A MANUAL
FOR TEACHING
BIBLICAL HISTORY

BY

EUGENE KOHN

Rabbi of Congregation Chizzuk Emunah
Baltimore, Md.

————

NEW YORK
THE UNITED SYNAGOGUE OF AMERICA
5677—1917

Copyright, 1917
BY
THE UNITED SYNAGOGUE OF AMERICA

To the memory of
SOLOMON SCHECHTER
ז״צ״ל
this book is reverently inscribed

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The author cannot permit this book to go to press without acknowledging his indebtedness to the Education Committee of the United Synagogue for their encouragement and assistance. He is especially grateful to Dr. Julius H. Greenstone for his many helpful suggestions and his careful reading of the text, both in manuscript and in proof. To Dr. Cyrus Adler and Professor Mordecai M. Kaplan his thanks are also due in large measure for their aid in removing crudities and improving the form and content of the work.

INTRODUCTORY NOTE

Jewish pedagogic literature is still in its infancy. While text-books for children, more or less satisfactory, have been produced by many authors during the past century, the effort to provide the teacher with proper material for his guidance in instruction is of very recent origin and the supply has thus far been very slight. The students in our several normal schools, and especially the large army of teachers, scattered throughout the country, who have not had the advantage of a normal school training, are often obliged to resort to works by Christian authors for information and guidance. While these may supply them with the facts and with the most approved method of presentation, they cannot give them the Jewish point of view which is so essential to the Jewish teacher. As the late Dr. Schechter once remarked, "We cannot have our love letters written for us. We must write them ourselves, even at the risk of bad grammar." We must place in the hands of our teachers books which will inspire them with loyalty and devotion to Judaism, which will give them the proper attitude to the Bible and to Jewish tradition, and which will provide them with an adequate understanding of Jewish strivings and ideals.

It is with this object in view that the Committee on Education of the United Synagogue requested Rabbi Eugene Kohn to prepare the work which is now given to the Jewish public. The author has succeeded admirably in his undertaking and has produced a work which contains valuable aids to the earnest teacher who is anxious to become more proficient in his calling. This volume, which is the result of considerable class-room experience, intimate knowledge of the sources of Jewish history, and arduous labor, gives correct and adequate data of the lessons treated, stimulating suggestions as to the manner of imparting each individual lesson to the average child, and, what is perhaps of greatest importance, an exalted attitude that the teacher should assume towards his work. While the responsibility of the work rests entirely upon the author, the Committee feels gratified in being able to present, as its first publication, a work that so fully responds to an urgent need. It is hoped that this book will be followed by many other volumes which may help in the better equipment of the Jewish teaching profession.

Julius H. Greenstone, Chairman,
Committee on Education of the
United Synagogue of America.

Philadelphia, June 11, 1917.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Purpose of Manual. In recent years some attention has been given to the improvement of Jewish educational method so far as instruction in the Hebrew language is concerned, but the teaching of Biblical history, although it holds an important place in the curricula of our religious schools, has received relatively little attention from our educators, at least from those of orthodox and conservative tendencies. From the reform point of view some recent publications, though exhibiting the faults which all early efforts in any direction necessarily show, do mark a decided pedagogic advance on the older unmethodical way in which the subject was taught. But from the point of view of traditional Judaism they are inadequate, however helpful some of their pedagogic suggestions may be, since they are guided by a different ideal. This manual attempts to assist the teacher of Biblical history from the point of view of Traditional Judaism. For whoever considers from this point of view the way in which Biblical history is taught must come to the conclusion that not only are we not realizing to the full the educational values which the study of Biblical history affords, but we are often giving our children very false notions of the Bible characters and of the lessons which the story of their lives is intended to teach Israel. To develop a good course of study in Biblical history cannot be the work of one man nor can it be done at one time. It is hoped however that the suggestions contained in this book may assist the earnest teacher to make his instruction more fruitful of good results for Judaism.

Three factors determining method of instruction. Every discussion of pedagogic method as applied to a particular branch of study must take three factors into consideration: the aim of instruction, the subject to be taught, and the child—his mode of thought, interests and capacity.

The Aim. The first thing that we must bear in mind is that the aim of all Jewish education must be a Jewish life; that the aim of each branch of Jewish study must be formulated not primarily in terms of information to be conveyed, but of Jewish habits of thought and action to be cultivated. It follows that Biblical history as taught by a Jew who believes in the authority of the Torah and the mitzvoth over our lives must be very different from the same subject as taught by one to whom Judaism is merely a number of moral maxims and the dogma of the unity. This book, attempting as it does to treat the problem from the point of view of traditional Judaism, considers that the main object of instruction in Biblical history is to inspire the child with an appreciation of the religious ideals that have moulded Israel's life in the past, with an understanding of how these same ideals express themselves in the religious institutions of the present day, and with the desire to further the historic aims of Israel's existence through identification with the institutional life of Israel, that is through the observance of the mitzvoth, affiliation with the synagogue, etc. Particularly must we create in the child the sense of his personal identity with his people, for this is the lever by which the events of the Biblical narrative can move the Jew to active interest in Judaism. He must feel that God's choice of Israel means that God has chosen him to live a certain life, the life of the Torah, and that if he fails to live this life, he sins against God and betrays his people. He should feel proud of the heroes of his nation and inspired with a sense of the obligations that his noble descent imposes. He must be made to discover the spiritual kinship that links him with the rest of Israel in the past, present and future. Unless we can accomplish this we have not succeeded in our teaching of Biblical history.

Wrong and right conception of aim illustrated. A lack of appreciation of these aims has often led to the treatment of the Biblical narrative as if it were merely a series of moral stories or, at any rate, of stories into which a moral can be read. According to this method the connection of the Jewish people today with the people of the Bible is almost wholly ignored and there is no appreciable difference in the way the events of the Biblical narrative are taught and, let us say, the incidents of some highly moral fairy tale or folk-lore of other peoples. To give an example I quote the following summary of a lesson on "Moses' Return to Egypt":

"So then we can learn these two noble things from our lesson; modesty adorns everybody even the greatest people, yes very often the greatest people are the most modest. And further, when we have begun to do something, let us do it with all our might and stick to it till it is finished, no matter what it is, whether a school lesson or setting a people free; whatever is worth doing at all is worth doing well."

One could imagine the same moral attached to the story of George Washington or of Cincinnatus and brought home as effectively by it. The difference between the right and the wrong method of treating the Biblical narrative from the point of view of the aim of such instruction can be seen if we contrast the above with the simple summary of the same lesson in the Passover Haggadah:

"Slaves were we unto Pharaoh in Egypt and the Lord our God brought us forth thence with a strong hand and with an outstretched arm. And if the Holy One, Blessed be He, had not brought forth our fathers from Egypt behold we and our children and our children's children might still be bondmen to Pharaoh in Egypt." And again: "In every generation one is obliged to regard himself as if he in person had come forth from Egypt, as it is said, 'And thou shalt tell thy son in that day saying, It is because of that which the Lord did for me when I went forth from Egypt.' Not our fathers alone did the Holy One, Blessed be He, redeem but us also did He redeem with them, as it is said, 'And us did He bring forth thence in order to bring us hither to give us the land which He had sworn to our fathers.'"

According to the method of the former quotation Biblical history is no more related to the child than the story of the Iliad, according to the latter it is his own history, the study of which helps him to self knowledge, to the knowledge of his Jewish self, the knowledge of the ties that bind him to his fellow Jews and the Jewish people to its God. Much more might be said of the effect upon the method of instruction of a clear conception of the aim of instruction in Biblical history when thus conceived in terms of Jewish life, but a study of the lessons given in this book will suffice to explain this without the need of further amplification, so we may pass to the consideration of the subject-matter to be taught as a determining factor in the method of instruction.

The subject-matter: Biblical history. I have throughout referred to the subject-matter under the name not of Jewish history but of Biblical history and I have done so advisedly. For the term Jewish history does not commit one to that interpretation of the early history of our people which is to be found in the Bible. From the Jewish point of view the Bible, in its narrative portions as well as in its laws, is Torah, that is authoritative teaching. It does not merely recall the early events of Jewish history but it takes a distinct attitude to these events, seeing in them the revelation of a divine purpose; it not only tells the deeds of Biblical heroes but it passes judgment upon them, here approving and there disapproving; and it is precisely this attitude to Jewish history, this interpretation of the significance of historic events, which must be made an influence in the life of the child. If we were merely teaching Jewish history as such and looked upon the Bible merely as the source book of this history we might tell the story of the Exodus somewhat in this fashion:

"The children of Israel who had at the beginning of their sojourn in Egypt been well treated by the Egyptian rulers, owing to a change of dynasty were subjected to oppression and forced to do servile labor for the Pharaohs. They took advantage however of a series of calamities that visited Egypt, which their leaders Moses and Aaron interpreted to the Egyptians as signs of the divine wrath incurred by her because of her oppression of the Israelites, and so left Egypt in a body."

The above account is Jewish history but it is not Biblical history for it has nothing to say about the significance of these events as the Bible regards them. It does not tell us that Moses was sent by God, it does not know anything of the covenant with Abraham of which these events are the fulfillment, it does not therefore see in the Exodus one link in a chain of events having its beginning in the election of Abraham and its consummation in the revelation at Sinai. In the Biblical narrative what is most conspicuous is the Eẓba Elohim, "the finger of God," in the merely historic account this may altogether be omitted.

Must give Biblical moral to Jewish history. Very few teachers in our Jewish schools, if any, would make the mistake of teaching the events narrated in the Bible merely as cold facts without any attempt at giving them religious significance, though frequent efforts at rationalization tend in this direction. For the most part, the aim in teaching the early history of our people is felt to be a religious one and to call for a religious interpretation of the events recorded. We are not loath to attach a moral to the stories we tell our children, but where we fail is that we imagine any moral which we can read into the story is satisfactory. We have already shown how the consideration of the aim of instruction in Biblical history, from the point of view of traditional Judaism, opposes this method and limits the moral which should be taught in connection with any given story, but the consideration of the subject-matter to be taught limits it still further. We must not only give a Jewish moral to each episode in the Biblical narrative but we must give the child the specific moral that the Bible itself attaches to that episode. If we take our Bible seriously, if we regard its interpretation of the events of our history as essentially true, as indeed part of the Torah, a divine revelation, then it becomes our duty to give this interpretation of events and not another to our children. We sometimes excuse to ourselves the perversion of the Biblical moral on the ground that because children are children they frequently cannot grasp what is really the Biblical lesson. If in any given instance this is the case, it is better not to teach that story at all to the child than to falsify it. But usually the ideas of the Bible can be brought home to the child if we but take the trouble to translate them into the language of childhood and illustrate them out of the child's own experience. It is largely due to indolence on the part of the teacher that we so frequently sin against the Biblical sense of a story. I have heard the story of Abraham's divorce of Hagar told as if it were a mere family squabble in which Sarah, by shrewish persistence finally prevails upon the meek and submissive Abraham somewhat reluctantly to send away Hagar, who had aroused her jealousy. Abraham was made a rather doubtful hero who represented the virtue of loving peace—peace at any price as the narrative showed—and Sarah was regarded as acting in a mean and ungodly capacity. Had that teacher read her Bible carefully and intelligently before coming to class she could not have been guilty of such grotesque distortion of the Biblical story, by which it is made not only trivial but ludicrous. She would then have realized that Ishmael had to be separated from Isaac for the same reason that Lot had to be separated from Abraham and Esau from Jacob, because they were not of the seed from which Israel was destined to spring; that even before the birth of Ishmael we have the prophecy told to Hagar, "And he shall be a wild ass of a man; his hand shall be against every man and every man's hand against him" (Genesis 16. 12). She would have observed that in the words of the Rabbis "Abraham was subordinate to Sarah in prophecy", that just as Isaac showed a mistaken preference for Esau so Abraham when the birth of Isaac is predicted to him pleaded, "Oh that Ishmael might live before thee!", and that the Bible recognizes the superior prophetic insight of Sarah by telling us that God commanded Abraham explicitly, "Let it not be grievous in thy eyes because of the lad and because of thy bond-woman; in all that Sarah may say unto thee, hearken to her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called." Surely, though the story undoubtedly presents difficulties of a pedagogic nature, it is not impossible to teach a child that God foresaw that Ishmael would be a "pere adam" (a wild ass of a man), that he did not wish the chosen people, who were to inherit the promised land, to be possessed of such traits, and that therefore Ishmael had to be sent away so that Isaac and his descendants might become the great people he had promised Abraham they would become. In this way the Bible speaks for itself and tells a story that is quite as intelligible to the child as the one that the teacher I have mentioned told, quite as intelligible and infinitely more edifying. I have given this instance at some length because it seems to me typical of the mischief that can be done by reading into the Biblical narrative any moral that may come to hand instead of the moral that the Bible itself intended.

Need of Bible study for teacher. This manual will endeavor in each lesson to point out to the best of its author's understanding what the Biblical moral of the lesson is. But, as interpretations are always subject to differences of opinion, a study of the suggestions contained in its chapters cannot relieve the teacher of the responsibility of a careful independent study, before entering the class-room, of the Biblical passages whose story he wishes to teach.

The child as determining method. And after he has mastered for himself the meaning of the Biblical narrative, he must study how to impart this to the child in a way that shall make it not only comprehensible but interesting, and all this without sacrifice of the aim of instruction. An adequate treatment of method in teaching Biblical history from the point of view of the interests and capacities of the Jewish child is at present impossible. We need years of study and experimentation in this direction before we can do it complete justice, but a few universally recognized pedagogic principles may briefly be considered here in their bearing upon our subject. We have spoken of the need of effort on the part of the teacher to make the lesson comprehensible and interesting, and we shall therefore give some attention to two questions: (1) How can the lesson be made comprehensible? (2) How can it be made interesting? We shall treat the questions separately for the sake of convenience, though, as a matter of fact, they are inseparable; for neither can a child be expected to interest himself in what he cannot understand nor can he be made to understand anything that involves the least difficulty without giving that sustained attention which only interest can elicit from him.

How to make lesson comprehensible. Proceed from known to unknown. The most important rule to bear in mind in order to make the teaching comprehensible is the familiar truism that one must proceed from the known to the unknown and keep constantly defining the unknown in terms of what is already known to the child. As is the case with most truisms, the truth of this statement is more frequently recognized than applied. Take for instance the very first sentence in one of the Biblical histories intended for the use of children. It reads, "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, that is the whole visible world." Was there ever a human being who did not know what heaven and earth meant and yet knew what the whole visible world meant? Contrast with this the following from another text-book:

"Once a long, long time ago there was no one living on this earth that is now so full of people.

"There were no living things at all here: no cattle, no wild beasts, no birds, no butterflies or insects of any kind and no fishes in the sea.

"Before that there were no green growing things here; no grass, no trees, no flowers.

"In the beginning God made the heaven and the earth.

"In the beginning was a time so long ago that no one knows when it was."

How much better is this way of beginning the story of creation from what the child has experienced of created objects than to begin with non existence and chaos. Few of us realize how many terms that are commonplaces with us mean nothing to the child. Particularly is this true of terms used in the Bible and descriptive of things familiar in the primitive orient but little known in the modern occident, such as altar, sacrifice, tabernacle, caravan, to name but a few.

Avoid formal definition. But at this point a word of caution is necessary against a too pedantic application of this principle of defining the terms that are used in the child's instruction. For example one book of Bible stories for young children prefixes to the story of creation a vocabulary which includes explanations of such words as ground, dark, light, sky, under, above, good, rest. But it must be apparent that a child who cannot without previous explanations understand such simple words as these is not in a position to profit by instruction in Biblical history at all. It is possible so to overload a story with definitions that the whole thread of the narrative is lost. We must be cautious lest our pupils fail to see the forest by very reason of the trees. Ample allowance must be made for the constructive imagination of the child, which builds up its own definitions out of the material of the narrative itself. Children have always had an understanding of fairy tales without ever having had the terms fairy, witch, king and princess defined for them. When you tell a child that the king sat on a high throne with his crown on his head, his sceptre in his hand, while all the people bowed down to him, the child, though he has never seen a throne, will recognize that it is something on which kings sit, that a crown is something that a king wears on his head, a sceptre something that a king holds in his hand, and that a king is a man who is distinguished from other men and to whom they bow, a very good working definition of a king which would make quite unnecessary any elaborate attempt to define for a child the concept of royalty. In fact, formal definition should be avoided wherever possible, and the skilful teacher will know how to make a story define its own terms in the same way as the sentence that we just gave as an instance defined for the child the four unknown terms: king, throne, crown, and sceptre. Indeed the most important idea of all, that we have to give to the child cannot be defined otherwise even to ourselves, namely the idea of God. The general rule to be followed may be laid down in these words: Never define for the child any term that the story itself can be made to define but do define every necessary term that the story itself cannot be made to define. It is worth while noting in this connection that the best definition for a concrete object is the object itself or a picture of it.

How to make the lesson interesting. Oral instruction preferable. So much for the question how to make the lesson comprehensible to the child. As has already been said, this in itself goes a great way toward answering as well our second question, how to make it interesting, but other considerations must also be taken into account. The art of teaching history is in great part the art of story telling. Children love stories and particularly true stories if they are well told, but this love of a child for a good story is limited, especially in earlier years, to a story that is told. The mere technical difficulties of reading, the physical inconvenience of the posture demanded, the absence of that commentary which voice and gesture supply to the story, the impossibility of asking a book questions, and a number of other similar considerations make it undesirable that the first acquaintance of a child with a lesson shall come from a text-book. Text-books have their uses, particularly in the higher grades, for purposes of review, to aid the memory in retaining what has already been taught by word of mouth, but the practice that obtains in some schools of expecting the child to learn the lesson from the book before he comes to class is bad and should be avoided.

Some suggestions as to story telling. If then the first presentation of a lesson must be given orally by the teacher, it follows that the teacher has to perfect himself in the art of story telling. Like all other arts, the art of story telling cannot be imparted by rule and particularly not within the small scope of this introduction. A few suggestions however may be helpful. Lewis Carrol, whose Alice in Wonderland shows a rare insight into the childish mind, makes his Alice express a preference for books with plenty of illustrations and conversation. There are two hints here that are of value to the teacher of Biblical history, the first is to use pictures to illustrate a story and the second always to prefer direct discourse to indirect. To take up the second of these suggestions first, compare the following accounts of the same event and ask yourself which appeals more to you:

1. Then Joseph could not refrain himself before all them that stood by him and he ordered every man to leave him. And there stood no man with him while Joseph made himself known to his brethren. And he wept aloud and the Egyptians heard and the house of Pharaoh heard. And Joseph told his brethren who he was and asked whether his father was yet alive. And his brethren could not answer him, for they were affrighted at his presence. Joseph told them to come near, and they came near, and he told them that he was Joseph whom they had sold into Egypt and that they should not be grieved nor angry with themselves for having sold him thither, for it was in order to preserve life that God had sent him before them. For the famine had been in the land for two years and there yet remained five years during which there would be neither plowing nor harvest, and so God had sent him before them to give them a remnant on the earth and to keep them alive for a great deliverance.

2. Then could Joseph not refrain himself before all them that stood by him; and he cried, "Cause every man to go out from me." And there stood no man with him when Joseph made himself known unto his brethren. And he wept aloud, and the Egyptians heard and the house of Pharaoh heard. And Joseph said unto his brethren, "I am Joseph; doth my father yet live?" And his brethren could not answer him for they were affrighted at his presence. And Joseph said unto his brethren, "Come near to me, I pray you." And they came near. And he said: "I am Joseph your brother whom ye sold into Egypt. And now be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that ye sold me hither; for God did send me before you to preserve life. For these two years hath the famine been in the land; and there are yet five years in which there shall be neither plowing nor harvest. And God sent me before you to give you a remnant on the earth and to save you alive for a great deliverance."

The reader will at once recognize in the second citation the exact language of the Bible. The first is the same passage turned into indirect discourse with no other change in its wording, yet how much it loses in force even for us adults and even in print; for children and in actual narration the story would lose even more.

The advantage of using illustrations. As for the advantage of using illustrations whether in the form of pictures that are distributed and passed around the class or in the form of stereoptican views, we have already suggested one advantage in that they help define for the child the meaning of some of the concrete terms not yet in his vocabulary, but they perform a still more important function in helping him to visualize the narrative. For what we see seems always a more intimate part of our experience than what we have merely heard. When Job wants to express the deeper intimacy of his new knowledge of God after God had appeared to him he declares, "I had heard of Thee by the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth Thee." (Job 42. 5.)

When to use illustrations and what illustrations to use. Though the use of illustrations, particularly of stereoptican views, which have the advantage of focusing the attention of the class on one thing, are a decided help, they should be used only in reviewing the lesson. The reasons for this are: 1. that the picture distracts the attention of the class from what the teacher is saying, 2. that it prevents the smooth flow of narrative by the necessity of explaining details of the picture that are often irrelevant, 3. that the interest in the dramatic dialogue of the characters which reveals their motives and, in most cases, the actual moral of the story is sacrificed to the interest in picturesque details of dress, scenery, etc., 4. that the teacher is at the mercy of the artist's conception of the Biblical narrative which rarely does it justice from a Jewish or from an artistic point of view, and often does violence to the nobler conception of the story that the unaided imagination, stimulated by the teacher's narrative, would have constructed. Pictures that represent God in human form should of course not be allowed in a Jewish school. Nor should the school use such pictures as represent anything of a mystical character in images so definite and familiar that they dispel the whole mystical atmosphere. When, for instance, the revelation on Mount Sinai is represented by two tablets of stone falling from heaven into the waiting hands of Moses, as in one familiar picture, it is hardly likely to instil the highest form of reverence. Or when, as in another picture, the ascension of Elijah is represented by a chariot drawn by horses of a brilliant red, meant to suggest fire but too definite in outline to permit of such suggestion, the child will in all probability merely be amused at the peculiar color of the horses and the picture will not have illustrated the story for him at all. It is therefore apparent that the teacher must exercise some sort of censorship over the illustrations used in teaching.

Self activity of child. We have several times referred to the activity of the child's own imagination in working over in his mind the material supplied by the teacher, and the recognition of the fact that the child's mind is not passive but active leads us to the acceptance of a principle of the most far reaching importance in all education, namely, that the teacher cannot impart a lesson unless he can get the child's mind of its own accord to seek that very knowledge that he wishes to impart. This is the wisdom of the homely proverb, "You can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink." We must stimulate an appetite for the mental food we wish to give the pupil even before we give it. How can this be done?

Jewish symbols and ceremonies a stimulus to self activity. When discussing the aim of instruction in Biblical history we took a hint from the Haggadah for Passover, the reading of which was mainly intended for pedagogic purpose since it is in fulfillment of the commandment, "And thou shalt tell to thy son in that day"; we may take another hint from it in this connection. The child at table on Passover eve sees before him a number of curious objects and ceremonials to which he is not accustomed. He sees the maẓẓot, the maror, and other symbols, he also notices the reclining attitude instead of the usual erect posture, and so he very naturally exclaims mah nishtannah! "How different is this night from other nights!" Then when his own curiosity has been stimulated he is given the answer to his questions and the lesson has been impressed upon him. The symbols and ceremonies of Jewish life which have their origin or explanation in the Biblical narrative are excellently adapted for this stimulation of intellectual curiosity which should precede the telling of the story. A reference to the Sabbath and how it is observed might well precede the story of creation which explains its origin and significance; a reference to the Passover observances might well precede an account of the Exodus; a reference to the synagogue might precede an account of the construction of the tabernacle, etc. These serve the double function of interesting the child in the narrative and of interesting him in those things in Jewish life which the narrative helps to explain. Where an object of Jewish ceremonial life cannot be found with which to stimulate his curiosity, some other fact of his experience may be taken instead. Thus the story of Noah might well be introduced by reference to the rainbow, the meaning of which the teacher will then undertake to explain to the child by the story.

The teacher's question as a stimulus to self activity. Inasmuch as there are in every class those of the type mentioned in the Haggadah "who know not how to question", it often becomes advisable for the teacher himself to put to the class the question that he wishes to have answered. And indeed an occasional question from the teacher in the very midst of the story may go a great way toward arousing interest and securing a clearer comprehension. Thus it may be that the teacher is telling the story of Joseph. He reaches the point where Joseph's brothers come to him to buy corn and explains how Joseph, having recognized them without their having recognized him, had them wholly in his power. He then asks, "Now what do you think you would do if you were Joseph and your brothers had treated you so cruelly and then they come to you for food and you have them in your power?" At once he has the class interested in the question of what Joseph actually did and their interest in the rest of the story as well as their better comprehension of the motives that underlie it is secured.

The pupil's recitation. So much for the teacher's original presentation of the lesson. This completed, the child must be called upon to recite it, not primarily, as most teachers seem to think, in order to give the teacher a chance to find out whether the child had learned the lesson, but because the necessity of telling it over to the teacher forces the child to think about the subject of the lesson and once more appeals to his self activity. The questions asked by the teacher should not be merely such as call for items of information but such as require the exercise of intelligence on the pupil's part and give evidence not only of his remembering the story but of his understanding it. If for example the teacher wishes to question the child on the story of creation, such formal questions as "In how many days did God make the world? What did he make on the first day? What did he make on the second day?" etc., are not enough, as they test the memory only. He should ask such questions as these: "Why do we rest on the seventh day of each week? What was the last thing God made? Why did God make man last?" For these test not only the memory but the understanding as well. The story that the children tell when thus asked to repeat the lesson will give the teacher an idea of what points have impressed themselves on them and what have not, and on the basis of these he must question further. In general there ought to be fewer questions beginning with "what" and more beginning with "why".

Dramatization of lesson. Beside the repetition of the lesson by the child in the form of a recitation and the answering of questions, there are many stories, in which the interest centers chiefly in the dramatic dialogue, that children might be encouraged to dramatize in class. The dramatization must be made by the children themselves in the spirit of free play, the teacher merely offering general suggestions but the dialogue being the spontaneous creation of the children. The natural imitative instinct of children which makes so much of their play the mimicry of the activities and occupations of their adult environment, takes very kindly to this sort of make-believe. At the same time this exercise enables them to enter into the motives of the Biblical characters and to understand and remember the incidents of the Biblical narrative as few exercises can. Nor need the teacher be discouraged by the lack of accessories to dramatization such as scenery and costume. The child's imagination, which can convert a rocking chair into a boat or a table into a mountain, can easily dispense with those accessories which the sophisticated mind of the adult requires. Stories that lend themselves to such treatment are Esau's sale of the birthright, Isaac's blessing of Jacob and Esau and the various episodes of the Joseph narrative.

The teacher's preparation. It follows from the above discussion that the teacher of Biblical history who wishes to do justice to his subject must give careful preparation to each lesson, not only, as we have already suggested, with a view to understanding the significance of the Biblical passages that he wishes to teach, but also with a view to teaching them effectively to the child. This preparation must include 1. inquiry as to object in teaching that particular lesson to the child, 2. the effort to find some point of contact between the theme of the lesson and the previous knowledge and experience of the child such as would appeal to his interest, 3. the study of the subject from the point of view of literary and oratorical effectiveness in the presentation, 4. the attempt to find the best possible illustrations and applications of the lesson to the life of the child, 5. preparation of questions and other devices by which the child is made to work over the lesson in his own mind and give proof of having assimilated it. In the chapters of this manual the object of each lesson according to the author's opinion will be pointed out and suggestions will, from time to time, be given as to the other points that have been here enumerated. This book refrains, however, from giving a detailed plan of each lesson as it is deemed important not to put restraints on the originality and initiative of the teacher but on the contrary, to encourage free and spontaneous expression of personality both on the part of teacher and of pupil.

Summary. Much more might be said about the method of teaching Biblical history, but this will have to suffice by way of introduction to the more concrete suggestions that are to follow in the chapters of this book. It may be well, however, before closing to summarize the more important conclusions reached:

1. That the aim in instructing the child in Biblical history is not merely to teach him a moral such as he might learn from any edifying story but to influence his life through the consciousness of his spiritual identity with the Israel of the Bible;

2. That the events narrated must be given the same significance that the Bible itself gives them and not any convenient moral that we may wish to append to them;

3. That teaching shall be so adapted to the child as to make the lesson (a) comprehensible, (b) interesting;

(a) That in order to be comprehensible it must proceed from the known to the unknown and must define the unknown in terms of the known, avoiding however, so far as possible, all formal definition, and leaving large scope for the exercise of the child's imagination;

(b) That in order to be interesting the lesson should first be presented by the teacher orally in a style made vivid by plenty of conversation quoted directly, and that this may well be followed up by illustrations such as the showing of pictures or stereoptican views; that the teacher stimulate the curiosity of the child before beginning the lesson preferably by the introduction of some relevant object of Jewish ceremonial, but, in the absence of that, by some other appeal to the child's experience; and finally, that the teacher encourage self activity and self expression on the part of the child by tactful questions both in the course of presenting the lesson and when the child is asked, as he should be, to recite the lesson he has learned.

These suggestions it is hoped may prove of some help to the earnest teacher of Biblical history. In the chapters which follow, an attempt is made to give them more concrete and definite illustration. Each chapter will therefore contain 1. the interpretation of the subject-matter of the lesson, 2. a brief discussion of the aim in teaching it, and 3. miscellaneous suggestions as to the way it can best be made to appeal to the child.

PART I

From Creation to the Death of Joseph

CHAPTER I

CREATION
Genesis 1.1 to 2.3

Note.—The lessons in this book are necessarily divided somewhat arbitrarily, that is without exact reference to the amount that can be taught at a single session of the school. This is unavoidable at present as periods vary in length in different schools, and classes vary in age and in the mental development of their pupils. The division therefore has been purely on the basis of the subject-matter and not of the time to be spent in instruction. Some lessons may require two or even three hours for their complete presentation.

Interpretation. The early narratives of Genesis serve as an introduction to Biblical history by giving the Jewish view of the origin of the world in general and the human race in particular, preparatory to discussing the role that Israel was destined to play in the world. The following are some of the most significant ideas that the narrative of the creation has to tell us with regard to the world and man's place in it:

1. That God is the creator and consequently supreme over matter, nature and the world;

2. That man is the highest being in the order of creation by reason of his being possessed of the divine attributes of reason and conscience as intimated in the words "in our image according to our likeness";

3. That God loves His creatures הָרַחֲמִים בְּמִדַּת שֶׁבָּרָא "whom he hath created in accordance with the attribute of mercy;"

4. That God in return desires man's love and his recognition in worship as is implied in the institution of the Sabbath.

Aim. In teaching this lesson to the child the aim should be to inspire him with the sense of reverence and worship, particularly in connection with Sabbath observance. The message of this as of all the earlier chapters of Genesis is a universal one, but, like most other universal aspects of Judaism, it has found concrete expression in a specifically Jewish institution, namely the Sabbath, and, as our aim is to affect the Jewish life of the child it is through association of the ideas of the lesson with the institution of the Sabbath that we must endeavor to make them effective.

Suggestions to the teacher. In accordance with the principle which demands that we proceed from what is known to what is not yet known, it at once becomes apparent that we cannot begin this lesson with an account of primal darkness out of which chaos and then the world was formed. In the introduction (page 22) we quoted an account of creation which began by a reference to created objects in the child's experience. In consideration however of the desirability of stimulating the child's intellectual curiosity before beginning the lesson, it would be well to introduce the lesson with a few questions regarding the distinction of the Sabbath from the other days of the week, culminating in the question, "Why do we act so differently on the Sabbath than on other days?" Then proceed to answer by telling the story of creation in the way suggested in the introduction. When the narrative is completed, again discuss the Sabbath and how it is to be observed, as in this way the moral of the narrative can best be enforced.

It is a well known fact that children are attracted by the exact repetition of certain phrases somewhat in the nature of a refrain. It is well therefore to utilize the refrain, "And there was evening and there was morning" with each of the successive days of creation.

CHAPTER II

ADAM AND EVE
Genesis 2.4 to 3.24

Interpretation. This is one of the narratives of the Bible whose real meaning in its entirety it is impossible to teach the child. To understand it, would require an experience that in the very nature of the case the child cannot have had. A partial understanding of its moral can, however, be imparted to him and the significant facts of the story be so impressed on his mind that he will remember them and, in later years, perceive their deeper meaning in the light of acquired experience. The story of Adam and Eve is the story of man and woman as exemplified in the progenitors of the human race. The Eden of blissful innocence is lost when there awakens in man the appetite for a forbidden knowledge, for an experience of evil as well as of good, an experience which in the end leaves him conscious of his nakedness, conscious of having sinned, and of being disillusioned, conscious of being altogether in a worse plight than if he had never sought after the forbidden knowledge. Obviously this deeper meaning cannot be realized by the child, but certain elements of it can be brought home to him; he can be made to feel that the enjoyment of the good things in life is dependent upon an implicit obedience to the laws that God has laid down as conditioning their enjoyment, so that disobedience means the loss of these joys.

Aim. The aim of the story of Adam and Eve must then be, from the point of view of the child, the recognition of the duty of implicit, unquestioning obedience to legitimate authority. So far the moral is universal and not specifically Jewish. Were we to rest here, we would not be realizing to the full the aim of instruction in Biblical history that we had set before us in the introduction. But, though the moral of the story of Adam and Eve is a universal one, it can be associated, as was done in the case of the story of creation, with certain aspects of Jewish life. Thus the legitimate authority for which we claim implicit obedience from the child can and should be made the Torah, and particular emphasis should in this connection be laid on the dietary laws because of their analogy to the divine commandment in the lesson, "of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it." In this way the moral of the lesson is, so to speak, dramatized in the daily life of the child and is made to increase his loyalty to Judaism as a whole.

Suggestions to the teacher. After what has been said with regard to the aim of this chapter, little remains to be noted by way of suggestions regarding method, as the story in its Biblical form is already admirably adapted to satisfy the child's love of a good story. The moral, as we have suggested it, while it should receive due emphasis at the end of the story particularly when it is being repeated by the children and so has become the subject of class discussion, should not be made too obtrusive in telling the story itself. The words of the serpent in tempting Eve and the conversation in which God rebukes Adam, Eve and the serpent should be quoted as nearly as possible in the Biblical language. In pointing out the connection between the story and its moral as given above, do so by questioning the child rather than by simply stating it yourself. Questions that may be suggestive are the following:

When God gave Adam and Eve so many trees to eat from and everything else that they needed, was it right that they should eat the fruit of the one tree that God had told them not to eat of, just because they wanted to know how it tasted?

If your parents, who give you so many things, your food and your clothes and your toys, sometimes tell you to do this or that which at the time you don't feel like doing, how ought you to act?

Do you know of any things that we Jews don't eat because God, who has made everything we eat, told us not to eat them?

CHAPTER III

CAIN AND ABEL
Genesis 4.1 to 15

Interpretation. The story of Cain and Abel is a study of sin, remorse and repentance. There is a suggestion in verse 7, of evil passions existing in Cain's heart even before the murder of his brother, and, though the verse is obscure, it may be interpreted as giving a reason for God's not accepting Cain's offering. Not until after the deed is done is Cain made fully to realize the significance of his act and then he is stirred by remorse and fear until God reassures him of his protection. The sign that God gives Cain is sometimes construed as part of his punishment but in the Bible it is mentioned rather as evidence of God's acceptance of his repentance.

Aim. The teacher should endeavor through this lesson to impress on the child the danger of yielding to envy and anger and the desirability of repentance and of confession of our sins to God whenever we have done wrong.

Suggestions to the teacher. Sentimentalists sometimes object to teaching this story to young children because of the sordid crime that it relates. This objection however is not valid, because the very ignorance and innocence of childhood rob the story of most of its horror. Indeed, the teacher must rather guard against the child's utterly losing the sense of the tragedy of the crime, the universal tragedy by which passion leads men to commit acts which they would later gladly retrieve if they could. In order to impress this on the child the teacher must describe what the narrative of the Bible but barely suggests, the wayward character of Cain before the sacrifice which made it unacceptable. Devote some time to characterizing Cain and Abel in such a way that the child pictures the former as a sullen, discontented, envious man, who showed no true appreciation of God's goodness to him and whose offering was therefore not acceptable to God, while that of Abel, who was sincerely grateful to God, was accepted. As this is the first time that sacrifice is mentioned, explain the meaning of sacrifice as a way in which men long ago used to show God that they were thankful for his goodness in giving them their food, by not using all that he gave them but burning some on a heap of stones called an altar. Use some illustration from the child's life of how a gift is more or less acceptable according to the motive which prompts it. You might ask the children, "Which would please you more; if somebody would give you a present on your birthday because he loves you, or, because he thinks that when his birthday will come you will give him one also?" and continue, "Now when Cain and Abel brought their offering to God, God knew that Abel loved Him and always obeyed Him and gave his offering because he was really grateful to God in his heart, but Cain, who was always discontented and not very obedient, God knew brought his offering only because he thought that if he did so God might be pleased and so send him the rain necessary to make his corn grow, that he would have plenty to eat during the year. Therefore God accepted Abel's offering but did not accept Cain's". Lay stress on God's warning to Cain, "Sin croucheth at the door", which is to be explained as meaning that Cain must be very careful how he acts and that if he feels like doing wrong to Abel, he must keep back the feeling and not do it, or he might be doing something which he would later feel very sorry for, after he could no longer undo it. Remember that the very young child has no concept of death and so relate the climax of the story somewhat in this manner; "Now when Cain saw that Abel lay on the ground bleeding and could not move or speak to him he knew that he had committed a great sin and was afraid". The dialogue between God and Cain after Abel's death should be quoted as nearly as possible in the language of the Bible, particularly Cain's attempt at first to evade responsibility in the words "Am I my brother's keeper?" followed later by his complete confession, "My guilt is greater than I can bear". In enforcing the aim of the lesson as we have given it, guard against merely making didactic statements and rather bring out the point by questions, after having concluded the narrative. The following are suggestive questions:

Why did God accept Abel's offering and did not accept Cain's?

How did Cain feel when he saw that God did not accept his offering?

What did God say to Cain to warn him not give way to anger?

When Cain saw that he had killed Abel how did he feel?

Did God forgive Cain? How did God show that He forgave him?

CHAPTER IV

NOAH
Genesis 6.5 to 9.1

Interpretation. The story of Noah is so simple as scarcely to need interpretation. The world had become corrupt, and, as God cannot abide moral corruption, it seemed better to destroy what he had created. Out of the universal destruction, however, God's providence singled out Noah, because of his moral superiority, to be saved and to start human life on a higher plane. He therefore bids Noah take with him into the ark his family and enough of the animals to assure the preservation of the different species, taking more of the clean animals which are fit for food, and, when Noah finally leaves the ark, He makes a covenant with him, the terms of which are that Noah, is to observe certain moral laws, including the prohibition of murder, and that God would never again destroy all life with a deluge and would guarantee the orderly succession of the seasons as necessary to man's existence. As a token of this covenant God shows Noah the rainbow.

Aim. The aim in teaching this lesson to the child should be to give him the idea of God's control over all the forces of nature and of His special providence exercised over each individual, rewarding the good and punishing the evil. As it is our purpose, wherever possible, to find some distinctively Jewish way in which the child can give expression to the ideals taught this lesson should be made the occasion for teaching the child the berakah (blessing) on seeing a rainbow which is associated with the Noah story.

Suggestions to the teacher. To connect this story with the child's own life begin with a reference to the rainbow. Let children tell what colors they have seen in the rainbow, call their attention to the fact that it appears always after a storm, and then tell them that you are going to relate a story which will explain to them why God makes a rainbow in the heavens after it rains. And when you have finished the story, again connect the moral of it with the rainbow somewhat as follows:

"And so, children, whenever we see a rainbow it should remind us of this story of how God saved Noah from the flood because of his goodness, and how God promised never to destroy the whole world again by a terrible flood. And whenever we see a rainbow we should all of us say this little prayer or berakah which I will teach you, זוֹכֵר הָעוֹלָם מֶלֶךְ אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהֹוָה אַתָּה זוֹכֵרבָּרוּךְ הַבְּרִית בְּמַאֲמָרוֹ וְקַיָם בִּבְרִיתוֹ וֱנֶאֶמָן, which means, 'Blessed be thou, O Lord our God, King of the world, who remembers His covenant and is faithful to His covenant and keeps his promise'".

The term covenant must be explained to the child in this chapter as an exchange of promises.

The story of Noah contains many appeals to the child's interest which the skillful teacher will know how to make the most of. A Noah's ark with all manner of queer little wooden animals that could be put in and taken out again has been a favorite toy with many a child now grown to manhood. A child is naturally interested in animals and, when you tell of how the animals came into the ark, ask the children to tell you the names of animals they have seen in the zoo or circus.

To emphasize the moral of the story use the haggadic elaboration of it according to which the period that the ark was in process of construction gave the sinners an opportunity to repent, of which however they did not avail themselves but instead merely mocked Noah for trusting in God and obeying him. This haggada is in full accord with the spirit of the Biblical narrative and gives content to the statement: "Noah was in his generation a righteous and whole-hearted man; Noah walked with God."[1]

The episode narrated in Genesis 9.21 to 29 had better be omitted as not adapted for children.

CHAPTER V

THE TOWER OF BABEL
Genesis 11.1 to 9

Interpretation. These verses tell how the descendants of Noah in the pride of a new civilization and the acquisition of the new art of building with bricks endeavor to defeat the divine purpose of scattering them over the world and are frustrated in their plans through God's confusing their language. Its moral is the vanity of any attempt on the part of man to defeat God's purpose.

Aim. This lesson is not one that yields a moral which the child is able to apply immediately in his own life. Its moral is rather for society than for the individual in its exposure of the vanity of reliance on the mere material elements in civilization. Inasmuch however as it can be made interesting to the child and appealing to his imagination it is well to teach it that it may become a part of his store of Jewish information which will receive added meaning as his experience grows.

Suggestions to the teacher. This lesson should be introduced by a reference to the different languages with which the child has come in contact. He can then have his attention called to the fact that, as all men are descended from Noah, they must all originally have spoken one language. This at once raises the question how it came about that there are now many languages, and, when the child is interested in this question, he has the proper mental attitude for hearing the story.

The motive for the building of the tower is not given very clearly in the Bible and, in the form in which it is given, is hardly calculated to impress the story on a child's mind. It is well, therefore, to amplify the story in accordance with the haggadah that suggests as motive the attempt to avoid the consequences of another such flood as at the time of Noah. The sin, therefore, of the generation of the dispersion lies in the fact that instead of trying to avoid God's displeasure they tried to render themselves immune to its consequences, a moral that carries out the idea of the Biblical narrative only stating it in more explicit terms.

CHAPTER VI

THE CHOICE OF ABRAM AND THE CHOICE OF CANAAN
Genesis 12.1 to 10 and 13.1 to 18

Interpretation. With this lesson the history of our people begins. The Bible wishes us to see in the separation of Abram and his clan from the parent tribe, and their migration to Canaan, not a fortuitous circumstance, but the fulfilment of a divine plan according to which God was to make of the descendants of Abram the chosen people and of the land of Canaan the chosen land. Why Abram was selected of all people is not clearly stated, but one trait of his character is made very conspicuous here and in all subsequent chapters, his implicit faith and obedience. The Rabbis emphasize that, in bidding him to leave his land, God tells him merely to go "to the land that I will show unto thee", without indicating what land was meant. Again He promises him, "To thy seed will I give this land", though Abram is childless. Nor was Abram permitted to believe that his nephew Lot might have been intended by the promise, for, when Abram's herdsmen and Lot's herdsmen quarrel, Lot chooses the land of Sodom and not the promised land. In a word, God seems to have selected Abram to be the father of the chosen people because of his faith, his unquestioning willingness to submit to divine guidance. A second trait of character that is made conspicuous is his love of peace as illustrated in his relations with Lot.

Aim. The primary aim in teaching this lesson to the child should be to inspire him with the thought that he is one of God's chosen people, a descendant of Abram, and should prove himself worthy of his descent by emulating Abram's obedience to God through his obedience to Jewish law. The whole point of this narrative is lost if the teacher fails to emphasize the fact that Abram is the father of the Jewish people.

The secondary aim may well be to stimulate interest in Palestine as the chosen land.

A third lesson that can be taught in this connection is the lesson of the desirability of peace.

The last two aims however must be brought in incidentally, the former as an indication of God's love for Abram and his descendants, the latter as showing wherein Abram was worthy of being chosen.

Suggestions to the teacher. As the whole point of the narrative is lost if the child is not made to feel the connection of the Jewish people with Abram, take pains to explain what is meant by descent and how a whole people can be descended from one man, by showing how a man's grandchildren are usually more numerous than his children, etc. It might be of advantage to use the blackboard for a graphic illustration of this idea. Then, after having explained how God expected to make a great nation of Abram's descendants, ask, "Do any of you know what people today are the descendants of Abram? Well, I will tell you. You and I and all who call themselves Jews are descended from Abram. That is why we always speak of him as our father Abram. Now don't you want me to tell you more about our father Abram and about the great people that came from him and to which we belong?"iblica

Hereafter always call Abram "our father Abram", as he is almost invariably called in Jewish literature אָנִינוּ אַבְרָהָם. This will keep the child conscious of his descent from Abram, increase his interest in him and make him feel that Biblical history is the history of his own people.

As the motives for God's choice of Abram are but vaguely suggested in the Bible, the teacher must make them more explicit. Call attention to the fact that the world had again become corrupt, that idolatry prevailed—and here it becomes necessary to explain what idolatry means—in the House of Terah as elsewhere (see Joshua 24. 2), but that there was one man, Abram, who always obeyed God and who, God knew, would instruct his children to do so. And therefore God told him to leave his family and his people because he wanted to make of him a great people that would always do as he told them and not a foolish and wicked people like those among whom he lived.

The various haggadic tales of the persecutions to which Abram was subjected by Nimrod and even by his own father, while beautiful in themselves and interesting to children should not be taught as part of the lesson. (See foot-note to page 46.)

In order to make the narrative more vivid and impressive, God's call to Abram and his promise (Genesis 12. 1 to 3) should be quoted in the language of the Bible, as also Abram's words to Lot (Genesis 13. 9) and God's promise when Abram settled in Canaan (Genesis 13. 14 to 18).

When speaking of God's promise to give Abram the land of Canaan, the teacher may digress somewhat to describe the main geographical features of Palestine, showing children on the map where it is situated and pointing out its main topographical characteristics, if the children are of an age when they know how to interpret maps. The description of the land should be such as to create an attachment to it, dwelling on the variety of its climate, the beauty of its scenery, and its fertility. Pictures of Palestine particularly of the places associated with the life of Abram, should be shown.

CHAPTER VII

BEGINNING OF ABRAM'S GREATNESS
Genesis 14

Interpretation. Abram's blessing begins to become manifest through his military success in the campaign to rescue Lot and his family. He is accorded recognition by Melchizedek, king of Salem (to be identified with Jerusalem), and "priest of God the Most High", who gives him bread and wine and to whom he gives a tithe of the booty. The king of Sodom also recognizes his greatness and the value of his services, which he wishes to reward, but Abram rejects the proffered reward in order to be able to maintain his independence and assert his reliance on the divine promise.

Aim. The aim in teaching this lesson should be to awaken an appreciation of the heroic virtues of courage, loyalty and independence, and, by associating them with the founder of the Jewish people and the Jewish faith to arouse the Jewish self respect of the child.

Suggestions to the teacher. It is very important in telling such stories the moral of which is to be enforced through the child's imitation of the virtues of the characters whose deeds it narrates, not to tag on a moral at the end of the tale. If the child is impressed by the story, imitation is sure to result, and, by adding a moral stated in abstract terms, one only gives the child the feeling that the events of the story did not really happen but were "made up" to point the moral. But the child must be impressed by the story, and the skillful teacher will know how to make the details of the story itself so impressive as to bring home their moral. For instance, instead of saying at the end of the story, "This teaches us what a brave man Abram was since he was willing to risk his life for Lot and his family", the teacher might begin the story somewhat as follows:

"Now when Abram was sitting one day at the door of his tent, a man came running to him all out of breath and, as soon as he had gained breath enough to speak, he said, 'There has been a terrible battle in Sodom. I and a few others have escaped but your nephew Lot and his family have all been taken away captive and no one can say what will be done to them.' Thereupon Abram called together his few followers to the number of 318 and, together with his friends and neighbors, Aner, and Eshcol and Mamre and their soldiers, followed after the enemy, trusting that God would help him, though he knew the enemy had many more men than he."

The interesting detail of how the enemy fell into the slime pits in the valley of Siddim should not be omitted as it gives greater vividness and reality to the narrative.

The child can be depended upon to respond to the appeal for his appreciation of Abram's martial virtues, but the full significance of Abram's refusal of a share of the spoils and his statement "Thou shalt not say I have made Abram rich" he will not grasp without the teacher's help. Bring out his point by asking, "Why did not Abram want to let the king of Sodom make him rich?" and if, as will probably be the case, the child will have no answer ready, explain as follows:

"The reason is this. Abram had joined the war not to get money or other riches from the enemy, for that would have been mere robbery. He had fought to save Lot and his family, and, when they were safe, he was satisfied. But the people of Sodom were, as you know from our last lesson, very wicked and their kings were all the time making war, even when there was no good reason, in order that they might become rich by what they took from the enemy. And Abram thought, if I take money now from the king of Sodom, some time later he may say, 'Abram, it is I who made you a rich man; now you must help me fight against my enemies and rob them'. Therefore Abram would have nothing to do with him and would not even take a shoestring from him. He knew, moreover, that if he obeyed God, God would give him all that he needed, and therefore he did not have to take presents from one whom he could not respect and honor."

Be sure to make clear that Melchizedek's tribute to Abram was in recognition of the fact that his victory was a sign of God's favor, and that Abram's giving the tithe was an expression of his recognition of God's help in the battle.

The lesson might be concluded by some such summary as the following:

So our father Abram became great and famous in the new land to which he had come, because God blessed him in all that he did so that he came to be called by the people about him a "prince of God".

CHAPTER VIII

HAGAR AND THE BIRTH OF ISHMAEL
Genesis 15.16.17

Interpretation. In chapter 15 the faith of Abram is once more given emphasis. God promises Abram great reward, but, being childless, he is indifferent to a reward which must ultimately pass to strangers, the descendants of Eliezer, but God explains to him that he is to have a child of his own to whom the reward is to descend, and he has faith in God's promise though for many years it remains unfulfilled.

The vision of Abram, recorded in verses 12 to 16 is significant as showing the providential character of the Egyptian bondage. We need not, however, discuss it here in detail, since its significance is only apparent in the light of later lessons and it is not intrinsically interesting to the child.

For the interpretation of the main theme of this lesson, the reader is referred to the introduction of this book, pages 19-20. It is to be noted that in giving to Abram her servant Hagar as wife, Sarai is doing an unselfish act in the hope that she may thereby help realize the promise made to Abram, and it is little wonder that she resents the arrogant attitude of Hagar, who is the chief beneficiary of her unselfish act and yet vaunts it over her as though Sarai's barrenness were a mark of inferiority and perhaps even of the divine disfavor.

The fact that, when Hagar flees from Sarai before the birth of Ishmael, she is asked by the angel to return, and that after the birth of Isaac, God not only sanctions but commands the separation, shows distinctly that the motive for the separation was that expressed in the words, "In Isaac shall seed be called to thee", and that, meanwhile, Abram was to have his faith put to the test through his attachment to Ishmael, as later through his attachment to Isaac.

It is also to be noted, here as elsewhere, that the patriarchs and their wives themselves had only a dim and often incorrect idea of God's purpose in his dealings with them. Thus Sarai, realizing that she is barren, at first reasons that God's promise to Abram was intended to apply to him alone and not to her and therefore necessitated his taking another wife. When Ishmael is born, Abram thinks that he is to be the child of destiny and it is one of the tests to which his faith is put when, after the birth of Ishmael, God tells him that not this son but another, who is to be born to Sarai, is to be his heir. The point of all this is that the history of the patriarchs is not merely personal biography but that its real significance is to be understood as showing the care that God exercised in selecting the material out of which the chosen people was to be moulded. Not all of Abram's descendants were to be deemed fit for this election, but he was to become the "father of a multitude of nations" of which only one was to be chosen.

In teaching of the covenant that is recorded in Genesis 17, the ceremony of circumcision cannot for obvious reasons be dwelt on in class, but the change of Abram's and Sarai's names should be, and therefore its significance needs to be interpreted. To give a new name is a sign of ownership and interest. God shows his love for Abram and Sarai and his intention to enter into closer relations with them by giving them new names. It is to be noted that God also gives Isaac his name (Genesis 18.21) and changes that of Jacob to Israel after he shows himself worthy of the title.

Aim. This lesson is one of a series of incidents which should impress on the child faith in the truth of God's words, which in the end are verified, though at first they often seem impossible of realization and more particularly, faith in God's election of Israel.

Suggestions to the teacher. There are two main difficulties to overcome in teaching this chapter; first, that the moral is such an abstract one, the whole story as we have interpreted it being conceived as a glimpse into the workings of providence in the history of Israel and the world, and second, that the incidents hinge upon family relations of a sort that a child with his ignorance of the facts of sex cannot easily comprehend.

The first of these difficulties can be largely overcome by giving much more emphasis than is usually given to the human and personal aspect of the story particularly to Abram's desire for a son and his repeated disappointments before the final realization of God's promise to him; and a little tact can overcome the second difficulty as well. To show how these two difficulties may be met, it will be necessary here to tell a great part of the story as it may be told to a class of children between the ages of seven and eight. After telling of God's promise to Abram to make of his seed a great nation as numerous as the stars in heaven and of Abram's rejoicing that he would have a son who would become after him the father of this great people, the teacher might continue somewhat as follows:

But year after year passed and Abram and Sarai were already growing old, and yet God had not fulfilled His promise to Abram to give him a son out of whose children and children's children He would make a great and good nation. And Oh! how Abram did want to have a son. When he would see the children of his neighbors at play with their bright eyes and laughing faces, he would think, "If only I had a little child like that how happy I should be and what delight it would be to watch him grow big and strong! How I would thank God for such a son and how I would teach my little boy to thank God and to love and obey Him and to be kind and good to all people as God wants us to be so that through him and his children and children's children all the nations of the earth would be blessed." And he would often tell his wishes to Sarai and they would try to comfort each other and one would remind the other of God's promise and would say, "We must be patient. God has promised us a son and in His time He will send us one." But one day an idea came to Sarai. She thought to herself, "Maybe it is my fault that Abram has no children. God promised a son to Abram but he did not make any promise to me. Maybe if Abram married someone else, God would let Abram have a son from this other wife." Now Sarai had a servant whose name was Hagar, and she told Abram to marry Hagar too, for in those days men often had more than one wife. And Abram did as Sarai suggested and, surely enough, not long after they were married it was told to Hagar that in a few months she would bear a child to Abram. Now you would think children, would you not, that after Sarai had been so kind to her servant Hagar and had let her marry Abram that Hagar would love Sarai for it and show kindness to her in return. But Hagar showed herself at this time very mean. She felt a foolish pride because God was going to give her a son and had given none to Sarai and she used to say to her, "See, you are married to Abram these many years and yet God has not given him any children from you, but I have been but recently married to him and now I shall soon bear him a son. Doesn't this show that God loves me more than you? Doesn't this show that I am better than you? Do you think I will be your servant any more? No indeed, I am not only as good as you but better." When Sarai heard these words day after day she was deeply grieved and angry and she complained to Abram, and Abram told Hagar that she must continue to serve Sarai as before. But when Sarai wanted to make Hagar do her work, she ran away and fled into the wilderness.

The above will suffice to show how the difficulties which we mention can be overcome. The passages that have been italicized suggest how the child can be given the feeling that the birth of Isaac was part of a divine plan for the good of the world. This can be still more clearly brought home by the latter part of the narrative in which God rejects Ishmael as a "Wild ass of a man." The teacher must make this quite clear to the class by asking, "Do you think that this boy Ishmael of whom God knew that he would be wild and wicked was the one whom God meant when He told Abram he would have a son who was going to be a blessing to all the world?" He must also emphasize Abram's affection for Ishmael, which made him mistake him for the son of promise, for Abram presumably did not know of the prophecy with regard to Ishmael's future. This will give the child the idea contained in the narrative that "There are many devices in a man's heart, but the counsel of the Lord that shall stand".

CHAPTER IX

ABRAHAM ENTERTAINS THE ANGELS
Genesis 18.1 to 16

Interpretation. These verses have given no little difficulty to the ancient Hebrew commentators. The first verse contains a statement of God's appearing to Abraham but does not give any content to this revelation, and then the three angels are introduced into the narrative as if another revelation were here intended. Moreover the number of angels that appeared to Abraham when one might have served the purpose as well also presented its difficulty, since Christian theologians, connecting this verse with the preceding, tried to employ it as an argument for the trinity. There are furthermore in these verses frequent changes of number which are difficult to account for. Thus in verse 3, Abraham addresses the angels in the singular, in verse 4 in the plural. In verse 9, we read va-yomeru "And they said" while verse 10 which seems a continuation of this conversation begins va-yomar "And he said". In verse 13 God himself suddenly breaks into the conversation. A comparison with other parts of the Bible in which angels appear shows that they too exhibit similar peculiarities of style.[2]

The study of these passages shows the following characteristic features of the Biblical conception of angels which will help to clear up the difficulties of our text. The angel, as the name both in Hebrew and English implies, is the messenger of God. Inasmuch as he exists only to do God's bidding his words are the words of God and may be introduced by the words "God said" as well as by "the angel (or angels) said". This accounts for the apparent inconsistency in the use of singular and plural in our passage. The angel has no discretionary power, as appears from the statement in Exodus 23. 21, that the angel cannot forgive sin. Inasmuch as he has no individual personality or will of his own but is merely a manifestation of God's will, he has no name of his own, the name being a mark of individuality, but bears the name of God, which being a mystery, he may not reveal.[3] (Genesis 32. 3. Exodus 23. 21. Judges 13. 18.) This idea of the impersonality of the angels is carried a step further by the Rabbis, who insist that no angel ever executes more than one message and account for the number of angels that appeared to Abraham by assigning to each a separate mission; one to predict to Abraham the birth of Isaac, another to rescue Lot, and a third to destroy Sodom. But such an explanation is scarcely necessary as there are other passages in the Bible where a number of angels are mentioned for no clear reason, as for instance in Jacob's dream. As for the difficulty that we found in verses one and two, it can now be made clear by understanding the appearance of the angels in verse two as the explanation of the revelation referred to in verse one.

Regarding the significance of angels in general, we may consider the accounts of their appearances as intended by the Biblical author to convey his appreciation of the mystery of how God can communicate with mortals without loss to His divine majesty. They certainly do convey something of this appreciation to the child, for the imagination of children notwithstanding their natural tendency to conceive of God in anthropomorphic terms, is impressed by these mysterious heralds of an invisible kingdom with a sense of the majesty of God's rule.

Aim. This episode has always been made use of, and rightly so, to impress the pupil with an appreciation of that courteous interest in the stranger and deferential attention to his wants and desires which constitute the true grace of hospitality, but an equally important educational value, perhaps from the point of view of the child an even more important one, is its power of impressing him with a sense of the mysterious possibilities of this world, in which any passing stranger that we entertain may turn out to be an angel in disguise, who will reveal himself to us and bless us if we do not turn him from our door. The story should leave the child with the feeling expressed in the exclamation, "Is anything too hard for the Lord". The teacher must of course not lose sight nor permit the child to lose sight of the story's connection with the main theme of the birth of Isaac, the significance of which we have already pointed out in the previous lesson.

Suggestions to the teacher. This is a story whose educational value would only be lost by analyzing its moral as the beauty of a flower is destroyed by pulling it apart to show its structure. Tell the story simply and, as nearly as possible, in the language of the Bible itself. Be careful to give the story its characteristic picturesque setting, and begin therefore by contrasting modern conditions of housing and travel with those of Abraham's days, thus establishing a point of contact with the child's present experience. The following facts should be impressed on the child:

1. That Abraham's nomadic life, which was also the life led by many of his contemporaries, necessitated his dwelling in a tent which could be pitched wherever he wanted to make his home,

2. That traveling was to a large extent on foot over hot sand or stones,

3. That travelers were not sure of obtaining food at regular intervals, and

4. That it was consequently a great kindness to offer them rest and refreshment.

After this introduction, tell the story of how Abraham one day saw three tired travelers on the road approaching in the direction of his tent and invited them to rest, refresh themselves and partake of food. Then, in a manner which would suggest that you are confiding to the class a great secret, tell them that these men whom Abraham had invited were not really men at all but angels of God.

The incident of Sarah's laughing when the angel delivers his message and then denying that she had laughed should not be omitted as it affords an interesting human touch to the story and still more as it gives the occasion for the angel's reply which contains the moral of the story, "Can anything be too wonderful for God?" There is no need of glossing over Sarah's prevarication and certainly no need of giving it undue emphasis, but the incident should be told in such a way that her motive is made clear. Say, for instance; "Now as you know, Sarah was very old, so old that she thought herself too old to have a little baby, and when she heard, from behind the curtain of the tent, the angel telling Abraham that in a year's time she should have a son she laughed, just as you would laugh if I told you that a rose bush would have roses in mid-winter. But the angel said to Abraham, 'Why does Sarah laugh? Is there anything that God cannot do?' Then Sarah was ashamed and said, 'I did not laugh'. But the angel said, 'Nay but thou didst laugh and Sarah was more ashamed than ever, for she knew that she had not told the truth, and she said no more."

CHAPTER X

THE DESTRUCTION OF SODOM AND GOMORRAH
Genesis 18.7 to 19.29

Interpretation. The incident of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, like that of the destruction of the generation of the deluge, is meant as an assertion of God's justice. The insistence on the justice of God is made the more emphatic by the recognition of the fact that His dispensations are such as may lead us at times to call His justice into question. When, therefore, Abraham exclaims, "Shall not the judge of all the world do justice?" he is not rebuked for his presumption, but, on the contrary, God seems to prefer his attitude to one that would accept apparent injustice with complacent resignation, and God does not disdain to justify Himself to Abraham in very much the same spirit as the Book of Job represents Him as preferring the blasphemous accusations of Job to the pious apologetics of his friends. (Job 42. 7.)

The particular crime assigned as an instance of the wickedness of Sodom was a form of immorality of which strangers were the especial victims. Lot's offer to surrender to the men of Sodom his daughters instead of the strangers was not only prompted by a sense of the obligation of hospitality but by the consideration of the different degree of immorality involved in the two acts. It goes without saying that the specific crime of the men of Sodom cannot be explained to the children otherwise than as a disposition to abuse strangers, the antithesis to the attitude of Abraham and Lot towards them, and, inasmuch as the nature of the crime cannot be taught, Lot's offer to substitute his daughters for the strangers cannot be taught since this act would then appear as an attempt to remedy one injustice by perpetrating another.

Aim. This lesson yields more than one moral for the child. The style of Abraham's plea for Sodom and Gomorrah is a very fine example of devotion in prayer and should affect the child's attitude in prayer. The lesson of hospitality taught in the story that preceded is given further emphasis by the contrast between the reception of the strangers by Abraham and by Lot, who was reared in Abraham's household, on the one hand, and by the people of Sodom on the other. This contrast between the character of Abraham and that of the people of Sodom should appeal to the Jewish pride of the child as a descendant of Abraham, the value of which pride we have had occasion to point out before. The transformation of Lot's wife into a pillar of salt is an excellent lesson in the value of prompt obedience and the danger of hesitation and inordinate curiosity.

Suggestions to the teacher. In teaching of Abraham's plea for Sodom and Gomorrah, do not merely give the substance of Abraham's prayer but thoroughly assimilate and impart the reverential spirit contained in such introductory phrases as "Behold now I have taken upon me to speak unto the Lord, who am but dust and ashes, peradventure, etc." "Oh, let not the Lord be angry and I will speak", and again, "Let not the Lord be angry and I will speak but this once". In order that this part of the lesson shall affect the child's attitude in prayer, speak of Abraham's plea as a prayer by saying "Then Abraham prayed, etc.", rather than simply "Then Abraham said", but do not, of course, go into a dissertation on prayer; let the child draw his own moral.

In telling of the reception of the angels in Sodom it is well to emphasize the contrast between the way the men of Sodom treated strangers and the way that Abraham and Lot treated them. The accusation of the men of Sodom, "This one fellow came in to sojourn and he will needs play the judge" is a fine involuntary tribute to Lot's moral superiority and should be quoted. The final picture in verse 28 should not be omitted as it emphasizes the connection of Abraham with these events and furnishes, so to speak, a concluding tableau to the story.

A description of the Dead Sea region of Palestine, accompanied by a good picture showing its present desolation, might furnish a good conclusion to the lesson. The following questions will test the child's comprehension of the story's moral:

1. How did our Father Abraham treat strangers? How did Lot? Where did Lot learn always to be kind to strangers? How did the people of Sodom treat strangers?

Why did God want to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah? When God told Abraham that he would destroy Sodom and Gomorrah, was Abraham glad or sorry? What did he do? Can you repeat his prayer?

What did the angels tell Lot and his family not to do? Did they all obey? Why did Lot's wife look back? What happened to her because she did not obey?

CHAPTER XI

THE DIVORCE OF HAGAR
Genesis 20 and 21

Interpretation. The incident recorded in Chapter 20 is intended to show the care exercised by God in preserving the purity of the chosen seed, but it cannot be taught to children because of their ignorance of the facts of sex. Chapter 21 verses 21 to the end of the chapter may be omitted since they offer nothing of interest to the child.

For the interpretation of the main theme of this chapter see introduction pages 19-20 and Chapter VIII. It is to be noted that God's choice of Isaac does not mean that His providence does not extend over Ishmael as well. Not only is Ishmael's life saved but God's promise to Abraham regarding Ishmael is kept as well as His promise regarding Isaac.

Aim. The aim in this lesson is practically the same as in Chapter VIII, to inspire faith in God's providential interest in human affairs in general and in Israel's destiny in particular. The child need not understand all the implications of the narrative at the time it is taught him but if it be taught properly the story will make its impression and he will understand them more completely later. God's hearing the voice of Ishmael should suggest to the child the value of prayer and thus influence his immediate life.

Suggestions to the teacher. Before beginning the narrative of this story recall to the children, by well directed questions, the previous history of the relations of Abraham, Sarah, Hagar and Ishmael, as we have explained them in Chapter VIII. Then point out the complications which the birth of Isaac introduced since God had promised that Isaac was to be the son to inherit the blessing of Abraham together with the possession of the promised land, and Ishmael, who was now beginning to grow up into the "wild ass of a man" according to the prophecy that had preceded his birth, would dispute this with him. It therefore became necessary for Hagar and Ishmael to be sent away after the birth of Isaac. Inasmuch as the idea of inheritance and the idea of national destiny are too abstract for children, the story must be adapted to their comprehension by putting it on a more personal plane somewhat as follows:

"Now when Hagar saw that God had given a son to Sarah also as the angel had promised and that this son Isaac and not her own Ishmael was the one to whom God told Abraham he would give the land of Canaan and whose children would be the great Jewish people, she became jealous and hated Sarah very much and even Sarah's little baby Isaac. And Ishmael too, who was now grown up into a big wild boy—you remember the angel had said he would be a wild man when he grew up—also was jealous of Isaac. And Hagar tried to persuade Abraham to give her son part of this land of Canaan that God had promised to Isaac. Now Sarah saw all this and she knew that it would not be good for Isaac to grow up together with this wild and wicked Ishmael and so she told Abraham to send Hagar and her son away to some other country where they could not do any mischief to Isaac whom God had chosen to be the father of the Jewish people."[4]

In concluding the story one might interest the child by telling him that there are descendants of Ishmael alive today who like us feel proud to be descended from Abraham, and describing some of the habits of the Bedouin Arabs, their nomadic life, their pastoral occupation similar to that of the patriarchs and also their tribal feuds and not infrequent raids for pillage which still would justify the prophecy, "His hand shall be against every man and every man's hand against him", but one should in justice say that this is not true of the large number of Arabs who have settled in more civilized communities. A picture of Bedouins in modern times would be of interest to the class and help give a sense of reality to the Biblical story.

CHAPTER XII

THE SACRIFICE OF ISAAC
Genesis 22.1 to 19

Interpretation. The story of the 'Akedah, that is the intended sacrifice of Isaac, represents the supreme test to which Abraham's faith was put. After Ishmael has been sent away and Isaac has been definitely declared to be the son of promise, Abraham is commanded by God to sacrifice Isaac. The test to Abraham's faith is not merely of the willingness to sacrifice sentiment and affection in obedience to God, but this latest command is a direct contradiction of God's previous words to him and yet he obeys.

The story can only be understood fully in the light of the religious customs of Abraham's day, according to which human sacrifice was not uncommon. (See II Kings 3. 27, also 21. 6, 23. 10 and Jeremiah 32. 35.) Viewed in this light God's asking Abraham to sacrifice his son meant nothing which to a contemporary of Abraham would have seemed essentially inconsistent with the divine character. It is God's forbidding the consummation of this act which is the innovation, so that this lesson teaches in a narrative form the same idea which later received its legal formulation in Leviticus 18. 21 and 20. 2-5. The chapter has therefore a twofold message; (1) that to be the elect of God requires of us the willingness to sacrifice any personal desire and even natural affection in obedience to him, and (2) that God's will, to which He claims obedience, is a benevolent one and does not demand or desire human sacrifice.

The idea that God does not desire human sacrifice was a great moral discovery and this narrative in our Bible gives us an interesting illustration of how such new spiritual insights in general are born; namely through the willingness to commit ourselves completely to whatever vision of truth is ours at the time. It was because Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac in accordance with his previous sense of what duty demanded of him, that this new revelation of God's will as opposed to human sacrifice was granted him. Had he, while sharing with his contemporaries the belief in the legitimacy of human sacrifice, hesitated to live up to this idea when it involved suffering for himself, he would never have been given the understanding that God does not desire human sacrifice. Our standards of morality are at all times imperfect, but it is only those who commit themselves without reservation to whatever standard they really hold that are the discoverers of new moral truths.

The part that Isaac played in the incident is but vaguely suggested in the Biblical narrative. The agadic elaborations of the story frequently represent Isaac as knowing what fate was intended for him and fully acquiescing in it. That Isaac probably had his misgivings is suggested by the question, "Behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" At all events he must have known what Abraham's purpose with regard to him was when he was being bound to the altar and, as the narrative records no protest, the Rabbinic conception of the part Isaac played is not contradictory to the Biblical story. The teacher is therefore justified in imparting the story in a way which would imply that Isaac lent himself willingly to Abraham's designs regarding him.

In the substitution of the ram for Isaac one gets a glimpse into the significance of animal sacrifice. It probably meant to the ancients a symbolic expression of the recognition that God had the right to demand the sacrifice of human life in his service and that it was a sign of his love and grace that no such demand was made. It suggests the important role that animal sacrifice played in history in weaning mankind from the habit of human sacrifice.

Aim. The aim of this lesson is to make the child feel that as a son of Abraham his love for God should be such that, like Abraham, he should be willing to make any sacrifice that his religion may demand of him. The traditional association of the shofar on Rosh ha-Shanah with the Ram of the Akedah suggests that this story may be used to give meaning to the New Year celebration.

Suggestions to the teacher. The pathos of this narrative is so deep and intense that many teachers, laboring under the notion so common in our day that children should be reared only on what is cheerful and bright and be kept far from a knowledge of any of the more tragic aspects of life, would like to omit teaching it to children all together. When therefore the curriculum of the school requires them to teach it, they tell the story in as matter of fact a manner as possible and seem anxious to get over it. This is a mistake however, for children have always had a fondness for stories containing something of the tragic, even of the weird and uncanny, as witness the popularity of Little Red Riding Hood, and the story of the Akedah is one which can, by very reason of what to our modern mind appeals as weird, impress its lesson on the child's imagination. To pass over it slightingly is to spoil what is undoubtedly the climax of the whole Abraham story and ignore one of the best opportunities of deeply impressing the child with the lesson of faith, obedience and self sacrifice.

Begin the lesson by speaking of Abraham's love for Isaac, now the only son that was left him and of the hopes he cherished of seeing him grow up to be a great man according to God's promise. Then tell how God resolved to test Abraham's obedience by seeing whether he would be willing to give up that which he loved most if so commanded. Before telling of God's command to sacrifice Isaac remind the child of the prevalent custom of animal sacrifice which he had heard of in connection with Cain and Noah. The fact of the general prevalence of human sacrifice at that time should not be taught the child as it will be impossible for him to comprehend such a practice and as the story only gains in force for him by making God's demand of Abraham appear extraordinary. We need not scruple that we are violating the Biblical moral in this instance, since the Bible's denunciation of human sacrifice is not a moral that the child has need of. A reference to animal sacrifice will therefore suffice to make comprehensible the command to sacrifice Isaac. All the conversation in this story should be quoted in the language of the Bible, not omitting Isaac's pathetic query, "Behold the fire and the wood; but where is the lamb for a burnt-offering?" And Abraham's evasive answer, "God will provide Himself the lamb for a burnt-offering, my son". In telling how Isaac was bound to the altar emphasize the fact that he did not rebel although he knew now that he was to be the sacrifice, because of his obedience to God and his father and his confidence in them. When telling how the ram was found caught by its horns in the bushes, ask, "How many of you have ever seen a ram's horn?" There will probably be no response. Then show the class a shofar or a picture of one and ask, "What is this?" The answer will be "a shofar". Then continue; "Well, a shofar is the horn of a ram. When we hear the shofar blown on Rosh ha-Shanah it should remind us of this ram and of how Abraham was willing to sacrifice Isaac and Isaac was willing to be sacrificed when God commanded, and we should think of how we, who are sons of Abraham and Isaac, must be willing also to obey God and our parents in everything even if it should be very hard to do so, even if it should cost us our life." In order to make sure that the child has understood the motives of the story the following questions may be asked in reviewing it: 1. When God asked Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, did he really want him to kill his son? 2. Why did God ask Abraham to sacrifice Isaac? 3. When Abraham tied Isaac to the altar did Isaac rebel against his father? When we hear the shofar blown on Rosh ha-Shanah what should we think of?

CHAPTER XIII

DEATH OF SARAH AND THE MARRIAGE OF ISAAC AND REBEKAH
Genesis 23 and 24

Interpretation. The incident of the purchase of the Cave of Machpelah need be mentioned only casually in connection with the death of Sarah as the political questions involved in the dialogue between the Bene Heth and Abraham are beyond the child's comprehension.[5]

The care exercised in the selection of a wife for Isaac from his own kindred rather than from the daughters of Canaan emphasizes again the interest of Providence in selecting the stock out of which the Chosen People was to come. Abraham's servant—presumably Eliezer, who is mentioned in Genesis 15.2—was not permitted to take Isaac out of Canaan as that would have been equivalent to a desertion of his historic mission which was connected with the Promised Land. Significant are the qualifications of the ideal wife for Isaac suggested in the prayer of Eliezer—kindness and hospitality.

Aim. The value of this lesson to the child, apart from its connection with the more general theme of God's selection of the seed from which the Chosen People is to spring, lies in the example of faith in God and fidelity to his trust exhibited by Abraham's servant, and of the kindness and consideration shown by Rebekah, which the child's sympathy with the characters of the story would naturally lead him to imitate.

Suggestions to the teacher. By following the Biblical narrative closely, you will have little difficulty in imparting it to the child. When telling of the death of Sarah, dwell on her virtues a while and then explain Abraham's concern that his son Isaac should have just such a wife as Sarah had been, one that would be worthy to be the mother of the great nation God had promised would be descended from Isaac. Then relate how, not finding such a wife among his neighbors, Abraham sent to the land from which he and Sarah had come. Explain Abraham's refusal to let Isaac go to Mesopotamia because God had told Abraham to leave that place and had promised that in Canaan he would make of his seed a great nation. Emphasize the length and difficulty of the journey, pointing out the route on the map if the children are old enough to interpret a map.

CHAPTER XIV

THE SALE OF THE BIRTHRIGHT
Genesis 25.1 to 34

Interpretation. (Chapter 25. 1 to 10 may be omitted as containing nothing of interest to children, except that Abraham's death and burial should be mentioned.)

The story of Jacob and Esau in their contention for the birthright and the blessing is one that is frequently misunderstood. The tendency to idealize the forefathers of the race has lead many teachers to attempt to justify the conduct of Jacob in his efforts to secure the birthright and the blessing, totally ignoring the fact that all the wretched consequences which followed naturally upon his attempt would seem to indicate that God did not approve. What these consequences were will be discussed in subsequent chapters. Other teachers sin in the opposite direction and make out Esau to be the innocent victim of Jacob's cunning and avarice. How they can reconcile this with the choice of Jacob to be the patriarch rather than Esau, how they can conceive that God's will could confirm the act of Jacob and the hand of Providence be, so to speak, forced into blessing Jacob though Esau was the more worthy of blessing, is difficult to understand. The mistake common to both these versions of the Biblical meaning of the story is that they look at it mainly as a character study of two contrasting types, whereas the moral of the story lies not so much in the characters as in the incidents, which, when given closer attention, reveal the fact that the motive underlying the whole story is not the personal contest between Jacob and Esau but the carrying out of God's plan, contained in his promise to Abraham, the plan of bringing into existence the people to whom He was to reveal Himself. And this idea is brought out, as in the story of Abraham's relation to Ishmael and Isaac, by contrasting the purposes of the human agents with God's purpose and showing how God's purpose is made to triumph by His so shaping the incidents of Jacob's life that they correct Jacob's original misconception of his mission.

Let us see how the incidents in this chapter cast light on our theme. Note in the first instance the prophecy contained in Genesis 25.23 which indicates in advance that Jacob and not Esau was intended from the beginning to be the heir of the blessing of Abraham. Note also that the prophecy speaks of "two nations" and "two peoples", showing distinctly that the events of the narrative were shaped by God with a view to subsequent history not merely to the lives of Jacob and Esau as individuals. The very fact that "the elder shall serve the younger" is to give emphasis to the divine election of Jacob, for, according to the law and custom of those days, the elder was entitled to the obedience and service of the younger. Had Jacob been the older of the two brothers his subsequent preeminence and that of his descendants would have seemed but part of the natural course of events and would not have argued divine election, but with Esau the first born the subsequent elevation of Jacob does so argue.

This, as well as much else in the story, becomes clearer to us if we understand what was meant by the birthright. In patriarchal times, the father was absolute ruler over his descendants. At his death, the oldest son took his place and inherited as even in later times, twice as large a portion of the estate as any of his other sons. (See Deuteronomy 21.17.) But this is not all that was involved in the birthright. If it were all, Jacob's desire for it would have been mere avarice and ambition and would have justified that total condemnation which many a teacher has given him. But we must remember that the first born was also the religious head of the tribe. (See Numbers 3.45.) It was therefore most natural for Jacob to assume that God's promise to Abraham, with all its spiritual implications, naturally went with the birthright.

Now let us examine the characters as they appear in this chapter. Esau is not the consummate villain that he is so frequently depicted as being in later Jewish agada. But on the other hand, he is not the injured hero. The story characterizes him as a skilful hunter, interested in his woodcraft, and caring little about either the privileges or the responsibilities of his birthright. To Jacob however the inheritance of the blessing of Abraham was important, perhaps a knowledge of the prophecy that had preceded his birth making it even more so. Esau had forfeited his moral right to the blessing through his failure to appreciate it. Not too much stress must be laid on Esau's words "Behold I am at the point to die and what profit shall the birthright do to me?" as these are to be regarded not as a statement of sober fact but as the exaggeration of a hungry man, for the Bible takes pains to explain Esau's attitude in the words, "And he did eat and drink and rose up and went his way. So Esau despised his birthright", showing that he was at the time perfectly satisfied with the bargain he had made. This takes from Jacob the stigma of having forced the bargain on Esau when the latter could not help himself. He merely took advantage of Esau's contempt for the birthright, which was sufficient evidence that he was not worthy to possess it. At the same time, Jacob's employing these means to secure the birthright does not seem, as will appear more clearly in later chapters, to meet the divine approval, because (1) this attempt to wrest the birthright from Esau through taking advantage of Esau's weakness in itself argues a lack of complete confidence in the realization of God's promise, in other words, a lack of that quality of temimut, of naive acceptance of God's will, which was so conspicuous a trait of Abraham's character, and (2) because he does not fully understand the spiritual character of his mission inasmuch as he regards its realization as dependent upon the legal status of the birthright, which he could, so he thought, secure by purchase.

Aim. The aim of this lesson is to teach the general truth that a privilege which is not appreciated becomes forfeit, and the particular truth that to be a Jew is to possess such a privilege, which we must learn to appreciate.

Suggestions to the teacher. Before beginning the narrative of this chapter itself, prepare the way by questions that will bring out the fact of the election of Abraham and his descendants and the choice that God exercised in selecting from among his descendants only those properly qualified. Such questions are the following; "Do you remember, when we were learning about Abraham and about how God told him to leave his land and go to the land that He would show him, that God made Abraham a promise? What was that promise? (Note: The answer must include the idea that his descendants would be a great nation, a blessing to all the world, and would inherit Canaan.) When our father Abraham died, did this blessing go to both his children, to Ishmael and to Isaac? To whom did the blessing belong?"

After having thus prepared the way proceed as follows:

"Now Isaac and Rebekah also had two children. The first born or older was called Esau and the younger Jacob, and it was known that only one of the two was to inherit the blessing, but for a long time it was not known which one."

Then contrast the two characters emphasizing the physical prowess of Esau, which won him the more universal admiration and the preference of his father with the quiet thoughtfulness of Jacob. In order to impress the child, the contrast must be given largely in terms of their physical appearance. We continue the narrative as a teacher might tell it in class:

"These two sons, Esau and Jacob, were very different one from the other. Esau was a big strong man, rough and hairy in appearance, who delighted in all sorts of sport and exercise, especially in hunting. People admired him for his great strength and skill and most of them thought that surely this big, strong man was the one whom God had chosen to be the father of His people. And Isaac himself loved Esau more than he did Jacob, because, now that Isaac was growing old, Esau used to hunt food for him in the forest and would tell him wonderful stories of his strength and skill in catching the deer and other game that he prepared for him for food. But Jacob was very different. He was not above the average man in strength and he had no particular skill in hunting as had Esau. He was a quiet man, who used to sit for hours in his tent, while his flocks were pasturing nearby and think about the things he had learned from his father and mother and from his grandfather Abraham, about how God had made the world, and about how he had told Abraham to leave his country and go to a new land, and, above all, about the promise that God had given to Abraham to make of his descendants a great people. Which of these two sons of Isaac and Rebekah had God chosen to become the father of the Jewish people? Most people, no doubt, thought at the time that Esau was meant, because he was the stronger and more successful in the hunt, but there was one person who thought differently, and that was the mother of these two young men, Rebekah. For she remembered a prophecy that God had told her before either of the two children were born, and this prophecy said, 'Two nations will come from thee and two peoples will be born of thee and one will be stronger than the other, but the elder will serve the younger'."

The prophecy is introduced here rather than at the beginning of the story because it is well to stimulate the child's curiosity as to which of the two is to receive the blessing of Abraham before giving him any hint as to the answer. By thus beginning with a statement of the question, the child's attention is at once directed to the central theme of the narrative without which the incident of the sale of the birthright is not comprehensible. But now one comes face to face with the subject of the birthright itself. Explain, that beside Esau's strength and skill, there was another reason why people thought that Esau was to be the chosen son, and that is because he was the older, for it was the custom in those days that the oldest son enjoyed what was known as the birthright. The idea of the birthright can be explained by saying that in the days of which we are speaking the father used to be the king over all his children and their families and servants, that he used to lead them in war and judge all their disputes in time of peace, and that he was also their priest, who used to perform the sacrifices for them and lead them in their prayers and hymns to God, but that, when the father died, the oldest son got all these rights and this right of the oldest son to become priest and king after the death of the father is known as the birthright.

After the child has a clear idea of the meaning of the birthright, tell how Jacob thought that the one who had the birthright was he whom God meant to make the head of the great nation he had told Abraham about, since whoever had the birthright would be king and priest over all the others after Isaac's death. I continue the narrative as the teacher might tell it:

"So Jacob kept thinking to himself, 'If only I had the birthright! If only I had the birthright!' but Esau, who had the birthright, seemed to care very little about it. So long as there was game enough in the forest to keep him busy hunting, he bothered his head very little about what he would do when, on Isaac's death, he would have to rule the people and lead them in the service of God, and the promise made to Abraham that some day his descendants would become a great nation concerned him even less, for he thought only of the affairs of the day and to the future he gave no thought at all."

This brings us to the climax of the narrative, the actual sale of the birthright. It must be told in such a way that the child understands the point that Esau lost his birthright because he did not know how to appreciate it, and that, as a universal proposition, a privilege not appreciated is lost. This can best be done if, before telling the story of the sale of the birthright, one presents a hypothetical case somewhat as follows:

"Suppose, children, that a man owned a very valuable book which he wanted to leave when he died to one of his two children, and suppose that one of his children was a great lover of books and the other did not care even to look at a book or to take the trouble to learn to read, which of the two children do you think ought to have had the book after the father's death? Of course, the one who knew the value of the book and how to appreciate it, because we only deserve what we know how to appreciate. Now who do you think should have had the birthright, Esau, who did not care about being the father of the great people God had promised to make of Abraham's descendants, or Jacob who did care? (Answer: Jacob.) Well, Jacob thought so too and so he began planning how he might get Esau to give up the birthright to him."

In quoting the dialogue between Esau and Jacob, paraphrase Esau's words in verse 32 so as to make it perfectly clear that they are an expression of contempt for the birthright, "I am so hungry I could die. What do I care for the birthright!"

After having told the story question the children with a view to seeing whether they understand its leading ideas. The following are suggestive questions:

What promise did God make to Abraham and to Isaac?

Was this promise meant for both of Isaac's children?

Which of Isaac's children do you think God wanted to have the promised blessing? Why? (Note: If the child gives the wrong answer, the teacher must ask a number of leading questions until the right answer is secured.)

What does birthright mean? Who had the birthright at the beginning of our story? Did Esau care very much for the birthright? Did Jacob want it? Why did Jacob want it? What did Jacob do to get the birthright?

This lesson lends itself easily to dramatization by the children. (See Introduction, page 31.)

CHAPTER XV

JACOB SECURES THE BLESSING
Genesis 26.1 to 28.9

Interpretation. In the first part of this lesson which deals with the life of Isaac, Genesis 26.3 is significant as emphasizing the idea of Palestine as a chosen land, an idea which is the more significant because it suggests that Jacob's flight from the land implied that he had somehow forfeited God's favor and that his flight was in reality a form of exile imposed on him as a punishment and discipline. Verses 7 to 12 must necessarily be omitted. Their general significance is the same as that of Genesis 20. Isaac's patience and forbearance in the matter of the wells suggests comparison with Abraham in his relations to Lot.

With regard to the incident of Jacob's securing the blessing, we have already in the last chapter discussed the significance of the main theme of this story. A few new elements, however, enter into it here. One of these is the blindness of Isaac, which, by making him more dependent upon Esau, keeps him from realizing Jacob's superior qualifications for becoming heir to the blessing of Abraham. Another new element that enters into the story is Esau's marrying the two Hittite women "who were a bitterness of spirit to Isaac and Rebekah". This gives an additional motive for Rebekah's action in trying to secure the birthright to Jacob, since Rebekah would otherwise, at the death of Isaac, become subject to Esau and his wives. It moreover gives emphasis to the fact that Esau was not to be the father of the chosen seed, since, in the case of all of the patriarchs care is exercised that their wives shall likewise be of chosen seed, of the same stock which produced the patriarchs themselves. Genesis 27.33 is significant, particularly the words, "yea, and he shall be blessed", as implying Isaac's recognition that, though the blessing was secured to Jacob by a deception, it was still an indication of God's purpose, and that he had hitherto been mistaken in wanting to confer the blessing on Esau. The same thought is implied in his assenting to Rebekah's suggestion that Jacob seek a wife from her kindred and in his repeating on that occasion the blessing, "May he give thee the blessing of Abraham", etc. As we have already explained, this does not mean that the Bible approves of the deception practiced by Rebekah and Jacob. Quite the contrary. The one immediate effect is that Rebekah has to lose Jacob; that Jacob, instead of entering immediately into possession of the land and the birthright, is a fugitive and an exile; that, as we shall see in subsequent chapters, Rebekah's hope for Jacob's speedy return is not fulfilled; and that as will likewise appear later, there is great danger of Jacob's remaining in Aramea and totally forgetting his destiny until Providence forces him to remember.

The circumstances related in this narrative as we have explained them are significant by reason of what they have to teach us with regard to Israel's mission as the chosen people. In the first place, there is implied the idea, which we have frequently pointed out before, that God's purpose with regard to his people is not fully realized by them. This is shown in our lesson by the fact that the patriarchs are represented as acting in a way which would tend to defeat God's purpose regarding them, as, for instance, when Isaac almost gives the blessing to Esau and when Jacob, through the means he chooses to secure the blessing, is compelled to flee from the Promised Land which he was to inherit. This is a very important corrective to that arrogance which faith in divine election is likely to bring with it, for it contradicts the assumption that the Jewish people is infallible. There is, moreover, implied in this story the idea that when Israel does not rightly conceive its mission, it must be taught through the discipline of hardship and suffering, as in the case of Jacob, that election does not mean immunity from punishment but, on the contrary, stricter accountability, as expressed by Amos, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will visit upon you all your iniquities". (Amos 3.2.)

Aim. The child will not be expected to grasp all the implications of this narrative, but neither will they all escape him, and if the story is well told, without any undue idealization of the characters or distortion of the narrative for the sake of reading a moral into it, the story will impress itself on him sufficiently to gain added meaning as he reverts to it in later years. It is a mistake to imagine that a moral which is not formulated is of necessity not learned.

For the child's immediate benefit, however, it is well to emphasize the punishment of Jacob's deception in order to inculcate the ideal of truthfulness. But great care must be exercised in order not to make Jacob so unsympathetic that Esau becomes the hero of the story, for this would distort the Biblical moral and give rise to a misunderstanding of it which the pupil is not likely to correct in later life. It must always be made plain that Jacob had a right to want and expect the blessing, but that he should have trusted God to give it to him and should not have tried to get it through deception.

Suggestions to the teacher. Inasmuch as the moral of this story is dependent on an understanding of the motives on which the characters act, take particular pains to make your dramatic impersonation of the characters as realistic as possible and not to delay the movement of the plot by lengthy moralizing. This story, like the preceding one of the sale of the birthright, lends itself very well to dramatization by the class, and the success of the children in assuming the roles of the different characters will be an excellent test of your success in imparting the story.

Though one should avoid moralizing in such a way as would interrupt the thread of the narrative, the very complexity of the motives of the characters gives a good opportunity to ask such questions as would necessitate the exercise of moral judgment on the part of the class, as for instance: Was Jacob right in trying to get the blessing from his father by taking advantage of his blindness? Was Jacob punished for having deceived his father? How? etc. But though the teacher may raise these questions, they must not be left open questions. The Biblical moral must be kept clearly in mind and convincingly presented; otherwise such questions merely develop a casuistical attitude on the part of the class, which is morally bad.

CHAPTER XVI

JACOB'S DREAM
Genesis 28.10-22

Interpretation. The story of Jacob's dream, in order to be clearly understood, should be considered in connection with the rest of Jacob's life. His life may be divided into three periods. During the first period, spent in his father's home, he endeavors by his own efforts, partly through unscrupulous means, to secure the birthright and blessing, with the result that instead of having the preeminence over Esau he must flee before him, instead of inheriting the Promised Land he is an exile from it, and instead of becoming the father of a great people he becomes subject to the tribe which his grandfather Abraham had been commanded to leave.

The second period of Jacob's life embraces his abode in Aramea. During this period, his early ambitions become more and more remote and unreal. First love, then the raising of his family and hard labor in the service of Laban draw his mind from his earlier ambitions, and it is with reference to this period that we are told, "A wandering Aramean was my father". (Deuteronomy 26.5.) But just when it would seem that the hope with regard to his future, which he had tried at first in vain to realize and had then almost abandoned, was wholly lost, God intervenes to send him once more to his land.

The third period of his life finds him in undisputed possession of the land, the prophecy of his youth fulfilled, though in a way very different from his youthful anticipations of its fulfillment.

Now Jacob's dream at Beth El is significant by reason of its position at the beginning of the second period in his life, during which he increasingly forgets his mission. It is intended to inform the reader that, though Jacob might forget, God would not and that, though Jacob's blundering devices could not secure him the birthright and blessing, God could secure them to him even when he despaired of them.

Aim. The aim of this story should be to impress the child with a sense of the watchful providence of God over our forefathers and us, and with the desire to express appreciation of this divine guardianship in worship. This story affords an excellent occasion for urging upon children the saying of a prayer on going to bed and on rising, in this way showing an opportunity for the child's application of the lesson in his daily life.

Suggestions to the teacher. Begin by contrasting the comfortable feeling of the child when he goes to bed in his own room, in his own bed, with his mother to pull the blanket over him and all the family nearby, with the way he would feel if night overtook him in a lonely wilderness with no one near except perhaps wild beasts, and he had to lie down on the ground with a stone for a pillow. After this description, give the point of the story you wish to teach, as follows: "And yet even if you would have to sleep alone in the wilderness, you would not be really alone, for God is always with us and sees us even though we do not see Him, and takes care of us, as the story I am going to tell you will show."

Then proceed with the story of Jacob, emphasizing his despairing mood when he leaves Beer Sheba, his fear of Esau, his grief at parting from his parents and home, his disappointment at having to leave the land God had promised to Abraham and Isaac and the sense of having failed after all to secure the birthright, together with the physical dangers and terrors of the wilderness. Then tell how Jacob lay down in the wilderness to sleep, and how God, who had been watching him all the time and took pity on him, sent him a beautiful dream to comfort him. God's promise in verses 13, 14, 15 should be quoted in Biblical language, as should also Jacob's exclamation "Surely the Lord is in this place; and I knew it not ... this is none other than the house of God, and this is the gate of heaven". Jacob's conduct in setting the place aside for worship and his vow should also receive notice. The significance of the name Beth El should be taught the children and its location pointed out on the map.

When the story has been told and repeated by the class, ask, "How many of you, when you go to bed or when you get up in the morning think of how, while you are asleep, God watches over you and takes care that nothing bad should happen to you? Do you say any prayer to God when you go to bed or when you get up to show that you know He takes care of you and thank Him for it? What do you say when you go to bed? When you get up?" Several children should be questioned on this as each child who does say his prayers will want to be given a hearing and should be encouraged. The children might be asked to memorize in Hebrew and English the verse שׁוֹמֵר יִישָׁן וְלֹא יָנוּם לֹא הִנֵּה יִשְׂרָאֵל "Behold, He that keepeth Israel doth neither slumber nor sleep" and be asked to make it a part of their night prayer.

CHAPTER XVII

JACOB IN ARAMEA
Genesis 29.1 to 31.54

Interpretation. The general significance of this period in Jacob's life has already been discussed. Note that when, after completing his term of service for Leah and Rachel, he thinks of returning to his home, the suggestion of a new contract with Laban satisfies him and he remains, so remote is now the thought of the birthright to him. And yet through persistent, persevering labor he does attain to a certain measure of power and influence and to patriarchal dignity. It is interesting to note the poetic justice which makes him during this period of his life the victim of just that sort of deceit which he had himself practised. Nevertheless in spite of the deceit practised upon him by Laban, Jacob remains scrupulously true to his side of the contract and serves the additional seven years for Rachel although he might have been tempted to shirk, as he had been paid in advance. (See Genesis 29.27 to 30.) To be sure he has no scruples about taking the full advantage of his superior mastery of the shepherd's art in his dealings with Laban, but he was certainly under no obligations to him after the treatment he had received from him. One naturally omits in teaching this lesson to children, Genesis 29.31 to 30.24, except that the pupils should be taught the names of Jacob's children because of their significance as heads of the tribes. The incident of the theft of the teraphim may also be omitted because the absence of positive knowledge as to what the teraphim were and what part they played in the religious life of our ancestors prevents us from doing justice to this episode.

Aim. This lesson, together with the ones that precede and follow it, is well calculated to impress on the child the superior advantage of honest, faithful labor over craftiness and deceit. This was already taught negatively in the preceding lessons through the failure of Jacob to attain his ends by deception. It is taught in this lesson both negatively and positively; negatively by Jacob's being made to feel what it means to be deceived, and positively by the fact that when Jacob, notwithstanding the deceit practiced on him, continues to render faithful service, he is finally given the opportunity to return and claim the birthright. The idea of truthfulness is further enforced by God's example in redeeming His promise to Jacob at Beth El.

Suggestions to the teacher. Before beginning this lesson review briefly the preceding, emphasizing the change in Jacob's attitude since his dream at Beth El, particularly his resolution not to attempt to secure the birthright through his own cunning but to rely on God's promise and to try to live aright in the present, trusting God as to the future. The incident of Jacob's lifting the stone from the well to assist Rachel in watering the flock should be given due emphasis as children of this age are interested in feats of strength. The romantic aspect of Jacob's love for Rachel need not be emphasized as this is lost on the child. In telling of Jacob's service as shepherd to Laban, attempt to give the child an idea of what a shepherd's work actually was, how it exposed him to all kinds of weather, how he had to protect his sheep against wild beasts, how he had to draw water for them, to shear them, etc., so that Jacob's serving Laban for all these years shall have some meaning to them. As children have very peculiar ideas of the length of time, try to give some conception of how long a time seven years is by asking one of the children how old he is and then explaining that seven years is probably longer than all the time that he can remember. Explain also how the time seemed shorter to Jacob because of his happiness in being with Rachel by a reference to the child's own experience of how quickly time flies when he is enjoying himself at play. To emphasize Jacob's perseverance tell of Laban's deception, then ask, "Now if you had worked hard for a thing for seven long years and then were cheated out of it, how would you feel about it?" Then point out the moral somewhat as follows:

"Jacob too felt very angry and did not at all like to work seven more years for what should rightly have been given him then. But no doubt the thought came to him, after all, was I any better than Laban? Did I not deceive my father Isaac into giving me the blessing when he wanted to give it to Esau, just as Laban has deceived me? Maybe this is God's way of punishing me. I must be patient and work another seven years as I have promised Laban even though it will be hard and unpleasant, and then maybe God will let me go back home and bless me as He has promised."

CHAPTER XVIII

JACOB RETURNS TO CANAAN
Genesis 32 to 35

Interpretation. Note the significant contrast between Jacob's leaving Canaan and his return. When he left, he was nominally and in his own esteem the possessor of the birthright and the blessing, which he had secured through his own effort and which he thought entitled him to possession of Canaan and the preeminence over Esau. Actually, however, he had gained nothing, and was a fugitive before Esau and an exile from the land. On his return, he makes no demands whatever, acknowledges Esau as sovereign, is ready to pay him tribute and to placate him with gifts, and prays to God only for deliverance from Esau's vengeance. And yet we find him at the end of this episode, by reason of his victory over Shechem and of Esau's departure to Seir, in actual possession of the Promised Land and a recognized ruler of a now important clan.

Before entering on his more illustrious destiny, however, he must be put to the test and atone for the desertion of his mission in his flight from the land in consequence of his efforts to wrest the birthright and the blessing from Esau. This test is indicated by his struggle with the angel on the very border of the Promised Land, a struggle from which he does not escape unscathed. Just what the Biblical author wished to express by this struggle of Jacob with the angel it is difficult to say. It is sometimes interpreted by teachers and preachers as an allegorical representation of a purely subjective struggle in Jacob's heart, but such an explanation is extremely far-fetched. The episode suggests comparison with the incident recorded in Exodus 4. 24-26 and seems to imply that consecration to any high task involves exposing oneself to danger, if, in any way, one is not thoroughly qualified for the task. So long as Moses has not taken upon himself the task of leading the children of Israel from Egypt his failure to circumcize his children can be overlooked, but once he has assumed that task, he is threatened with death for his failure to do so. Similarly, when Jacob is about to enter into the land promised in his father's blessing and confirmed in the vision at Beth El, he too finds himself face to face with a divinely commissioned opponent. His victory over the angel is symbolic of his success in finally qualifying for his mission as is implied in the change of his name to Israel with the explanation of its significance, "For thou hast striven with God and with men and hast prevailed". Inasmuch as there is not mentioned here any struggle with "men", the thought is suggested that this victory is an omen of the future success of the chosen people, while the shrinking of Jacob's thigh sinew suggests that this success is not to be won without suffering and sacrifice, an interpretation frequently found in the Midrash. This representation of the experience of a nation in terms of that of an individual who is the nation's founder is much more in keeping with the spirit of Biblical literature than the allegorical representation of abstract truths in terms of historic or biographical events. Note in this connection Hosea 12. 3-5; "The Lord hath also a controversy with Judah, and will punish Jacob according to his ways, according to his doings will He recompense him. In the womb he took his brother by the heel, and by his strength he strove with a god-like being; so he strove with an angel, and prevailed; he wept, and made supplication unto him: At Beth El he would find him and there he would speak with us". The meaning of these verses is obscure but it is evident that the prophet makes Jacob's experience typical of Israel's as a people.