Abraham: A Man of Relationships
Avram R. Shannon
Avram R. Shannon, 鈥淎braham: A Man of Relationships,鈥 in From Creation to Sinai: The Old Testament through the Lens of the Restoration, ed. Daniel L. Belnap and Aaron P. Schade (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book), 279鈥310.
Two chapters on Abraham may seem excessive, but the importance of Abraham鈥檚 narrative to the Old Testament, indeed to the entire Latter-day Saint canon, suggests that even two may not be enough. In the last section, Gee reviewed the journeys described with the Abrahamic narrative. In this chapter, Shannon explores the narratives themselves, giving particular attention to the relationships depicted therein, and, in so doing, presents a perspective by which Abraham may be understood as a true disciple of God. 鈥擠B and AS
The story of Abraham is one of the central stories in Genesis and in the Old Testament/
Methodological Considerations
As we begin our discussion of Abraham, Sarah, and the various aspects of their life and story, there are a few points that need to be considered from the outset. The first is one of names and terminology. Abraham was born with the name Abram, and Sarah with the name Sarai. As part of the continual unfolding of the Lord鈥檚 covenant, he changes their names in Genesis 17. This means that within the Bible itself, for much of the narrative surrounding them, Abraham and Sarah are referred to as Abram and Sarai. This is not, however, how we tend to refer to them in English, where we usually use their covenant names. Although I will be discussing and analyzing parts of the text that happen before the names are changed, I will refer to them as Abraham and Sarah for the sake of convenience and readability.
The other consideration is the relationship between the narratives and story of Abraham in the book of Genesis and the contributions to our knowledge about Abraham鈥檚 life in the Book of Abraham, one of the distinctive books of scripture revealed by Joseph Smith as part of the Restoration.[4] It is difficult to determine the exact relationship between the Book of Abraham and the book of Genesis.[5] There are, however, a few observations that can be made that will be useful to the present discussion. The first is that the Book of Abraham is a relatively short book and that it adds only a few aspects to the broader narrative of Abraham as found in Genesis. Much of our present Book of Abraham is centered on Abraham鈥檚 cosmic visions, including a discussion of the Creation in chapters 4 and 5. This essay is focused on the narrative of Abraham鈥檚 life, and so, those cosmological aspects are not emphasized in this paper.[6] Instead, this paper instead focuses primarily on the portrayal of Abraham鈥檚 life as found in Genesis, but in those places where the Book of Abraham provides insight I will incorporate those insights into my discussion.
This essay is arranged canonically, which is to say that the material in Abraham and Sarah鈥檚 story is analyzed roughly in the order that it appears in the current biblical text. Biblical scholars have discussed various sources that were later compiled together in order to produce the Book of Genesis and other parts of the first five books of the Bible, much the way that Mormon compiled various sources in the production of the Book of Mormon.[7] Although I acknowledge many of the complexities of this scholarship, generally speaking, what are called 鈥渟ource critical鈥 arguments are not addressed in this chapter. In general, the stories are examined and explored canonically in the way that they have come down in the received biblical text.
God鈥檚 Call
The story of Abraham in the Bible begins with him living in a place identified in the King James Version (KJV) as Ur of the Chaldees (Hebrew 峋給r kasdim) (Genesis 12:1). The traditional reading of this toponym places Abraham in a famous city on the banks of the Euphrates in Mesopotamia.[8] There is some scholarship that instead places this city in northwestern Syria rather than in Mesopotamia.[9] Recent scholarship has continued to study and adduce a plausible historical context for the milieu of Abraham and his family.[10]
The heart of Abraham鈥檚 story really begins when the Lord tells Abraham to get up and leave his land.[11] There are places in Restoration scripture鈥攁nd especially in the immense extrabiblical literature surrounding Abraham鈥攖hat discuss Abraham鈥檚 early life and offers valuable insights into Abraham鈥檚 background, but this is not the focus of the Bible.[12] In the Bible, the story of Abraham really starts when he receives this command from the Lord: 鈥淕et thee out of thy country, and from thy kindred, and from thy father鈥檚 house, unto a land that I will shew thee鈥 (Genesis 12:1). From a relational perspective, Jehovah鈥檚 command to Abraham is to leave not only where he lives but also his 鈥渒indred鈥 and his 鈥渇ather鈥檚 house.鈥 Biblical scholar Dianne Bergant notes, 鈥淚n traditional societies such as ancient Israel, one鈥檚 identity, livelihood, security, and future were all rooted in one鈥檚 status in the household, which was the center of religious, social, and economic life. Such a household consisted of several generations of a family鈥攇randparents, aunts and uncles, and cousins. Abram is told to leave all this, to sever the most intimate bonds imaginable, and to migrate to a foreign land.鈥[13]
The Lord is calling Abraham to leave his old relationships and to build a new covenant relationship with the Lord, which would positively affect this extended family in the coming decades and become the backbone of the development of the ancestral family of Jacob/
Thus, the Lord promises to Abraham to give him blessings and to give him the ability to bless the whole world: 鈥淎nd I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed鈥 (Genesis 12:2鈥3). Note here that at this point the specific promises of the Abrahamic covenant are not revealed to Abraham鈥攐nly a statement of God鈥檚 blessing over Abraham and of Abraham鈥檚 ability to share that blessing with others,[14] including his own extended family. Indeed, this clearly shows that the Abrahamic covenant is fundamentally not just about Abraham receiving blessings for himself. At its core, the Abrahamic covenant is centered on its ability to bless others, and this is clearly mapped out very early here in the stories of Abraham.[15] This serves as another reminder that as the recipient of the covenant, Abraham is required to interact and relate with others to bless them.[16]
The Abrahamic covenant is not possible without Sarah. The Lord鈥檚 promises are fundamentally centered around descent and posterity, which means that they are blessings that come through men and women. It is no mistake that when Jacob gives to Joseph the promises of these blessings, Jacob blesses Joseph with 鈥渂lessings of the breasts, and of the womb鈥 (Genesis 49:25). According to the Doctrine and Covenants, the highest degree of the celestial kingdom and the full blessings of the Abrahamic covenant are limited to men and women together (Doctrine and Covenants 131:1鈥3).[17] The blessings of Abraham are fundamentally the blessings of Sarah.[18]
One of the first things that Abraham does when he comes into the land of Canaan is to build an altar at Shechem (Genesis 12:6). In fact, Abraham鈥檚 itinerary through the land of Canaan is characterized by his building of altars, many of which become holy places or other important locations in later Israelite history. The altars at places like Shechem (12:6), Beth-el (13:3鈥4), Hebron (13:8), and the Temple Mount (22:14) define and delineate the land for his descendants.[19] These altars mark places of divine promise and interaction, showing places where Abraham interacts with his family, God, and others. Through the course of Abraham鈥檚 life, he travels up and down the land of Canaan, in preparation for the divine promises to inherit it for him and for his descendants (13:14鈥17). As biblical scholar Elliot Rabin notes, 鈥淲hereas for Cain, being forced to wander is a punishment, for Abraham, it is a sign of God鈥檚 favor.鈥[20] As Abraham travels throughout the land, he interacts with variety of kings and nobles. Sometimes, as with Melchizedek, these are sources of blessings. Sometimes, as in the interactions with Pharaoh or Abimelech, these are sources of confusion and difficulty, but we see God鈥檚 delivering hand throughout the narratives.
Sarah and the Sister-Wife Theme
In many ways the narrative around Abraham is pushed forward by Sarah because the desire for a son and for posterity is understood in Genesis as deriving from her infertility. This makes Sarah鈥檚 quest for a child in some ways even more poignant and helps explain her decision to allow Abraham to marry her enslaved handmaid, Hagar, as discussed below. The significance of Sarah to the covenant and story of Abraham cannot be overstated. She is part and parcel with the Abrahamic covenant, her desire for children pushes the interactions with Hagar and the birth of Ishmael, and her reputed beauty causes conflict with others around her and her husband.
There is a repeated story in Genesis, which some biblical scholars call the 鈥渟ister-wife theme.鈥[21] This is one of the first parts of the story of Sarah and Abraham in Genesis, and it bears unpacking because it is not exclusive to the Abraham narrative. In this theme, the matriarch and the patriarch (Sarah and Abraham in Genesis 12:10鈥20 and 20:1鈥18; Rebekah and Isaac in 26:1鈥16) pretend to be sister and brother in order to preserve the life of the husband, since they are afraid that the king of the land will kill the husband in order to marry the wife. The wife is protected from the king by miraculous means, and the patriarch usually ends up enriched by the process.
This theme presents some difficulties to latter-day readers of the Hebrew Bible/
On one level, these difficulties illustrate to us one of the great reasons to read the stories of these important figures in the Old Testament. The Old Testament is willing to show us the complexities of men and women like Abraham and Sarah, which in turn helps to remind us that fundamentally, the human story is one of redemption (2 Nephi 2:4鈥7). Like all of the children of our first parents, Sarah and Abraham inherit a fallen nature, which needs to be overcome through repentance and reliance on Jesus Christ (Mosiah 3:16鈥19). Some of the discomfort in the examples of Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, and Rebekah lying can help us to see places where the patriarchs and matriarchs may have struggled, but we know from modern revelation that they have entered into their exaltation (Doctrine and Covenants 132:37). The reminder that we do not need to see the patriarchs and matriarchs as always acting perfectly does not mean that we should ascribe to them gross unrighteousness. It simply means that we can acknowledge that as fallen human beings, they could sometimes make less than perfect choices.
The Book of Abraham adds a distinctive element to at least the first example of this theme. In Abraham 2:22鈥25, it is the Lord who commands Abraham to lie and say that Sarah is his sister so that 鈥淸his] soul shall live鈥 (Abraham 2:24).[24] This solves some problems but raises others鈥攔aising the question as to why God is commanding Abraham to lie. In a sermon given on August 27, 1842, Joseph Smith taught, 鈥淭hat which is wrong under one circumstance, may be, and often is, right under another. God said, 鈥楾hou shalt not kill鈥; at another time he said, 鈥楾hou shalt utterly destroy.鈥 This is the principle on which the government of heaven is conducted, by revelation adapted to the circumstances in which the children of the Kingdom are placed. Whatever God requires is right, no matter what it is, although we may not see the reason thereof till long after the events transpire.鈥[25] This teaching by Joseph Smith reminds us that the primary reason that we obey commandments is because of our relationship with God, who commanded them. Under this understanding, Abraham鈥檚 lying about his relationship with Sarah becomes a test of his willingness to obey God no matter what he commands, a foreshadowing of the testing that the Lord will command when he asks Abraham to sacrifice his son Isaac.
Abraham and Lot
As noted, the story of Abraham plays out in Abraham鈥檚 family relationships. This is certainly true of Abraham and his nephew, Lot. Although Lot鈥檚 most prominent role in the stories in Genesis is in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, Lot is interwoven into the life and story of Abraham. There are fruitful lessons for us to learn from the interactions between Abraham and Lot.[26]
According to Genesis 12:4, Lot was part of Abraham鈥檚 travels from the very beginning, traveling with him as he left his 鈥渒indred鈥 and his 鈥渇ather鈥檚 house鈥 (Genesis 12:1).[27] As Abraham and Lot begin to grow in wealth, tensions began to arise between their herders. It is worth remembering that, for Abraham and Lot, much of their wealth was in livestock. The Bible informs us that Abraham was 鈥渧ery rich in cattle鈥 (13:2) and that Lot had 鈥渇locks, and herds, and tents鈥 (13:5). Because livestock need land to pasture, as their wealth grew, Abraham and Lot were no longer able to live in close proximity. Thus, the biblical narrator informs us that 鈥渢he land was not able to bear them, that they might dwell together: for their substance was great, so that they could not dwell together鈥 (13:6). The tension is so great, in fact, that 鈥渢here was a strife between the herdmen of Abram鈥檚 cattle and the herdmen of Lot鈥檚 cattle鈥 (13:7). This seems to have been a quarrel over pastureland.
According to Genesis, Abraham goes to Lot and says, 鈥淟et there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we be brethren鈥 (Genesis 13:8). Abraham is attempting to nip potential struggles between himself and Lot in the bud by addressing the concern head-on, and he does so by invoking their family relationship. 鈥淏rethren鈥 in Genesis 13:8 clearly refers to general kinship rather than to a specific relationship as brothers. Abraham then makes Lot a very generous offer: 鈥淚s not the whole land before thee? separate thyself, I pray thee, from me: if thou wilt take the left hand, then I will go to the right; or if thou depart to the right hand, then I will go to the left鈥 (13:9). Although Abraham is the elder of the two, and so would be able to claim any part of the land for himself, he offers the choice to Lot to pick whatever part he wants, and Abraham then will honor that choice. One of the things that characterizes Abraham is his generosity in his interpersonal relationships.
Lot chooses the 鈥減lain of Jordan,鈥 which the biblical narrator informs us was 鈥渨ell watered every where, before the Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah鈥 (Genesis 13:10). This choice will, of course, have disastrous consequences for Lot and his family, leading not just to his being captured in battle but also to the loss of his wife and some of his children.[28] Biblical scholar Joseph Blenkinsopp suggests that Lot is 鈥渧oluntarily taking himself out of contention as the heir presumptive of Abraham by choosing to live not only outside the land of promise but also among people of bad repute,鈥 thus preparing the way for the birth of Isaac and the passing of the covenant through Abraham鈥檚 descendants.[29] Abraham allows Lot to choose where to go. Abraham does not focus on his right but instead extends to Lot the privilege of choice.
Part of what is intriguing about this story is that it leads to further communication and blessings from the Lord. After Abraham and Lot part ways, Abraham receives this communication from God:
And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward:
For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.
And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth: so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered.
Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee. (Genesis 13:14鈥17)
Having given up some of the more fertile parts of the land in a generous gesture to preserve the good feelings in the relationship between Lot and him, Abraham receives a promise of even more land and, more importantly to Abraham, a promise of numerous descendants. The Lord commands Abraham to look around him and explore in all directions because that will be a gift to him and, especially, to later Israel. In being willing to sacrifice his temporal blessings in favor of his connection to his nephew, Abraham showed the kind of person that he is. This passage in Genesis 13 is the first full articulation of the Abrahamic covenant in the Bible, and it is no mistake that it is given after Abraham鈥檚 show of generosity.[30] His care for Lot leads him to to rescue Lot, but that in turn leads to Abraham鈥檚 meeting with Melchizedek, a biblically mysterious figure.
Abraham and Melchizedek
Lot鈥檚 decision to 鈥淸pitch] his tent toward Sodom鈥 (Genesis 13:12) led to difficulties for himself and his family. According to Genesis 14, there was a war between a coalition of kings from places east of the land of Canaan and kings from the area surrounding the Dead Sea, including Sodom and Gomorrah.[31] Lot appears to have moved from his seminomadic experience to living within the border of Sodom (Genesis 14:12). Because of this, when the city of Sodom fell to the coalition of kings, Lot and his family and property are part of the spoils of war.
Abraham hears about Lot and his family needing rescue and gathers together 318 of those who were born in Abraham鈥檚 household who were trained for combat. This number is suggestive both of Abraham鈥檚 wealth鈥攁s his household was large enough to muster 318 individuals for combat鈥攁s well as the relative size of the conflict between the two coalitions, since Abraham鈥檚 relatively small force is able to rout the invading armies. We do not know how much strength Abraham鈥檚 allies Mamre, Eschol, and Aner brought to the conflict, but it is clear that this was a small, guerrilla-type action, since they attacked by night (Genesis 14:15).[32] The attack is successful, and Lot and his family are saved.
This experience leads to an interlude where Abraham meets with the kings of Sodom that he saved but also with Melchizedek, the king of righteousness. Melchizedek is a mysterious figure in the Old Testament who appears only here and in Psalm 110. Because of the mysterious nature of his appearance in the book of Genesis (he appears without preamble and disappears without explanation), Melchizedek has attracted a large amount of discussion and interpretation in both Judaism and Christianity.[33] Because Melchizedek looms so large in Latter-day Saint readings and understandings of priesthood organization, he figures prominently in Latter-day Saint discourse, although his prominence in the priesthood discussion in Alma 13 was the forerunner for this.[34] Alma 13 expands on Melchizedek鈥檚 narrative significantly, adding information such as Melchizedek being a king under his father, Melchizedek ruling over a wicked people, to whom he was preaching, how the people repented, and how Melchizedek set up a righteous civilization.[35] The Joseph Smith Translation (JST) contains a lengthy side narrative about Melchizedek that has some continuity with the account in Alma 13 but also has some differences. JST Genesis 14:26鈥30 talks about how Melchizedek performed miracles in his childhood and was an exemplary priesthood holder.[36] Regarding Abraham, Doctrine and Covenants 84:14 reveals that he received the priesthood from Melchizedek, although the scriptures do not specify whether Abraham received it before, during, or after the interactions between him and Melchizedek in Genesis 14.
None of the additional information about Melchizedek is in Genesis. Therein, Melchizedek is the king of Salem (traditionally associated with Jerusalem) and is the priest of the 鈥渕ost high God鈥 (Hebrew El-Elyon).[37] Melchizedek brings bread and wine, blesses Abraham in the name of the most high God, and then blesses the most high God for aiding Abraham. Abraham then pays tithes 鈥渙f all鈥 to Melchizedek (Genesis 14:18鈥20). With only this information in the Bible, it is no wonder that Melchizedek is such a mysterious figure.
We are blessed, however, to have the narrative additions from the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith鈥檚 New Translation because they add valuable information about Melchizedek鈥檚 interactions with Abraham. First of all, both Alma and the JST make the point that Melchizedek is known as 鈥減rince of peace,鈥 which is a play on words in Hebrew with the name of Melchizedek鈥檚 city of Salem (Alma 13:18; JST Genesis 14:33). This connects with Abraham 1:2, where Abraham says that he is looking to become a 鈥減rince of peace,鈥 which he says he received by becoming a 鈥淗igh Priest.鈥 Because Doctrine and Covenants 84:14 tells us that Abraham received priesthood from Melchizedek, we can make a connection between Abraham and Melchizedek鈥檚 becoming princes of peace with their priesthood blessings.[38]
The New Translation also gives clarity to Abraham鈥檚 paying tithing to Melchizedek. JST Genesis 14:37鈥38 says, 鈥淎nd he lifted up his voice, and he blessed Abram, being the high priest, and the keeper of the storehouse of God; Him whom God had appointed to receive tithes for the poor.鈥 This indicates that Melchizedek was the 鈥渒eeper of the storehouse of God,鈥 thus one appointed to receive tithes. It also tells that the purpose of the tithing in this storehouse is 鈥渇or the poor.鈥 In JST Genesis, Abraham specifically pays tithes because of his great economic blessings because 鈥淕od had given him more than that which he had need鈥 (JST Genesis 14:39).[39] Abraham鈥檚 temporal blessings are more than what he needs to support himself, and thus he is willing to use those blessings to the economic benefit of others, which is just one other way in which the Abrahamic covenant becomes a blessing for 鈥渁ll the families of the earth.鈥[40]
Abraham鈥檚 willingness to put his life on the line for his nephew and his interactions with Melchizedek show the high premium that Abraham placed on family and the low premium he placed on the things of this world. This is underscored by his refusal of any of the spoils of the war, and shows that the king of Sodom could not say, 鈥淚 have made [Abraham] rich鈥 (Genesis 14:23). Abraham understood that it was the most high God who was the 鈥減ossessor of heaven and earth鈥 (14:19) and that he could give blessings far beyond any temporal treasure. In interpreting the narratives in Genesis, Hebrews 11:13鈥16 contains the beautiful teachings that Abraham and the rest of the patriarchs and matriarchs were 鈥渟trangers and pilgrims鈥 who were looking for a heavenly country. Abraham鈥檚 covenant perspective was one that focused not on earthly things but on a 鈥渂etter country.鈥 This feeds into one of the great blessings of the Abrahamic covenant鈥攅ternal families and eternal relationships.[41]
Abraham鈥檚 focus on eternal relationships with the Lord and with family did not mean that Abraham鈥檚 life was without strife or trial, however. Sarah鈥檚 continued infertility and the fraught relationship with her enslaved handmaid, Hagar, challenged all parties. These interactions are worth looking at in detail, and this will be our next point of investigation.
Sarah and Hagar
Some of the more difficult stories in Genesis relate to Abraham鈥檚 interactions with his wives. Abraham and Sarah鈥檚 quest for children is one of the driving forces behind many of the choices they made in their lives.[42] As noted above, this includes Sarah鈥檚 decision to give her enslaved Egyptian maid Hagar to Abraham as a concubine.[43] The words maid and concubine had particular social connotations in the ancient world. According to Holzapfel, Pike, and Seely, a 鈥渃oncubine is a woman, usually a slave, [who is] married to a man, but who had less legal status terms of inheritance than a wife.鈥[44] The word that the KJV translates as 鈥渕aid鈥 in Genesis 16:5 is used to 鈥淸translate] a Hebrew word that means slave鈥攊ndicating that Hagar, Bilhah, and Zilpah were slaves to Sarah, Rachel, and Leah.鈥[45]
It should be noted at the outset of this discussion that the laws regulating multiple wives were different in the ancient world than in the modern world of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. During the Restoration, Joseph Smith received a revelation about why Abraham and his heirs had more than one wife. In the ancient world, men having multiple wives was an ordinary part of the ancient world.[46] It is clear from revelations received by Joseph Smith in this dispensation, however, that Abraham鈥檚 multiple wives were not simply ordinary marriages from an ancient perspective but that they were celestial marriages that were approved and sealed in heaven (Doctrine and Covenants 132:34鈥35).
Just as with plural marriage in the early parts of this dispensation, divine approval did not make the actual marriages any easier. This was especially true in this case because the explicit reason for Sarah giving Hagar to Abraham as a wife was to have children.[47] Genesis 16:2 states, 鈥淎nd Sarai said unto Abram, Behold now, the Lord hath restrained me from bearing: I pray thee, go in unto my maid; it may be that I may obtain children by her.鈥 Note that because Hagar is Sarah鈥檚 servant or slave, any children that Abraham had by Hagar would legally come from Sarah, at least in theory.[48] E. A. Speiser connects this to Hurrian law, citing a case where 鈥渢he husband may not marry again if his wife has children. But if the union proves to be childless, the wife is required to provide a concubine, but would then have all the legal rights to the offspring.鈥[49] There are, however, some struggles between Hagar and Sarah, especially in terms of inheritance.
Some of this tension seems to come from Hagar. Genesis tells us that after Hagar conceives, 鈥渉er mistress was despised in her eyes鈥 (Genesis 16:4). The word translated as 鈥渄espised鈥 means to have contempt for someone. Sarah seems to feel that she has made a mistake on some level since she responds to being despised with a rejoinder to her husband, 鈥My wrong be upon thee: I have given my maid into thy bosom; and when she saw that she had conceived, I was despised in her eyes: the Lord judge between me and thee鈥 (16:5, emphasis added).[50] Abraham tells Sarah, 鈥淭hy maid is in thy hand; do to her as pleaseth thee鈥 (16:6).[51] Genesis 16:6 goes on to say, 鈥淪arai dealt hardly with her,鈥 eventually causing Hagar to flee the relative safety of Abraham鈥檚 tent and the protection from the world that it represented.
This part of the narrative surrounding Abraham and his family deserves some unpacking. First, it is a reminder to us of one of the key reasons to read the Old Testament, in that it is not afraid to present its characters, even one as significant as Abraham, in all of their complexities. In spite of their covenant desire, there are still struggles in the relationship between Abraham and his wives, struggles that carry over into later parts of the biblical narrative and beyond. As we discussed in connection with Abraham lying about Sarah鈥檚 status as his wife, one of the most useful parts of the Hebrew Bible/
Because of the fundamental recognition that redemption is necessary for all of humanity, it is not necessary for us to try and justify or explain away actions in the scriptures that make us uncomfortable. When we see Abraham, Hagar, and Sarah acting in ways in their family that are not good, it gives us space to think about how we can work through our own family environments. Relationships can be very difficult, but difficult relationships do not ruin everything for us. Hagar鈥檚 taking advantage of her mistress鈥檚 infertility for self-aggrandizement, Sarah鈥檚 dealing harshly with Hagar, and Abraham鈥檚 unwillingness to intervene in the struggles between his wives are very human responses to the struggles in these individuals鈥 lives. Yet, for all the difficulties, the family of Abraham is still remembered by the Lord, and each member still seeks the Lord.
Note, for example, the care that the Lord has for Hagar, Sarah鈥檚 slave. According to Genesis 16:7, because of the struggles between these two women, Hagar flees into the desert.[52] While in the wilderness, an angel appears to her, bringing her a message from Jehovah. She is first told to return and submit to her mistress (Genesis 16:9). This is not the end of the statement, however. The Lord tells her, 鈥淚 will multiply thy seed exceedingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude鈥 (16:10). The wording of this promise makes it very clear that Hagar鈥檚 descendants are part and parcel with the promises of what we call the Abrahamic covenant, and although there will still be struggles, the Lord remembers her and her sacrifices for its fulfillment.[53] Indeed, Hagar is then informed that she will have a son and is commanded to name him Ishmael, 鈥渂ecause the Lord hath heard thy affliction鈥 (16:11). The name Ishmael means 鈥淕od will hear鈥 in Hebrew, such that Ishmael bears the mark of the Lord鈥檚 care for his mother in his very name.
The Lord鈥檚 care for Hagar continues in the story of her being kicked out after the birth of Sarah and Abraham鈥檚 son, Isaac.[54] After the birth of Isaac, Ishmael is 鈥渕ocking鈥 (Genesis 21:9).[55] This leads to Sarah requesting Hagar and her son be sent away, because 鈥渢he son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son鈥 (21:10). Abraham does not want to send them away, but he does so after the Lord tells him to (21:12). After Hagar leaves and their water runs out, she 鈥渃ast[s] the child under one of the shrubs鈥 (21:15).
Yet the Lord鈥檚 care for Hagar is still evident in this chapter. Even before she is cast out, the Lord tells Abraham that he will also make Ishmael into 鈥渁 nation, because he is [Abraham鈥檚] seed鈥 (Genesis 21:13). The Lord reiterates this promise to Hagar herself in Genesis 21:18. Hagar receives comfort and direction from God, reminding the reader once again that he is not a respecter of persons and that he loves all of his children, black and white, male and female, and, as is especially germane to this story, bond and free (2 Nephi 26:33).[56] Being enslaved does not put Hagar out of the notice of the Lord, and she has a role to play in fulfilling of the Abrahamic covenant. For Latter-day Saints, Doctrine and Covenants 132 implies that her relationship with Abraham is a celestial relationship, suggesting that, like Abraham, she has received her exaltation, and she sits on a throne (Doctrine and Covenants 132:29).[57] Indeed, being enslaved did not put her out of the notice of the Lord because none of God鈥檚 children are outside of his notice. Hagar illustrates a key part of the relational nature of the Abraham narrative, reminding us that the Abrahamic covenant is about how we relate to each other and how the Lord relates to us.
The Changing of Names and Covenant
As with other parts of Genesis, there are a number of symbolic names in the stories surrounding Sarah and Abraham, including divinely appointed name changes.[58] Abram and Sarai have their names changed or modified as part of their process of seeking the covenant. The name Abram comes from Hebrew words that mean something like 鈥渆xalted father.鈥 As noted above, Abraham鈥檚 life and his story in Genesis focuses on his family relationships, including his desire to have children and to therefore become a father.[59] This has strong resonances with Abraham 1:1鈥5, which states that Abraham was searching for the 鈥渂lessings of the fathers.鈥 Indeed, the idea of Abraham and fatherhood seems to be entwined through all of those first few verses in the Book of Abraham, with the word father or fathers appearing ten times in the first five verses.
Thus, it comes as no surprise that fatherhood remains part of the covenant that God makes with Abraham, and (although his name is changed from Abram to Abraham) the idea of fatherhood is still there. The Bible explains the name change as a transformation of Abraham into a 鈥渇ather of many nations鈥 (Hebrew ab hamon goyim) (Genesis 17:5). Although this explanation has elements of folk etymology to it (i.e., the name Abraham does not come from ab hamon goyim), the giving of the name symbolizes the covenant relationship between the Lord and Abraham.
Sarai鈥檚 name is changed to Sarah. Unlike the change from Abram to Abraham, the Bible does not give a reason for this particular change. Although this change is probably not even a change in the root of the name, there is a still a symbolic element of receiving a new name as part of the new covenant identity. The new name represents a change from the old identity to a new covenant relationship with the Lord. Abraham and Sarah鈥檚 new names are symbols of their covenant blessings and their covenant responsibilities to serve the Lord and to bless his children. This obligation to bless others stands at the center of Abraham鈥檚 respect for the rules of hospitality, as shown when he met the three travelers.
Abraham and the Holy Men
We have already noted that two of the major themes in the stories of Abraham are Abraham鈥檚 generosity and his obedience. Both of those are displayed in his interactions with the three travelers as recorded in Genesis 18. Abraham was sitting in his tent when he saw three strangers and invited them into his hospitality. There is a little bit of incongruity in what Abraham offers the strangers and what he ends up giving them that serves to highlight Abraham鈥檚 hospitality and generosity. In Genesis 18:4鈥5, when he invites the travelers in, Abraham offers them a 鈥渓ittle water鈥 and a 鈥渕orsel of bread,鈥 which the travelers accept. He then tells Sarah to make cakes using three measures of the good flour. The KJV鈥檚 鈥渕easures鈥 are not the equivalent of modern cups. 鈥淢easure鈥 translates an ancient measurement called a seah, meaning that Abraham鈥檚 three measures of flour is the equivalent of roughly ninety-three cups of flour. Sarah would be able to make a lot of cakes with that much flour. Abraham also goes and kills a young calf and serves it the strangers with butter and milk.[60] The lengths that Abraham goes to in order to care for his guests is much more than he offered them at the outset. Rather than serving them a little bit of bread and water, Abraham throws a great feast for them.
Abraham鈥檚 generous spirit is especially noteworthy in light of the ancient customs of hospitality. The ancient world could be a hostile place, and so there were cultural protections to protect and preserve travelers.[61] The book of Genesis portrays Abraham in such a way that highlights his concern for these protections鈥攈e wants to protect and preserve these travelers. This again highlights the importance of relationship in the Abraham story. Abraham is not only concerned with those with whom he is immediately connected, but he is also concerned with strangers who were passing by. This is a great example of what Rabin calls Abraham鈥檚 鈥渦nwavering concern toward others, no matter whether they are family or stranger.鈥[62] Abraham鈥檚 willingness to extend love and protection to strangers is not limited to travelers and underscores a key interaction between him and Lord concerning the people in Sodom and Gomorrah, which we will explore next.
Abraham and Prophetic Intercession
After the other two men leave, the third man, whom the scriptures present as Jehovah, lingers behind to speak with Abraham. He asks, 鈥淪hall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do; Seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him鈥 (Genesis 18:17鈥19).
The Lord gives to Abraham quite the commendation here. Note that the Lord frames Abraham鈥檚 righteousness as generational鈥攎any nations will be descended from him, and he will teach his children to keep the commandments and to do justice. The Lord takes the long view, and his relationship with Abraham reflects that view.
After this, the Lord tells Abraham that he is going to go down to Sodom to see whether they needed to be destroyed, 鈥渂ecause the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and their sin is very grievous鈥 (Genesis 18:20). Abraham then asks the Lord a famous question, 鈥淲ilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?鈥 (18:23). It is a difficult question to ask at the best of times. God is responsible for both life and death (1 Samuel 2:6), and his ways are not always knowable to humanity (Isaiah 55:8). Although Abraham surely has some sense of this, his relationship with Jehovah is sufficient that Abraham is willing and able to intercede with the Lord on behalf of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. As it is recorded in Genesis, Abraham proceeds to continue to ask God to save the city for fewer and fewer people, until the Lord promises that he will not destroy the city of Sodom and Gomorrah if he found even ten righteous people (Genesis 18:32).
Abraham鈥檚 willingness to stand between the Lord and the people of Sodom is what is known as 鈥減rophetic intercession,鈥 and Abraham is a distinctive example of this. Joshua M. Sears has discussed prophetic intercession by highlighting 鈥渢he theological discomfort that may arise when modern readers study intercessory accounts in scripture.鈥[63] It can be jarring for some to see the prophet seemingly protecting people from a presumably loving God. However, Sears points out that this seems to be a teaching tool on the part of the Lord. Sears notes,
We may ask, if God were solely interested in prosecuting Israel, why bother holding conversations with the defense in the first place? God also serves as judge, and judgment would certainly be easier without the debate. But easier is not what he chooses. 鈥淪hall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do[?]鈥 God asks, before deciding no (Genesis 18:17). He tells Abraham of his plans to destroy Sodom, Abraham balks, and the intercessory probing begins (see 18:20鈥33). One cannot help but sense that God had intended this all along. The invitation to be challenged hints that the prosecution has more in mind than winning. Furthermore, the fact that God the judge so often decides against God the prosecutor suggests that, despite all the talk of death and doom, God the judge really isn鈥檛 rooting for God the prosecutor after all. The division between judge, prosecution, and defense begins to break down.[64]
This whole story serves as a good reminder that the occasional barriers that we put between God鈥檚 justice and his mercy can be artificial, especially in an Old Testament context.[65]
In fact, Abraham鈥檚 question at the outset of his interaction with God here is instructive in how it blurs the categories of justice and mercy: 鈥淭hat be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?鈥 (Genesis 18:25). Note that Abraham is pleading for mercy for the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, but he does so with an appeal to the Lord鈥檚 justice and righteous judgment. This blurring of justice and mercy is characteristic of the Lord who serves as 鈥渏udge, prosecution, and defense,鈥 but it also illustrates why relationships are so important in the stories surrounding the establishment of the covenant. Fundamentally, the purpose of the Abrahamic covenant is to help Abraham, Sarah, and their descendants to become 鈥減erfect,鈥 which means to be like God. By participating in God鈥檚 twinned attributes of compassion and justice, Abraham learns something about what it means to be like God and what the kinds of relationships are that the Lord wants us to build through covenant making with him and our fellow human beings.[66] That knowledge and those relationships will be tested by the Lord as part of the process of making Abraham holy. It is now to the great Abrahamic test that we turn next.
The Aqedah
After all of Abraham and Sarah鈥檚 work and faithfulness in acquiring a son together comes one of the most difficult commandments recorded in scripture[67]: 鈥淎nd it came to pass after these things, that God did tempt Abraham, and said unto him, Abraham: and he said, Behold, here I am. And he said, Take now thy son, thine only son Isaac, whom thou lovest, and get thee into the land of Moriah; and offer him there for a burnt offering upon one of the mountains which I will tell thee of鈥 (Genesis 22:1鈥2). This commandment tests Abraham鈥檚 commitment to the covenant with the Lord, especially in light of the long-awaited birth of his son Isaac.[68]
Child sacrifice was not unknown in the ancient world and was seen as the ultimate of consecration, often done in great extremity.[69] It would not have been outside of the immediate religious world of Abraham. According to Restoration scripture (and some of the traditions that circulated in early Christianity and Judaism), Abraham had already had an experience with almost being sacrificed himself before his travel to the Holy Land (Abraham 1:11鈥12). The Near Eastern background of the Lord鈥檚 command to Abraham makes this command even more remarkable and worthy of discussion. In later parts of the Hebrew Bible, human sacrifice is absolutely not associated with the God of Israel. In the Hebrew Bible, child sacrifice is often associated with the worship of the non-Israelite god Molech, who is worshipped through an act of 鈥減assing one鈥檚 seed through the fire to Molech.鈥[70] Some scholars have connected this ritual to the Tophet, a place of ritual burning condemned by the Israelite prophets, or to the Phoenician molk sacrifices, linking this practice to some form of Israelite or Canaanite human sacrifice.[71] The command given to Abraham to sacrifice his son would have felt both strange and familiar.
There are some elements from the Book of Abraham that add another element to this story and, on certain levels, make the command even more heart-wrenching. Abraham 1:10 references that the priest of Pharaoh would offer a 鈥渢hank-offering of a child,鈥 which appears to be a reference to an attested practice in ancient Egypt.[72] What makes this episode particularly poignant is the addition of the information in Abraham 1:5鈥7 that Abraham鈥檚 鈥渇athers鈥 had turned from the worship of the Lord and tried to have Abraham killed through ritual sacrifice, apparently for his pushing against their idolatrous actions.[73] This means that the command to sacrifice his own son would have pushed against the horror of his own experiences on the altar, a fate that he was saved from only by the timely intervention of the Lord. This heightens the sense of what a difficult commandment this would have been for Abraham to fulfill.
Although the command to sacrifice Isaac is a striking one, it is one with important doctrinal significance to Latter-day Saints.[74] As already noted, this passage begins 鈥淎nd it came to pass . . . that God did tempt Abraham鈥 (Genesis 22:1). The verb that the KJV translates as 鈥渢empt鈥 is the Hebrew nissah, which is a verb that means to 鈥渢ry鈥 or 鈥減rove.鈥 Rather than being tempted in the sense that the Lord is trying to get Abraham to do something wrong, this is testing whether or not Abraham will do anything that the Lord commands him to do.[75] This is confirmed later in the story of the binding, when the Lord tells Abraham, 鈥淣ow I know that thou fearest God鈥 (Genesis 22:12).[76] This test was fundamentally about whether Abraham loved God more than Abraham loved his son or his own self-image of himself as a 鈥渇ather of many nations.鈥 Given the amount of covenant and promise that has gone into the birth of Isaac, this is not an empty commandment鈥攖his is a real test of Abraham鈥檚 love and loyalty to Jehovah. According to John Taylor, Joseph Smith taught the Quorum of the Twelve, 鈥淚 heard the Prophet Joseph say, in speaking to the Twelve on one occasion: 鈥榊ou will have all kinds of trials to pass through. And it is quite as necessary for you to be tried as it was for Abraham and other [people] of God, and (said he) God will feel after you, and He will take hold of you and wrench your very heart strings, and if you cannot stand it you will not be fit for an inheritance in the Celestial Kingdom of God.鈥欌[77] In the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord tells Joseph Smith that Abraham鈥檚 obedience to this difficult testing is part of the 鈥渨orks of Abraham鈥 (Doctrine and Covenants 132:32鈥36).
One of the compelling things about this part of Abraham鈥檚 story is how laconic he is about the whole affair. We know from his prophetic intercession in the matter of Sodom and Gomorrah that Abraham is not afraid to intercede with God or even to argue when Abraham does not agree with something. Yet in this case, we do not see him protesting or pleading with God. He simply gets up and does what he is told. Genesis tells us, 鈥淎nd Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place of which God had told him鈥 (Genesis 22:3). Note Abraham鈥檚 silent obedience here. Abraham鈥檚 laconic response to the commandment is one of the features of this story. There could be many reasons behind this, but it speaks to Abraham鈥檚 loyalty to the covenant that he made with Jehovah, as does everything in this story.
There is a beautiful and elegant structure to this narrative in Genesis 22. When the Lord first commands Abraham, he responds by saying, 鈥淏ehold, here I am鈥 (22:1). This is a translation of a Hebrew phrase that can be translated as something like, 鈥淏ehold me,鈥 or 鈥淚t is I.鈥 Although obscured by the translation in the KJV, when Isaac asks his question in 22:7, Abraham responds to him in the same way he did to the Lord. Abraham says the same thing again in Genesis 22:11, when the angel of Jehovah stops him from killing his son. This provides a nice symmetry between Abraham鈥檚 relationship with Isaac and Abraham鈥檚 relationship with the Lord. One of the characteristics of Abraham is his readiness to serve, and his exhortation of 鈥淏ehold me.鈥 The binding of Isaac is fundamentally about Abraham鈥檚 willingness, whatever the difficulty, to do what the Lord asks him.[78]
Conclusion
Abraham is sometimes described as 鈥渢he father of the faithful.鈥 A close examination of his life and the lives of his family members shows that Abraham earned this title because of his willingness to be embedded in relationships鈥攂oth with God and with his fellow human beings. Jesus Christ cited Deuteronomy 6 and Leviticus 19 to establish the two great commandments of loving God and your neighbor (Matthew 22:37鈥39). Abraham exemplifies the process of loving God through loving your neighbor. This is not to say that Abraham did not have his struggles in his life and his relationships, as his interactions with Hagar and Sarah clearly show. Sarah herself had her own struggles with becoming the 鈥渕other of the faith,鈥 but her own faith led her to becoming a biological mother long after any expectation of that happening. This did not free her from her struggles with Hagar, but the Lord was able to transform that into a great blessing for the descendants of Ishmael.
The Abrahamic covenant is about relationships, both with each other and the Lord, and in this life, sometimes these relationships are tested. This was true of Abraham and Lot and Sarah and Hagar. Sarah鈥檚 trust in the Lord was tested by her long wait for motherhood. Abraham鈥檚 relationship with the Lord was put to the greatest test with the Lord鈥檚 command for Abraham to sacrifice Isaac, his beloved and covenant son. It is no mistake, however, that the test of Abraham鈥檚 life was a test based on his relationships. Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar remind us that as we become the 鈥渟eed of Abraham鈥 (Doctrine and Covenants 84:34), we do so by entering into covenant relationships with the Lord and with others. As we do so, we are able to say, like Abraham, 鈥淭hy servant has sought thee earnestly; now I have found thee鈥 (Abraham 2:12).
Notes
[1] Both Latter-day Saint and general scholarly literature on Abraham is immense. The following sources were especially useful in the preparation of this chapter: Dianne Bergant, Genesis: In the Beginning (Minneapolis: Liturgical Press, 2013); Joseph Blenkinsopp, Abraham: The Story of a Life (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2015); Elliot Rabin, The Biblical Hero: Portraits in Nobility and Fallibility (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society, 2020); E. A. Speiser, Genesis (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1964), Richard Neitzel Holzapfel, Dana M. Pike, and David Rolph Seely, Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2009).
[2] Rabin, Biblical Hero, 121.
[3] David L. Peterson, 鈥淕enesis and Family Values,鈥 Journal of Biblical Literature 124, no. 1 (2005): 5鈥23. Peterson suggests that Genesis is very concerned with family and family values, although those values do not necessarily accord with twenty-first century notions about family.
[4] For a useful and approachable introduction to the Book of Abraham, see John Gee, An Introduction to the Book of Abraham (Provo: UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017). Gee鈥檚 book is especially useful because of his annotated bibliography at the end of each chapter.
[5] This is in contradistinction with the Book of Moses, which, as an extract from the Joseph Smith Translation, is explicitly an inspired revision of the King James Version of the Bible. See Kent P. Jackson, The Book of Moses and the Joseph Smith Translation Manuscripts (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2005), 1.
[6] Readers interested in the cosmographic and cosmological aspects of the Book of Abraham should look at John Gee and Brian Hauglid, eds., Astronomy, Papyrus, and Covenant (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2005). This book provides a number of essays looking at various aspects of the Book of Abraham and its relationship to ancient and modern astronomy. See also Kerry M. Muhlestein, 鈥淓ncircling Astronomy and the Egyptians: An Approach to Abraham 3,鈥 Religious Educator 10 (2009): 33鈥50; Gee, Introduction to the Book of Abraham, 115鈥20.
[7] For a Latter-day Saint discussion about issues regarding sources and interactions generally, see Daniel L. Belnap, 鈥淭he Law of Moses: An Overview,鈥 in New Testament: History, Culture, and Society, ed. Lincoln H. Blumell (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book; Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 2019), 19鈥34. For a more in-depth discussion, see David Rolph Seely, 鈥淲e Believe the Bible As Far As It Is Translated Correctly: Latter-day Saints and Historical Biblical Criticism,鈥 Studies in Bible and Antiquity 8 (2016): 64鈥87. For an accessible discussion of the various arguments in favor of understanding the processes in producing the first five books of the Bible from a literary perspective, see Joel S. Baden, The Composition of the Pentateuch: Renewing the Documentary Hypothesis (New Haven, CT: Yale University, 2012).
[8] Blenkinsopp suggests that the Mesopotamian connections here indicate an exilic gloss on the original 鈥渓and of the fathers.鈥 Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 26.
[9] Paul Y. Hoskinson, 鈥淩esearch and Perspectives: Where was Ur of Abraham?鈥 Ensign, July 1991. Because of the Egyptian influence visible in the Book of Abraham, that particular book of scripture is very suggestive of placing Abraham鈥檚 Ur in what is now modern-day Syria.
[10] See, for example, John Gee鈥檚 chapter on Abraham in this volume.
[11] Rabin, Biblical Hero, 123鈥24.
[12] There is a useful collection of many of these traditions in John A. Tvedtnes, Brian M. Hauglid, and John Gee, Traditions about the Early Life of Abraham (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2001). The material in the Book of Abraham is found in Abraham 1:5鈥20. Rabin discusses some of the rabbinic background in Rabin, Biblical Hero, 127鈥28.
[13] Bergant, Genesis, 42.
[14] Blekinsopp, Abraham, 27.
[15] The longer version of the Abrahamic covenant that Latter-day Saints are most familiar with is found in the Book of Abraham, which characteristically for that book, introduces ideas of priesthood blessings into the core idea of the covenant. According to the narrative timeline of the Book of Abraham, this happens right around the same time this shorter version is given in Genesis 12. For a discussion of the Book of Abraham鈥檚 version of the Abrahamic covenant, see Monte S. Nyman, 鈥淭he Covenant of Abraham,鈥 in The Pearl of Great Price: Revelations from God, ed. H. Donl Peterson and Charles D. Tate Jr. (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1989), 155鈥70. See also Shon Hopkin鈥檚 chapter in this volume.
[16] Again, this is explicitly laid out in Abraham 2:9鈥11, but it is perhaps implied in the ambiguous phrasing in Genesis 12:5, which talks about the 鈥渟ouls they had gotten in Haran.鈥 Jewish tradition understands this as bringing souls to the worship of Jehovah. The early Midrashic collection of Genesis Rabbah suggested that Abraham would convert the men, and Sarah would convert the women. See Genesis Rabbah 39:14. This is a convenient English translation: Harry Freedman, trans., Genesis Rabbah (London: Soncino Press, 1983).
[17] 鈥淎brahamic Covenant,鈥 a Gospel Topics essay at ChurchofJesusChrist.org, says that 鈥淎braham made covenants with God when he received the gospel, when he was ordained a high priest, and when he entered into celestial marriage.鈥
[18] And, as we shall see, they are fundamentally the blessings of Hagar and Keturah.
[19] Shechem is the first capital of the northern kingdom of Israel (see 1 Kings 12:1). Bethel was one of the earliest resting places of the ark of the covenant when the Israelites entered the land (Judges 20:27), and when the Israelite king builds his two national shrines, he places one at Bethel (1 Kings 12:29鈥39). Hebron was the first capital of David鈥檚 kingdom before the capture of Jerusalem (2 Samuel 2:1鈥3). The significance of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is well known. For a discussion of the relationship between the life of Abraham and later notions of place and space, see Koog P. Hong, 鈥淎braham, Genesis 20鈥22, and the Northern Elohist,鈥 Biblica 94, no. 3 (2013): 321鈥39.
[20] Rabin, Biblical Hero, 122.
[21] Holzapfel, Pike, and Seely, Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament, 52.
[22] His interaction with Sarah in these circumstances both in the initial lie in Genesis 12:20 and in the rationalization that Sarah is his sister are two of the three places where Medieval Jewish commentator Nahmanides ascribed sin to Abraham. The third is the treatment of Hagar, discussed below. See the discussion in David Berger, 鈥淥n the Morality of the Patriarchs in Jewish Polemic and Exegesis,鈥 Modern Scholarship in the Study of Torah: Contributions and Limitations, ed. Shalom Carmy (Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson, 1996), 131鈥46. For a Latter-day Saint reading of the story that largely exonerates Abraham based on the Book of Abraham and its affinities with other ancient texts, see Thomas W. Mackay, 鈥淎braham in Egypt: A Collation of Evidence for the Case of the Missing Wife,鈥 BYU Studies Quarterly 10, no. 4 (Summer 1970): 429鈥40.
[23] Holzapfel, Pike, and Seely, Jehovah and the Old Testament, 52. In this section (containing page 52) they provide a useful summary of some of the literary problems and suggest solutions.
[24] It is, perhaps, intriguing to note that the Joseph Smith Translation does not make the same change to the story, such that Abraham is still the originator of the idea in JST Genesis. See 鈥淥ld Testament Revision 1,鈥 p. 29, The Joseph Smith Papers.
[25] 鈥淗istory, 1838鈥1856, volume D-1 [1 August 1842鈥1 July 1843] [addenda],鈥 p. 3 [addenda], The Joseph Smith Papers.
[26] Larry R. Helyer, 鈥淭he Separation of Abram and Lot: Its Significance in the Patriarchal Narratives,鈥 Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 26 (1983): 77鈥88.
[27] Raymond Hariri, 鈥淎braham鈥檚 Nephew Lot: A Biblical Portrayal,鈥 Tradition: A Journal of Jewish Orthodox Thought 25 (1989): 31鈥41, especially 31鈥32.
[28] Hariri, 鈥淟ot: A Biblical Portrayal,鈥 34鈥35.
[29] Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 32.
[30] Speiser, Genesis, 98. Helyer lists numerous commentaries on Genesis that adduce this lesson from Abraham and Genesis. See Helyer, 鈥淪eparation of Abram and Lot,鈥 86n3.
[31] Shinar is the biblical name for Mesopotamia generally. Elam was a kingdom in what is now Iran. Neither Ellasar nor 鈥渢he nations鈥 can be securely connected to any specific place. The five 鈥渃ities of the plain鈥 were destroyed in the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and biblical scholarship has been unable to connect them to any specific place, with the notable exception of Zoar. See Willem C. van Hattem, 鈥淥nce Again: Sodom and Gomorrah,鈥 Biblical Archaeologist 44 (1981): 87鈥92.
[32] Rabin connects this to the idea that God fights the battles for his people because the odds are stacked against the Israelites. Rabin, Biblical Hero, 249. On that idea from a Restoration perspective, see Kerry Muhlstein, 鈥淎 Savior With a Sword: The Power of a Fuller Scriptural Picture of Christ,鈥 Religious Educator 20, no. 3 (2019): 114鈥21.
[33] See J. Reiling, 鈥淢elchizedek鈥 in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, ed. Karel van der Toorn, Bob Becking, and Pieter W. van der Horst, 2nd ed. (Leiden: Brill; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999), 560鈥62; Moshe Reiss, 鈥淭he Melchizedek Traditions,鈥 Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament 26 (2012): 259鈥65; Ioan Chirila, Stelian Pasca-Tusa, and Elena Onetiu, 鈥淩econstruction of Melchizedek鈥檚 History in Rabbinic and Christian Traditions,鈥 Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 48 (2017): 3鈥15; Ann N. Madsen, 鈥淢elchizedek at Qumran and Nag Hammadi,鈥 in Apocryphal Writings and the Latter-day Saints, ed. C. Wilfred Griggs (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1986), 285鈥95.
[34] Much of this discourse derives from Joseph Smith鈥檚 use of the book of Hebrews in his explanation of the Latter-day priesthood order. See Frank F. Judd Jr. 鈥淢elchizedek: Seeing After the Zion of Enoch,鈥 in Sperry Symposium Classics: The Old Testament, ed. Paul Y. Hoskisson (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University: Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2005), 69鈥82; John W. Welch, 鈥淭he Melchizedek Material in Alma 13:13鈥19,鈥 in By Study and Also by Faith, ed. John M. Lundquist and Stephen D. Ricks (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book; Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 1990), 2:238鈥72.
[35] The immediate source for Alma鈥檚 expanded Melchizedek narrative is not explicitly stated in the Book of Mormon. It does contain material that is not in Genesis, which is mostly concerned with Melchizedek鈥檚 interactions with Abraham. The only clue to his source that Alma gives is when he says, 鈥淣ow there were many before him, and also there were many afterwards, but none were greater; therefore, of him they have more particularly made mention鈥 (Alma 13:19). Alma does not specify who 鈥渢hey鈥 are, but he tells the people of Ammonihah that 鈥渢he scriptures are before you鈥 (13:20), suggesting that wherever this comes from, Alma views it as scriptural. See Judd, 鈥淢elchizedek,鈥 69鈥72; Welch, 鈥淢elchizedek Material,鈥 263鈥64.
[36] Doctrine and Covenants 107:2鈥3 informs us that the higher priesthood was renamed the Melchizedek Priesthood 鈥渂ecause Melchizedek was such a great high priest.鈥
[37] This is a name for God that is most common in the Psalms. Sometimes the element Elyon (鈥淗ighest鈥) appears, as it does here, connected with God (Hebrew Elohim), sometimes it is used with Jehovah/
[38] It is intriguing to connect these ideas to the prophecy in Isaiah that Jesus, as the Davidic Messiah, would be a 鈥淧rince of Peace鈥 (Isaiah 9:6).
[39] Judd connects this with the JST鈥檚 connection of Melchizedek to Enoch in Judd, 鈥淢elchizedek,鈥 79鈥80.
[40] It also provides a valuable perspective on the relational aspect of the Abrahamic covenant, especially regarding who our 鈥渘eighbor鈥 is (in light of Jesus鈥檚 teachings on the parable of the good Samaritan).
[41] Kent P. Jackson, 鈥淭he Abrahamic Covenant: A Blessing for All People,鈥 Ensign, February 1990.
[42] Bergant, Genesis, 41.
[43] For a discussion of the Latter-day Saint understanding and deployment of the Hagar stories, see Andrew C. Smith, 鈥淗agar in LDS Scripture and Thought,鈥 Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 8 (2014): 87鈥137. Smith has a useful and in-depth examination of the Hagar passages in the Old Testament. See also Carol L. Meyers, 鈥淗agar,鈥 in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, ed. Bruce M. Metzger and Michael D. Coogan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), 266.
[44] Holzapfel, Pike, and Seely, Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament, 64.
[45] Holzapfel, Pike, and Seely, Jehovah and the World of the Old Testament, 66. Although not all of the modern connotations of the word slave are present in the biblical conception, it is important to be aware of the difference in social status between Sarah and Hagar.
[46] Ze鈥檈v Falk, Hebrew Law in Biblical Times (Provo, UT: Foundation for Ancient Research and Mormon Studies, 2001), 127鈥28; Petersen, 鈥淕enesis and Family Values,鈥 15 argues that Genesis has an 鈥渆xpansive鈥 view of what family means.
[47] According to Jacob in the Book of Mormon, this is one of the primary reasons the Lord allows plural relationships. See Jacob 2:30.
[48] Falk, Hebrew Law, 154.
[49] Speiser, Genesis, 120鈥21.
[50] Meyers, 鈥淗agar,鈥 266.
[51] Although Abraham will ask the Lord for guidance in the later story in Genesis 21, the Bible gives no such indication that he does so here in Genesis 16. He might have done so, based on Genesis 21, but it is not explicit or implicit in Genesis 16.
[52] Dozeman, 鈥淲ilderness and Salvation History in the Hagar Story,鈥 24, especially notes 4 and 5.
[53] The Bible tends to present Ishmael in a positive light, and there are numerous individuals in later Israelite history (including the Book of Mormon) who are named Ishmael. See Michael D. Coogan, 鈥淚shmael,鈥 in The Oxford Companion to the Bible, 329.
[54] Some scholars have suggested that there are a few problems with the chronology in Genesis here, since they understand Ishmael to be an infant here. The early biblical scholar Hermann Gunkel argued that the two stories of Hagar and Ishmael fleeing were two versions of the same story. Gunkel, 鈥淭he Two Accounts of Hagar (Genesis xvi. and xxi., 8鈥21),鈥 The Monist 10 (1900): 321鈥42. T. D. Alexander, 鈥淭he Hagar Traditions in Genesis XVI and XXI,鈥 Vetus Testamentum Supplements 41(1990): 131鈥48, argues that the two stories derive from different traditions. Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 53, observes, 鈥淲e can make sense of the activity of the characters at this juncture only by ignoring Ishmael鈥檚 鈥榮chematic鈥 age and thinking of him as a young child.鈥
[55] This is a wordplay on the name Isaac, since the verb translated as 鈥渕ocking鈥 has the same root as Isaac鈥檚 name. It is actually probably better translated as 鈥渓aughing鈥 or 鈥減laying,鈥 but these translations would not explain Sarah鈥檚 violent reaction. For a discussion of the various interpretive strands here, see Smith, 鈥淗agar,鈥 96n32.
[56] Meyers, 鈥淗agar,鈥 266.
[57] Orson Hyde, an early Apostle of the Restoration, explicitly taught this point. In an address given in 1874, he said, 鈥淚f you go right into Abraham鈥檚 bosom there will be one side Sarah and on the other Hagar.鈥 See Orson Hyde, in Journal of Discourses (London: Latter-day Saints鈥 Book Depot, 1875), 17:10. Smith, 鈥淗agar,鈥 108, argues that 鈥渢he defense of polygamy is by far the most prevalent usage that Hagar has been put to [in early Latter-day Saint scriptural interpretation].鈥
[58] On the importance of symbolic names in the Bible generally, see Gahl E. Sasson, 鈥淭he Symbolic Meanings of Names as a Narrative Tool: Moses, Abraham, and David,鈥 Storytelling, Self, Society 11 (2015): 298鈥313.
[59] See Sasson, 鈥淪ymbolic Meanings of Names,鈥 305.
[60] This shows, incidentally, that the prohibition against eating milk and meat together was not yet on the table in this point in biblical history.
[61] Peter J. Sorenson has a very nice discussion of hospitality laws throughout history, including some discussion of how they might play out for modern Latter-day Saints. See Peter J. Sorenson, 鈥淭he Lost Commandment: The Sacred Rites of Hospitality,鈥 BYU Studies Quarterly 44, no. 1 (2004): 1鈥29. For the biblical text specifically, see Peter Altmann, 鈥淗ospitality in the Hebrew Bible,鈥 Bible Odyssey, https://
[62] Rabin, Biblical Hero, 130.
[63] Joshua M. Sears, 鈥溾極 Lord God, Forgive!鈥: Prophetic Intercession in the Book of Amos,鈥 in Prophets and Prophecies of the Old Testament, ed. Aaron P. Schade, Brian M. Hauglid, and Kerry Muhlestein (Provo, UT: Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University; Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 2017), 194.
[64] Sears, 鈥淥 Lord God Forgive,鈥 194鈥5.
[65] See Avram R. Shannon, 鈥淟aw of God/
[66] Timothy D. Lytton, 鈥溾楽hall Not the Judge of the Earth Deal Justly鈥: Accountability, Compassion, and Judicial Authority in the Biblical Story of Sodom and Gomorrah,鈥 Journal of Law and Religion 18, no.1 (2002): 31鈥55.
[67] Rabin, Biblical Hero, 145鈥48; Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 87鈥88.
[68] For a Latter-day Saint discussion on this passage in view of learning about sacrifice, see Blair G. Van Dyke, 鈥淓lements of Sacrifice in Abraham鈥檚 Time and Our Own,鈥 Religious Educator 10, no. 1 (2009): 51鈥69.
[69] Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 84鈥86. For an in-depth discussion of the theological and historical ideas behind this see Jon D. Levenson, The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1993).
[70] There is an overview of this worship in Geza Vermes, 鈥淟eviticus 18:21 in Ancient Jewish Bible Exegesis,鈥 in Studies in Aggadah, Targum and Jewish Liturgy in Memory of Joseph Heinemann, ed. Jakob J. Petuchowski and Ezra Fleischer (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1981), 109. See also Moshe Weinfeld and S. David Sperling, 鈥淢oloch, Cult of,鈥 in Encyclopedia Judaica, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), 14:427鈥29; George C. Heider, 鈥淢olech,鈥 in Toorn, Becking, and van der Horst, Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible, 581鈥85; John Day, Molech: A God of Human Sacrifice in the Old Testament (Cambridge: Cambridge University Publications, 1985). Thomas Hieke does not even think that this worship has ritual connotations but, instead, refers to the avoidance of Persian military service. See Thomas Hieke, 鈥淒as Verbot der 脺bergabe von Nachkommen an den 鈥楳olech鈥 in Lev 18 und 20,鈥 Die Velt des Orients 41 (2011): 147鈥67.
[71] First suggested in Otto Eissfeldt, Molk als Opferbegriff im Punischen und Hebra茂schen und das Ende des Gottes Moloch (Halle [Saale], Germany: M. Niemeyer, 1935); Morton Smith defends the idea that this worship refers to the practice of human sacrifice. See Morton Smith, 鈥淎 Note on Burning Babies,鈥 Journal of the American Oriental Society 95 (1975): 477鈥79.
[72] For an Egyptological perspective on this particular element in the Book of Abraham, see John Gee and Kerry Muhlestein, 鈥淎n Egyptian Context for the Sacrifice of Abraham,鈥 Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 20, no. 2 (2011): 72鈥77.
[73] Gee and Muhlestein, 鈥淓gyptian Context,鈥 75.
[74] This is independent of the Christological significance that Christian readers have often placed on the story, a significance explicitly called out in the Book of Mormon by Jacob in Jacob 4:5. For the role that this story has played in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim discourse, see Jacques Doukhan, 鈥淭he Aqedah at the 鈥楥rossroad鈥: Its Significance in the Jewish-Christian-Muslim Dialogue,鈥 Andrews University Seminary Studies 32 (1994): 29鈥40. See also Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 86鈥87.
[75] According to Abraham 3:25, one of the primary points of the creation of the world was to provide a place for this kind of testing of obedience. See also Blenkinsopp, Abraham, 81.
[76] On the connection between the test and the knowing, see Jean Louis Ska, 鈥淕enesis 22: What Question Should We Ask the Text?,鈥 Biblica 94 (2014): 257鈥67, especially 259鈥60.
[77] Joseph Smith, as reported by John Taylor, in Journal of Discourses (London: Latter-day Saints鈥 Book Depot, 1884), 24:197.
[78] Jonathan Jacobs, 鈥淲illing Obedience With Doubts: Abraham at the Binding of Isaac,鈥 Vetus Testamentum 60 (2010): 546鈥59, especially 557鈥8.