly the closest to Himself and the most beloved man, was restrained from glory, lest the temple which David wished to build should become associated with his name precisely because of David's military successes[132] . God had special hopes for Solomon to build the temple, and He specifically notes that Solomon would be a man of peace, whose very name means "peace."
Simeon and Levi brothers - instruments of cruelty their swords.
Let not my soul enter into their council.
and to their assembly let not my glory be added.
Cursed is their anger, for it is cruel.
and their fury, because it is fierce.
He promises to scatter them in the future, and when the Jews settled in Canaan, the tribe of Simeon was inside the domain of Judah with no separate domain, and the Levites were also not given a domain for their tribe, instead they were given cities with small plots of fields throughout Israel, so they did not have their own land to farm like all the other tribes.
But as soon as he turns his gaze to his next son, he begins to pour out completely different words, not bitterness and censure, but happiness, contentment and praise, pride in a son who has reached the heights.
Judah - you shall be praised by your brothers.....
The young lion Judah of prey, my son, rises ...
The scepter shall not depart from Judah ... until the Reconciler comes....
Here the prophetic eye of James marks the presence of the Messiah, who will come specifically through the descendants of Judah. No clear sign of the One who would save the world had been given to anyone before, only a promise, and this is the first announcement of Him, the first indication of through whom He would come into the world, at the dawn of the appearance of the people whom God had planned precisely to provide for His appearance in our world, providing for the Messiah some environment in which He could live and act, unfolding His work of providing for the Salvation of mankind.
Jacob touches each of his sons, and the others, except Dan, are shown to be quite prosperous and blessed, at least successful. Dan, however, causes his father concern that his name, meaning "judgment" or "judge," is too pronounced in his son. Judgment in itself should not be a problem, because if judgment is sound and right, no one can be harmed by it; such judgment is good for all. However, the "judge" may be seized by the function itself, and he becomes infatuated with it, becoming not an equal among equals, but only an overseer, seized by the passion to find fault and to nag. From such a prospect James asks for God's protection, because it can destroy so many good things in any society. "Judge not and you will not be judged" or "lest you yourselves be judged" - if social interaction instead of mutual help (otherwise cooperation between people loses its meaning) begins to look for faults, real or imaginary, then unity is out of the question, and society will not be able to fulfill its mission. Of course, it is necessary to fight against shortcomings, if they exist, and this is the other side of the matter, but picking on and deliberately looking for shortcomings is a distortion that cannot help against shortcomings, but on the contrary, it only multiplies the problems of society and gives rise to new shortcomings.
Finally James comes to Joseph and, as with Judah, he cannot do with brief words. He describes his life and the trials he endured with honor - the anger of his brothers against him, the misfortune of his life, the loss of his gains in Potiphar's house, and yet "his bow remained firm and the muscles of his arms strong. Few can withstand such pressure from their environment, but with such an example, many in similar disadvantage could hold on more firmly and not allow themselves to upset Providence by dropping their arms. The first is usually always the hardest, while the others have already seen the example, have the path laid out or at least mapped out, and know what is at the end of it. James points out the reason and source of such strength of his beloved son - the connection with the Strong One, with his God. If one is determined to hold firmly to what he is already holding on to, who can break it? This, in fact, is faith - a state of mind and soul directed toward a particular course of action or holding on to a desired picture. It is a choice we make, from which then flows not only a person's actions, but even feelings and approaches to things. Those blessings that Jacob calls on Joseph's head belong to any such person who is victorious first of all within himself, and after that he becomes victorious in the external world as well.
The youngest, Benjamin, was given a word with a double meaning, both positive and not so positive - a "ravenous wolf" that does not go without prey. In the near future this tribe almost disappeared precisely because of its predatory nature, and if there were more principled people in the leadership of Israel, it would have disappeared altogether. However, the fiery Paul, who never tired of looking for "prey", came out of the same tribe - the strongest missionary, who did perhaps more than all the other apostles put together, not only founding many churches in the Greek-speaking world, but also advancing the theoretical provisions of Christianity.
Jacob's death and funeral
When he had finished blessing his sons, Jacob continued his conversation on a less lofty subject, but one that was of great importance to him. The upsurge of his spirit and the burst of his last creativity before his family, which he had spent so many years assembling like a mosaic and nurturing every good sprout, had cost him dearly. His health was on the verge of collapse, his energy reserves were incomparably less than in previous years, so this burst of energy had exhausted his reserves. As his speech came to an end, he felt that his strength was leaving him and these were his last moments. He calmly willed his children to bury him with his fathers in their grave in the cave that Abraham had bought for Sarah and where Abraham himself, Isaac and Rebekah, and Leah now also lay. And having expressed his last wish, he lay down on his bed, about to rest from the accumulated fatigue of the last few minutes, relaxed quietly, sighed, and life left him. No agony, no agony, no pain - the energy drained out of his whole body at once, evenly. The bodies of these people did not accumulate diseases due to moderation and strong heredity. But even physically weak people could have such care if they had peace and tranquility in their souls, creating balance on the physical level as well, confident that God is favorable to them, that they have a future, and that there is nothing that hangs over their souls as an unrepentant and unexpressed burden before God, or as a sore wound in their memories. Such people not only have confidence and peace, but they are accompanied by the presence of God. Almost in the same way my father was leaving, although he had been ill for many years and debilitated by illness. But he was delighted that he was loved by God, that he was going home, and nothing clouded his peace of mind. His last easy exhalation amazed the doctors and nurses, because no one else in that hospital had ever died like that - usually lung patients leave life in their own hard way. That peace, which is characteristic of anyone intimately acquainted with God, can neutralize the most serious illnesses and make passing away easy.
The idea is that every healthy person should die healthy, no matter how strange it may sound. Everyone is probably familiar with the derisive "who does not smoke and does not drink, he will die healthy" - but if only those who repeat it knew the difference in death of a sick and healthy, especially in spirit, person. In a sick person, the first organ or organs that die make the rest of the organism suffer quite severely or unpleasantly, creating different effects, from external convulsions or agony to the sensations of spreading through the body or impending emptiness and cold[133] . "Healthy" death, on the other hand, has no agony or other negative feelings, so this alone should make people realize that the health of the body and soul are objects of supreme value and primary goals for any reasonable person. Many people appreciate immortality and believe that it can be somehow achieved in one way or another, and I quite agree with them and appreciate it, but God's sentence "from dust you were taken, and you will return to dust" cannot be outsmarted or circumvented without His help, except to delay this moment... The easiest way to become immortal is to live until the Second Coming, and, of course, to be on the side that meets the Son of God as a friend. In principle, the majority of those who live now have a good chance of doing so... You say that many people have already set the time of the end? Yes, but that doesn't guarantee that it won't happen. Moreover, I do not calculate or assign any dates, the end will become obvious enough in due time. When we look at the books of Daniel and Revelation, much will become clearer.
And a little more about the pleasures of our age - those pleasures that cause problems for the organism (and there are those, and there are many of them, that do not cause disease or destruction) will sooner or later create conditions in which the organism will no longer be able to enjoy them. Alcohol will no longer be needed for pleasure, but to feel normal at least a little - and it is no longer a pleasure, but sheer misery. It is the same with smoking and heavier substances - all such pleasures lose their power over time, taking away health and the ability to enjoy them. It was a kind of discovery for me that the greatest pleasure is health. Many people can probably remember from their childhood that even just being is a great pleasure... If it weren't for excessive sweets, or even worse, we might not lose the ability to enjoy life itself without additional stimulants.
Joseph, when he saw his father dead, did not hold back his tears, great was their affection, also they shared the same feelings, conviction and knowledge, and even impressions of God and all that is connected with Him, it was a real knowledge of God. Their bond was not only that of fathers and children, but also that of teacher and pupil, it was through learning from his father that he did not become confused when he was in bondage, and without these lessons he would hardly have had a chance of enduring the hard times. After saying goodbye to his father, he subjected his body to embalming procedures in which the Egyptians were experts. After the long embalming procedures, which took forty days, all of Egypt spent another seventy days in mourning for this remarkable person whom the country had the honor of hosting. This was the decision of Pharaoh, who was impressed by his meeting with Jacob, and by this he paid tribute to the representative of the ancient clans and one of the founders of the sacred nation. From Joseph he could learn much about the aims and vocation of their family, as well as their religion and faith. The years of famine had long since passed, but the country had survived and escaped many calamities, and there seems to have been little loss of life even among the common people. Moreover, among the surrounding nations many had survived on account of the supplies in Egypt. Such services to the country are usually rewarded to the highest standards.
After mourning, Joseph asks for an audience with Pharaoh, addressing some court mediators, which could mean that from some time he might have been demoted in his position and no longer have as much power as before. Indeed, the hard times are over and life has moved on, bringing new demands and new leaders and favorites, which is natural. Joseph was not forgotten, and although he may not be the second ruler of the country now, he still had a lot of influence. Most likely, asking some nobles to transfer his request to Pharaoh, he gives respect to these new (or old) persons at the court, who rose maybe with his participation. Or maybe he's just busy mourning his father and it keeps him from doing business for a while. He asks to convey to Pharaoh his and his father's request that Jacob be buried in Canaan. And he receives full cooperation and sympathy. Pharaoh assists him in any matter as before. Not only that, but almost all the highest men of the land go with Joseph to Canaan to attend Jacob's funeral, paying great tribute to the departed patriarch, as well as to Joseph himself. All of Jacob's descendants also traveled, leaving only their children and flocks in Goshen.
A little before reaching the place where the field Abraham had bought for Sarah was, the caravan stopped and here they held a mourning for Jacob. The sight was memorable and impressive, so that the inhabitants of Canaan called this place "The Meadow of the Egyptians" or "The Lamentation of the Egyptians" - Abel-Mitzrayim (there were more Egyptians in this caravan than Jews, which was noted by Canaanite observers), although before that it had another name. It has been repeatedly read in old books that the Egyptians were a rather wise people, at least the upper classes. This is noted in the Bible itself when it speaks of "the wisdom of Egypt." And the Egyptians confirmed their status by seeing off a representative of the patriarch family, after whom very few came close in strength and character to their figures. Only Moses like him, and to a lesser extent Joshua four or five generations later.
Joseph after Jacob
After the funeral, when everyone had returned to their places, the sons of Jacob were troubled, thinking that the evil they had once done was so great that Joseph might still want to reckon with them, despite all his previous assurances of peace and forgiveness. They could be understood to some extent, they could have no doubt about God, but Joseph was still a man. What if his character changed in his old age? Even if just a little, but in his most important moments? So they sent one of them to him as a negotiator, to induce him to make peace, to preempt him if he had any plans for revenge, and if possible to make arrangements for the future. They had taken their father's request to heart, the latter had asked him to do the same at one time, so that he would not resent his brothers and take revenge on them. However, they still didn't know their brother well and thought worse of him than the situation was. When they tried to tell him all this, he cried, then began to assure them that they were worrying for nothing. By this point, after the messengers had spoken to Joseph, they entered all together and bowed down to him (for the umpteenth time...), and declared that they were his servants. However, Joseph speaks words that are characteristic of men of this kind, righteous and honest - "Do not be afraid, I am under God." That is, "I am under His direction, He is my superior or commander," meaning that "I will do nothing that He would not like or forbid." The Synodal translation says "I fear God," which faithfully conveys the meaning of his figure of speech.
He again, in a manner not usual to most people, approaches the evil done by his brothers, looking not at the crime itself, but at what it led to, in the manner of the proverb, "if it were not fortunate, misfortune would help it. This phrase, that God had sent him into Egypt by their hands, he had already told them when he first revealed himself to them, and he repeats it again, and it is perhaps the best assurance of his favor with them, and the assurance that no vengeance would or could be taken.
Of course, the fact that he is considering the result of what they did is not yet an excuse for the evil done to him. He is not saying that it was not sin or evil, that it did not have the wrath of God upon it. But Joseph is not the judge of the here and now. He is entrusted with their lives and the destinies of the tribe, and he must guard them. It was a time to save, not destroy, to gather, not scatter. In such a time, to engage in revenge or even just punishment for past crimes and mistakes would have been a crime before God and man.
After this account Moses concludes his first book with the report of the end of Joseph's life at the age of one hundred and ten. His years are considerably shorter than those of his father, whose years are also considerably shorter than those of Abraham and Isaac. Jacob had many stresses and his years are shortened by the children who concealed Joseph's fate and thus condemned him to a long depression. Joseph, on the other hand, had different reasons for his shortened years. He was not depressed for a long time, he did not give up his hands when difficult circumstances occurred, he even seems to be not subject to despondency at all, and the greatest factor in the shortening of his life can be seen only in the diet peculiar to civilized Egypt - the abundance of meat and fish, which were so strongly remembered by those who came out of Egypt. The diet of an official of the highest rank, enriched in comparison with the simple food of his father's house, failed him, and could not but fail him... For the same reason, in later years, the kings of Israel and Judah had extremely short reigns, and most of them died of their own deaths, that is, they grew old too soon - rarely did any of them live even to sixty. The royal food of even those times is dangerous precisely because of its excesses and refinements, mixtures of poorly compatible products, and this prestigious food has moved nowadays to the tables of the inhabitants of almost all so-called civilized countries, making almost everyone who eats it as weakened and short-lived.
In dying, Joseph does not ask to be buried immediately after his death in Canaan, even though he could have repeated the same thing his father did. Instead, he asks his children and grandchildren to carry his body with them as they leave this place. As a dignitary of Egypt he is an asset to that country, and gives it some debt without depriving his subjects of his presence, also as if he were staying with his people who remained in these places for a long time to come. He has no doubt that the time of the exodus will come, he knows the timing - from the time God designated four hundred years for Abraham to gain Canaan (this was in Abraham's 85th year), only 275 more years have passed, and it will be at least 125 years before the exodus from Egypt (in reality, 155 years have passed). Joseph's death took place somewhere in the year 2368 from the creation of the world or in 1636[134] BCE. He was embalmed according to the customs and rules of the country, but it looks like he was put beforehand in something that could be carried, an "ark" or lightweight sarcophagus, not a fixed place of eternal rest. He wasn't going to stay here forever.
Notes
1
Many believe that the solar system originated later or the Earth was "inserted" into it at a certain moment
2
The book of Job 38:7 describes the creation of the earth, that there were witnesses - inhabitants of other worlds, that is, the universe was already there when the seven days of the Creation of the earth took place. And the planet was already there before that, only lifeless.
3
Actually, in cosmology there is also an idea that different substances could have been formed otherwise, immediately after the so-called Big Bang. That is, not produced by the stars. Then it could have taken even less time.
4
It is difficult to unambiguously understand the words of Christ "My Father is still creating, and I am creating". If it is about the creation of new inhabited planets, the Earth is not the last in this series, if it is about whole worlds and universes, God does not give any information about it at all, but rather it is about something else, because at the time when life was created on the Earth, a little earlier, somewhere in the universe, and it seems to be where the central world of God is located, a conflict between God and the devil arose and broke out when evil appeared in the world, expressed in the nagging of the authority and powers of the Son of God by one of the strongest angels, Lucifer.
5
The eighth chapter of Proverbs
6
Col.1,17
7
The original "ehi or" can be read as "there is light" without delving into the intricacies of the ancient language.
8
I realize how limited my knowledge is. One could (and should), of course, study and become a doctoral candidate in all the disciplines touched upon in the Bible before undertaking all of this, but the range of knowledge required to evaluate the issues raised would take many years. Even if I could do that, I would hardly be interesting to read then... So I took the risk of taking on the assessment of the days of Creation as well, even though it is more difficult than the rest of the Bible, where such extensive natural science knowledge is not required. Something pushes me to take the risk and even dare to believe that I am not so wrong, at least from a creationist standpoint.
9
Or transferred to a more suitable range of radiation. However, one can still think that on the fourth day the planet could have been added to the solar system, having previously been somewhere else, where it was artificially illuminated. But that's a bit of a stretch...
10
In many translations it looks like "firmament", although it is also "vault". From afar, the planet's atmosphere really does look like a shell around a ball.
11
Or rather it is a readjustment from the order of things that existed before creation to the mode that is needed for evolved life forms.
12
About Phalek it says that "in his days the earth was divided", this is about 100 years after the Flood.
13
Here I am not referring to the time of the Flood alone, but to what happened about a century later.
14
It's probably the "Knowledge is Power" of the seventies.
15
Isaiah 47:13
16
One story fits this situation very well - a three or four year old child is with his mother somewhere among other people, and he noticed one mom with twins in her arms; he stares at them in amazement, then turns to his mother and asks - where is mine like that?
17
Exodus 20:8-11
18
Article with links to names of scientists and studies: polit.ru/news/2006/10/30/amazonka/
19
Revelation 21:2; John 14:2-3; Hebrews 11:10
20
While there is no doubt about the usefulness of fruits and vegetables in their raw form, this does not seem to be the case for grains. Their niche in our diet is different, and I myself am not inclined to consider their consumption in unconverted form as normal or proper. At least weakened people will have major, if not huge problems from raw grains.
21
When a person is confused, led around the finger, the right hemisphere is somehow blocked. I've seen things like that.
22
Of course, I have not spoken to him personally, but I have heard a lot of such and similar things from his supporters, and we can speak confidently about his ideas of world order. They are voiced by those who oppose God.
23
They will not disappear anywhere, they will just take their real niche and fulfill the role they are programmed to fulfill initially, leading a "herbivorous" life.
24
I have not verified the truth of this statement, nor have I reviewed the writings of all medieval scholars, or even, I repent, any of them, but I still trust those who have mentioned it, which is more than one case. At the very least, some of them really did put too much trust in authority.
25
In humans there is a residual effect of this still, scientists talk about a minimum of one quantum of light per second per square centimeter of skin, and usually from 6 to 60. At death, this glow disappears.
26
And this is the most important point, because of this, self-righteousness, righteousness from one's own efforts and works, is impossible.
27
Everything was calculated long ago before Creation, only the scenarios of genes' inclusion have changed - this is most likely the case. In the genetics of living things there are many reserves and reserve possibilities, while the genetics of different species should not overlap, i.e. dogs cannot change into cats.
28
Rom.5:12-19
29
2 Corinthians 5:21. Many translations translate this phrase as "made a sacrifice for sin," but the original phrase is "made sin," that is, the center of all evil, the bearer of sin.
30
Hebrews 10:26 - For if we, having received the knowledge of the truth, sin arbitrarily, there remains no more sacrifice for sins
31
It is an interesting image - as long as a person is in himself, as if in a "house" in this comparison, in a familiar environment, he does not stumble over a problem. As long as the circumstances are favorable and habitual, a person may well look prosperous, but he sometimes needs to "go out of the house", that is, when he is out of favorable "manual" circumstances, a weak spot is ready to be put under his feet, his problem will be waiting for him....
32
For supporters of the belief in the natural immortality of the soul and otherworldly life it is a mystery here - why only the blood cries out, and not Abel himself, who would have been able to say all this directly to God himself after death.
33
Babylon is a separate topic. Revelation calls this system a harlot, or rather a prostitute, who trades with the authorities and the powers that be the souls of people, their obedience and loyalty for the sake of their personal position in society and the system of power. That is, they say to the authorities - we will provide you with obedience of the masses in anything, and you provide us with benefits and some powers... For the sake of these manipulations they went to change the principles of the Way expressed in the Bible. The religion of the Bible itself does not harm society and government by working with human nature. The true Church should guide the minds of society and the rulers whenever possible, but in reality many spiritual leaders are being molded by those who rule, to suit their interests. Church groups are born, most of whom are indifferent to higher subjects but may be sensitive to any others, and these groups are led by the worst descendants of religion who have found in it a feeding trough. This is Babylon, the system of unfaithfulness to God in the church that has taken the leadership positions in this world. And it started a long time ago. And these temptations visit all churches that have had some success.
34
Variability itself is in no way an argument against religion and the Bible.
35
Revelation 11:18 "the time to judge the dead ... and to destroy those who destroy the earth"
36
Proverbs 12:10
37
1656 of creation
38
2 Peter 3.5
39
About the anchors and other circumstances of the ark is interesting research of Ronald Eldon Wyatt, who conducted a survey of the find in the mountains of northern Turkey, where Armenians used to live; after the events of 1915 these places were abandoned by them and the new inhabitants of these places speak about some legends lost because of this. You can find quite a bit about him and his findings on the internet.
40
Of these subjects I am not certain; it is a tentative speculation. And it is unlikely that anyone can authoritatively clarify it.
41
B.Grebenshchikov, "The Sky is Getting Closer".
42
Shem was a hundred years old two years after the Flood - Gen. 11:10, so he is the second son, since the first son was born to Noah a hundred years before the Flood. Ham is the youngest - 9:24, thus the eldest is Japheth.
43
A.K.A. Palestine
44
One of these is that when the Jews went to Palestine, they had to pass through the land of the Idumeans. God ordered them to ask permission to pass through without using military force, forbidding it by saying that "this land I have given" to the descendants of Esau - Numbers chapter 20. Later in the book of Judges, Jephthah refers to the same time that Israel bypassed the land of the Moabites without entering it for the same reason.
45
In this case, it was Ron Wayett, who studied the area and the lore, along with studying the hill under which the ark is located. Turkey recognized his findings, calling it Noah's Ark in official documents, Noah`s Ark Site. It is among the tourist attractions in Turkey.
46
Verse 8 of Genesis chapter 10 sets him apart from the other sons. As if he were the last, the youngest, the one who often gets the most attention.
47
Nimrod is the great-grandson of Noah, and Falek is the great-great-grandson. The time of this catastrophic separation and drift of the continents can be assumed quite confidently that it happened if not at his birth, then in early childhood, because the name is given still in the very early days of life, and his name means "earthquake". Thus the divergence of the continents, which gave their present position and configuration, occurred, in all probability, in the 102nd year after the Flood. Following the age records of the genealogy of Shem in Genesis chapter eleven, it is easy to establish this year of Phalek's birth. See the table in the box "On the Causes of Degeneration".
48
Rom.13:4 - The ruler is "God's servant, to you for good", "...He does not bear the sword in vain - he is God's servant, an avenger for the punishment of him who does evil".
49
When you mix vegetables with vegetables, there is no problem, the problem starts when you play with high-calorie foods of protein, carbohydrate and fat nature. Some foods can even facilitate the digestion of each other, but few people do this, usually the opposite is true.
50
The Bible itself says nothing about the destruction of the tower. But it is as if the excavations confirm the legends that the tower was exposed to the elements.
51
At the time of the Flood, the highest mountains were covered by 7-8 meters, and at that time the Ararat Mountains were the highest. The builders oriented themselves on them, and probably, this height was not too high and the goal seemed achievable to them. Soon, when the continents split and traveled, new higher mountains appeared on the Earth. And the Caucasus most likely also rose additionally as a result of these changes.
52
Not everyone agrees with this, as some languages show an enviable resistance to change, while others can change quite rapidly by historical standards under changing conditions. The originator of this assumption himself gave other figures for the rate of variability, and 19% is an average.
53
When the lithosphere is unified, its pressure keeps the asthenosphere in a more "thick" consistency, but if the lithosphere is cracked, the pressure drops and the viscosity decreases, perhaps quite significantly. So we get "liquid grease" under the continents.....
54
Which indicates some velocity sufficient to create a wave. If the velocity were very low, there would be no wave.
55
Farrah's firstborn was born when he was 70 years old, but Abram was born when Farrah was 130 years old. This is evident from the juxtaposition of Genesis 11:32 and 12:4 - that is, when the father died at 205 years of age, Abram was 75 at this time.
56
Are many people's minds ordinary? - Maybe, but the potential of all healthy people, and even many unhealthy people, is enormous, and if they wanted to, they could all achieve great success, which is one of God's original purposes for people. "He who seeks will find," emphasizes the Son of God, and every seeker, anyone and everyone.
57
Rev.20,6.
58
Genesis 9:6
59
This location seems to be a mistake, the Amalekites were not yet there, this is clearly referring to the area where the Amalekites would later live. Moses wrote this four or five centuries after these events.
60
Very estimated and approximate estimates by hand, provided a slightly longer childbearing period for women up to 60 years for the first five hundred years and the number of children from 4 to 10 during this time, when there are no particularly long crop failures and wars. I tried to calculate through cycles, what could be the increase in one generation, which for that time I took as forty years, although for the first couple hundred years it could be more, but then it decreased constantly to the current twenty (if I'm not mistaken). He believed that women after forty years of childbearing period pass into the category of old population, not participating in the growth.
61
"Dhammapada" translated by E. Parnov.
62
Science has excluded some facts from its scope. Voluntarily. It can be understood - if there is no possibility to reproduce something for measurement and study, it is simply impossible to study it. But then it is not necessary to say that these weakly repeated or unreproducible facts do not exist or that they are anti-scientific... Although this maxim is not about science, but about some who speak on its behalf.
63
Jer.34:18-19
64
The expression means to believe when the simplest actions, including walking, are done with the presence of God in mind, as if He were near. Usually when people don't see someone near or feel someone, their actions are somewhat different than when they are in the presence of someone, as people (and not only) influence each other. This "walking" before God requires remembering Him, considering Him in every action. And it is implied that a person in the presence of such a Person behaves more cautiously, or even completely differently, than when he does not feel His presence. Many a man who allows himself to be unnecessary when, in their judgment, no one sees him, could be much better if he remembered that he is well seen and understood. The remedy is not absolute, but many who want to be better could be helped a great deal. Living in the presence of God...
65
It would seem that Abraham is the father of only two nations, the Arabs and the Jews, but if we consider the spiritual influence, all who have embraced Christianity are his children also.
66
Col.1:28 - "teaching every man all understanding and wisdom, so as to present every man perfect in Christ"
67
The difference between the "sinner" and the "wicked" is that any normal person has a conscience and if he does something that violates the law, his conscience torments him, while the "wicked" have managed to somehow adapt. In the Bible there is an even worse category of the wicked who have a "seared conscience", for those there is no longer any possibility of salvation, while the "wicked" have not yet crossed the line where conscience disappears. Their conscience sometimes awakens and they have hope.
68
Isaiah 28:16 is a prophecy about the king of Tyre and at the same time about the devil, because of the commonality of characters and many traits.
69
In this case there is a substitution of concepts. They would be more or less right if they were talking only about the moment of salvation - justification, forgiveness of previous sins. But when it comes to survival or health or many other things, every word and even letter becomes important and even critical, obedience cannot be abolished because it does not create merit for salvation.
70
Luke 17:32
71
It is not about forgiveness of guilt in the salvation process, but about the right character for God's representative. Repentance for the wrong done is good, but sometimes all that is needed is victory, not just good, but the best.
72
It was only because Christ never broke the law, and because as God He was able to take away the sins of those who would allow Him to do so, and because He deliberately went about it, that He was able to become the Sacrifice symbolized by animal sacrifices.
73
It is possible not to see Him personally, but to experience Him with great tangibility and authenticity even without seeing Him, which is the experience that distinguishes serious believers. And so essential is the word to believe, to accept the truth of His words and promises. It opens some doors to something more.
74
The binding of the sacrifice is mentioned in the Bible, Psalm 117:27. According to the Levitical laws, i.e. of the Israelite period, as far as I understand, the sacrifice was placed on the altar already killed, but it seems that in pre-Israelite times the sacrifice was cut on the altar. An untethered animal could be a lot of trouble, while a rope made it much easier for even a less experienced person to handle.
75
It has been used by many nations since very ancient times. 400 shekels is about 4 kilograms of silver, which at this point in time is about one and a half thousand dollars (with the average price of silver being $450 per 1 kilogram).
76
1 Thess.4,16
77
Restricting and ordering the sphere of love, happiness and family, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."
78
It means to bind oneself or another by an oath, promise, or word. A spell can also mean adding to a promise or demand a clause of punishment for breaking it, so that it is almost a curse, but it differs from a curse in that the punishment only comes into effect if the promise is broken. If a person says - "I will do it," that's a promise. But if he says to it - "If I don't do it, then let this or that happen to me", it is a curse. Or if he who demands something or commissions something adds a clause of sanctions for non-performance, that too is a spell. A curse is usually pronounced for something that has already been done, whereas a spell is stipulated in advance.
79
An important point for those who say that women in ancient times were as powerless as they are today in some Eastern cultures. In antiquity, we can see by this example the unchainedness and certain freedom of women, which was preserved for a long time. There needs to be a return to the roots.....
80
Eccl.3:11 - where Solomon speaks of "peace" placed in the heart of man, the word "olam" - eternity, infinity - is used.
81
Mat.19,8
82
Luke 12:47-48
83
Rom.2:14-15
84
In the Bible, this chapter with the account of things earlier is not in chronological order, so I digress as well.
85
Approximately this happened when he was 136 years old, at which time Jacob was somewhere around 76 years old. Immediately after these events he fled to Harran to Laban, where he stayed for 20 years.
86
At this point he was about seventy-seven years old. Isaac died at the age of 180, when Jacob and Esau were each 120 years old. Isaac wished to bless Esau when he felt considerable weakness and thought death was near, he was about 136 years old at this time, but it turns out he overestimated his problem and lived a long time. The problem with his sons seems to have brought about a great change in his thinking, awakening him from his complacency and complacency, which was beneficial to his health.
87
Again it can be seen that this also shows that God did not plan to bring evil to the peoples of the Earth, as some conspiracy theorists accuse not only the Jews, but sometimes God Himself, that He gave them the right to rule over all. The Bible gives no reason to think so. If even some of the Jews themselves thought so, it would be a misunderstanding and distortion of God's plans.
88
Pl.Jer.3:33
89
1 Corinthians 11:31-32
90
Later on, the examples of David and Saul will show this clearly
91
They themselves were pagan, but they bore the name of the real God, Yahweh, and were dedicated to Him.
92
This is the question of to whom Jacob could tithe of the possessions he had acquired with his own hands. Melchizedek was no longer there - if you mean Eber, Eber died four years after Abraham's death when Jacob was 19. But the role of patriarch and priest then could or should have gone to the next living patriarch of Shem, and that is Isaac. Giving the tithe to the father was fine. In an extreme case, if the father had died earlier, as he himself expected at first, Jacob himself would then become patriarch. In such a case, giving a tenth of his property meant that he could only use it for sacrifices or other sacred purposes, but not for himself.
93
Abraham and Nahor are brothers, Isaac and Bethuel are cousins, Jacob and Laban are third cousins
94
We should not think that if there had been peace between the sisters, God would have given children to Rachel and Leah. On the contrary, according to His characteristic scenario, both of them would have been barren until some time later....
95
It is similar to the recent story of American weapons supplied to one country. A lot of it turned out to be stolen, and when the military, who had not expected such a thing, were outraged, they were made to feel guilty, saying, "Didn't you know who you were dealing with?
96
If against, God is removed from the responsibility for this person, but the only trouble is that man is not freed from the power of the elements and the laws of large numbers... Especially from the power of evil and many other problems from which God could help. Man is also left with much less protection from dark forces. By and large the power of God over man remains, because the devil is not really the supreme ruler, not having divine powers, but he is in no hurry to intervene, because He is not called....
97
Pr.18,20.
98
Ambrose Bierce, The Devil's Dictionary. The publication is known by various titles.
99
Gen.31:38
100
If you have noticed how a person moves in caprice, then you will probably remember the Russian folk expressions "showing off", "showing off"... It is hard to escape the impression that the body is moving currents of forces, on the way of which there are obstacles and the normal flow of muscle movements is disturbed, becoming distorted. The body "bends", deviating from the normal trajectories....
101
Gen.32:2
102
This is all about the Son of God, but with the Father it is much more pronounced, so that He has to "dwell in unapproachable light," so that the celestials also have to keep some distance.
103
I don't even want to consider the alternative, if Esau had not relented. In that case, as soon as he gave the order to his troop to attack or raised his hand against his brother, God's protection would have come into play, the angels from Mahanaim who had accompanied Jacob would have appeared, or even He Himself who had fought Jacob that night.
104
East of the Jordan, perhaps not far from where he met his brother. But old maps also show Sochof west of the Jordan, much closer to Shechem. Sukkoth (shalachos) would be a more correct pronunciation.
105
That doesn't mean he didn't attend them.
106
I find that among people there is not that destiny, but rather a certain number of psychotypes of people within which people are perfectly matched. The compatibility depends on the design of the person, not on any randomness. The number of types is small (haven't tried to count them, probably within a hundred or two hundred), so perfectly matched couples are quite common.
107
From the time of the promise of the land to Abraham until Israel entered it, 430 years had passed. From the time Jacob and his family went into Egypt, 215 (or 225, depending on the point of reference) years had elapsed, half that time.
108
Gader Tower
109
Joseph was sold by his brothers at 17, became a high level official in Egypt at 30, after seven harvest years and two years of famine he must have been 39 or 40, at which time his father and brothers move to Egypt, and his father tells Pharaoh his age 130. Joseph spent 22 years in Egypt before the family came, and was sold about the time his father was 108 years old.
110
This is not a complete answer, the topic is broader, but more on that later.
111
Gen.42:21
112
In the next chapter, where two of Pharaoh's high-ranking servants are imprisoned, they are brought to a prison under the jurisdiction of, again, the chief of the bodyguards. That is, the prison was also under the security service.
113
This is quite similar to what Freud called "projection" or "transference," where one's own faults and vices are attributed to others.
114
Although the covenant accepted by their fathers, the contract under which they were born, obliged them... On the other hand, God did not prevent Esau from going his own way, nor did He prevent Ishmael from going his own way, although they did not explicitly or consciously renounce the Way. In general, the options were possible. Including the worst - what happened to the sons of Judah.
115
It looks like Tamar stayed with him as the mother of his children, but it is not known if he lived with her as his wife.
116
I cannot claim that the name of the Amorites has anything to do with "amorous" affairs in our times, but it is hard to escape the impression that there is a connection. The word "amour" is directly derived from the Latin amare - to love, according to Merriam-Webster, while in Latin it can be traced back to a Proto-Indo-European root. Perhaps?
117
Men have a similar art of seduction, which allows them to achieve their own fairly guaranteed, also being the same kind of crime with the same payback.
118
"To jealousy loves the Spirit who dwells in us" - James 4:5
119
In ancient times, and even now in some societies, the court is very simple - only one person is right. And if one side is right, the other side is guilty. If the accused proved his right, the accuser is guilty....
120
Sergei Orlov, "The Second"
121
Lament Jer.3:33; Proverbs 16:7; Rom.8:28
122
Eccl.8,11.
123
Could also sound like "Hebrew", "Eber", "Ever", could be a noun word and a name from the name of a famous ancestor of Semitic peoples.
124
In the synodal translation for some reason it is called Iliopolis, apparently after a later name.
125
One example of those structures is bible-facts.ru/1381-zernohranilische-iosifa-grandioznyy-kompleks-v-egipte.html
126
Joseph tells his brothers - "there are five more years of famine ahead, when they will neither plow nor reap"
128
But one can easily imagine the phrase, somewhere after the examples about Abraham's faith - "by faith Jacob let Benjamin go to Egypt"....
129
Os.8,4
130
Num.11:14-17, 24-29
131
Is it okay that I use old expressions sometimes? Since some time I have stopped being embarrassed by old words, even if they are "outdated", they are not "backward". And if I try to read the Synodal translation of the Bible in a more modern language, it is only because there are more appropriate words today and not everyone is inclined to hear the meaning of what is spoken in the language of yesterday.
132
1 Chronicles 22:8 - "You have shed much blood and waged great wars - you shall not build houses in my name"
133
These sensations occur in healthy people as well and are not related to dying per se.
134
My calculations at which our era begins after 4004 (this date is verified by many other researchers as well) years from the creation of the world.