Ancient Treaties and Biblical Covenant

For years I have spoken about the Biblical Covenants of the TaNaK (otherwise known as Hebrew Scriptures or Old Testament) and how they contain eternal truths related to Israel both then and now. There have been many who assert that God has replaced Israel with the Church. They state that God changed His mind towards Israel who “failed to pass the test” and so He chose the Church who accepted Jesus versus the Jews/Israel who rejected Jesus as the Messiah (many times laying the blame on Jews as killers of the Son of God or typical Christian anti-Semitic label of ‘Christ-killer’). This is Replacement Theology or Supersessionism in a nutshell. It’s theology is shaped around the basic belief that Israel let God down, so He chose another, the Church. Replacement Theology can take two sides of the spectrum. #1. There isn’t anything individually special or unique about the Jews anymore, they are just like everyone else and God loves them, yet the covenant has still been transferred to the Church. #2. The Jews are a cursed race because they rejected Jesus and thus, they are damned without the possibility of salvation. This second theological stance may come across as extreme, and it is, but it is one that is held today by many professing “Christians” and was the foundational ideology preached by many of the Church Fathers, leading eventually to the Nazi Holocaust (Shoah) of six million Jews.

Also, woven into the fabric of Replacement Theology is the belief that all the blessings attached to the covenants intended for Israel, were given to the Church, yet of course the curses would remain with the Jews. However, one of the key mistakes to this reasoning, let alone the complete neglect and ignorance of understanding God’s nature and what covenant is, is that you cannot divide the blessings and the curses as they were exclusively bound to the very fabric of covenant! The blessings and curses only describe one particular type of covenant, that is the Mosaic Covenant, and this type of covenant, based off of the Hittite/Babylonian Suzerain-Vassal Treaty, always included blessings and curses. You cannot separate them. So it must be understood that there were other covenants given to Israel (Abrahamic and Davidic based upon the ancient Royal Grant Treaty) which Scripture declares are eternal and everlasting to Israel…this cannot imply the Church, for these promises to Israel were literal, physical promises to the physical descendants of Abraham, renewed through Isaac and Jacob and the rest of the Jewish race.

So, by much of the Churches reasoning concerning Replacement Theology, if we are to approach the Biblical covenants justly, with the belief that the Church indeed has in fact replaced Israel, then the Church must also be subject to the curses just as much as they believe they possess the blessings! This is certainly not a popular thought as Church history teaches us that the Church Fathers (Justin Martyr, St. Augustine of Hippo, John Chrysostom, Bernard of Clairveux, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, etc.) believed firmly that the curses remained with the Jews. Once again, a total ignorance and rejection, on the part of the historical Church, to the nature of Biblical covenant. The Church cannot say, “We want the blessings but not the curses!” If they are attempting to hijack God’s covenant with Israel, the Church must accept the curses…which only means, that do to the imperfect historical record of the Church (Crusades, Inquisition, etc.) the Church is in danger of being cursed. This might come as a shock to many, but it is the truth. If the Church did indeed replace Israel, which I reject this theology outright, then the Church is subject to being cursed through disobedience. You see where this leads us with the sticky, chaotic approach for the Replacement Theologian. The Replacement Theologian cannot just believe that the Church has replaced Israel until they thoroughly study the Biblical, Hebraic, worldview. They must take into account the approach of covenant and what God meant when he forged covenant with Israel. To try to twist this into fitting the Church, upsets the apple cart and warps the Word of God. It creates problems that the only way to “fix” is to pollute and change the message of the Scriptures. It is religious theft and Biblical hijacking.

So let’s get some things clear before we dive into the historical relevance of the Abrahamic/Davidic Covenants and the Mosaic Covenant. God alone did the choosing and established covenant. Israel did not approach God, nor did Abraham, for he was a pagan before the Lord called to him (Joshua 24:2). As we see in Genesis 12:1, “Now the Lord had said to Abram: “Get out of your country, from your family and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you.“” God chose Abraham and blessed him on account of his righteousness and faithfulness to God. This does not imply Abraham was a perfect man, but it does reveal Abraham as a man with great faith and love for God. He was willing to go against his own cultural norms in order to follow God and that was credited to him as righteousness (Romans 4:3).

Abrahamic and Davidic Covenants and the Royal Grant Treaty

Therefore, God established a promise with Abraham through Genesis 12:1-3 “Now the Lord said to Abram: “Get out of your country, from your family and from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you and make your name great; and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you; and in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.”” In Genesis 15:1-21 we see covenant in action where God called Abraham to cut apart certain animals and separate them, according to the ritual of ‘Cutting a Covenant’, an ancient Mesopotamian practice of establishing a covenant between two parties. In this practice, the two individuals making a covenant would cut apart animals and then walk between the pieces, often before witnesses. Regardless of social standing, the two people would be considered equal. The symbolism behind the halved carcasses was to announce to the world the stipulations of the contract, that if either person violated the covenant, they would become like the animal pieces. Essentially their lives were tied to the deal! However, in Abraham’s case, although he is obediently doing what the Lord has commanded him to do, it is possible he is thinking, “How can I pass between the pieces with the Lord? That would mean I am equal to Him? That is impossible!” Yet, Abraham still obeys. Then in verses 12-17 we read:

Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, horror and great darkness fell upon him. Then He (God) said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years. And also the nation whom they serve I will judge; afterward they shall come out with great possessions. Now as for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried at a good old age. But in the fourth generation they shall return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites is not complete.” And it came to pass, when the sun went down and it was dark, that behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a burning torch that passed between those pieces.”

God made the covenant alone with Abraham. This covenant would be bound to the very nature of God, based on who He is. Abraham could never have kept the covenant, but God can. Abraham is put into a deep sleep and has an incredible vision where God shows him the history of his people. They will be strangers in a foreign land, as Abraham had been, they will be afflicted and enslaved but after four hundred years they will come out of the land wealthy. God will uphold His promise by giving them the land of the wicked Amorites, who at the time of Abraham, were still being given time to repent. The land of enslavement is Egypt, and we know by the history of Exodus, that the Israelites were slaves. Moses delivered them and they plundered Egypt (Exodus 12:35-36) during their exit as the Lord had promised to Abraham. So God promises redemption and the sign of the covenant is ‘land’. He promises that the Israelites will come into the Promised Land, which was fulfilled under Joshua (Joshua 2) and God seals this covenant by passing between the pieces in a fiery motif that represents the glory of God. It is also relevant to note, that before God passes between the pieces, He states the purpose of the covenant which has the great reward of ‘land’ after four hundred years of affliction. This is so Abraham knows exactly what sort of covenant this is. Then once the glory of the Lord has passed between the carcasses, God states clearly the boundaries of the land in verses 18-21:

“On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: “To your descendants I have given this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the River Euphrates–the Kenites, the Kenezzites, the Kadmonites, the Hittites, the Perizzites, the Rephaim, the Amorites, the Canaanites, the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.”” God is specific about His covenant which includes blessing the descendants of Abraham with land. It is important to note that these boundaries are much larger than modern-day Israel, and the only time in history where nearly all of this was under Jewish control, was during King David/Solomon’s time. This goes to show that God had specific borders in mind and this would be given to Israel. However, when the tribes entered the land, they failed to take it all, mostly out of rebellion, unfaithfulness, fear, or making unholy alliances with the people groups who were subject to God’s judgment.

The passage in Genesis 15 is based on a Hittite/Babylonian treaty called the Royal Grant Treaty. This treaty was made between a king and his vassal as a reward for the loyalty in which the vassal demonstrated. In Tim Hegg’s book, ‘The Letter Writer: Paul’s Background and Torah Perspective’, he says: “In this kind of treaty the Great King would grant a parcel of land to the Vassal, declaring it tax-exempt and the possession of the Vassal through perpetuity. When the Vassal died, the land would become the possession of his family throughout their generations.” The Royal Grant Treaty is patterned directly off of what God establishes with Abraham. God uses a legally binding treaty, Abraham would have been familiar with, to cement His covenant with the patriarch of the Jewish people. This also shows God as the God of history. He doesn’t need to invent something never before seen, but uses a customary method of establishing a covenant and then perfects it. So God, as the Great King, entreats His Vassal, Abraham, to a covenant that consists of land (Israel) being given to Abraham and his descendants forever. As the stipulations of the Royal Grant Treaty dictate, even after the Vassal dies, the land is still retained as a possession to his descendants forever. Hegg continues with by saying, “No one could take the land from them, and no one could require a tax from it, even by the successor of the Great King.”

This covenant is permanent according to the Great King. Hegg says, “In this case, the rights of the Vassal were guaranteed in the treaty, and the Great King was the one who took the oath. There were no stipulations laid upon the Vassal, or measures to which he would need to perform in order to receive the gift. The whole matter was guaranteed on the word and oath of the Great King.” God established covenant with Abraham because He desired to choose a people in which to glorify Himself to the world, and He chose a man of great faith who was righteous and obeyed. Israel was not chosen by their own merits, as Deuteronomy attests in 7:6-8: “For you are a holy people to the Lord your God; the Lord God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth. The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; but because the Lord loves you, and because He would keep the oath which He swore to your fathers, the Lord has brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you from the house of bondage, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.” This election, this covenant oath which God swore to the forefathers of the Israelite nation, was everlasting and God vowed never to forget or abandon His people Israel. God also reaffirmed this covenant through King David (2nd Samuel 7:8-17, confirmed in Psalm 89) who He promised would forever reign upon his throne and which the Messiah would one day come through his line. “When your days are fulfilled and you rest with your fathers, I will set up your seed after you, who will come from your body, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for My name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom forever…And your house and your kingdom shall be established forever before you. Your throne shall be established forever.” (2nd Samuel 7:12-13, 16) With David, was the reaffirmation of land and permanent ruling. How can a king rule without a kingdom? How can a king rule without land? Although Israel would be banished from the land, return, and suffer exile again, God will never be proven a liar and His promise with David stands. The State of Israel was reborn on May 14th 1948 and we look ahead to the return of Messiah who is from the line of David, where He will once again reign, but this time His reign will never end. So, God’s promises to David also echo a future, messianic promise of the restoration of Israel.

This is attested in Jeremiah 31:31-37 where God promises to renew His covenant with Israel by writing it upon their hearts, forgiving their iniquities, and affirming His covenant with them which is eternal. At Mount Sinai the people verbally agreed, “We will do all the Lord has commanded of us.” But this lip-service, for most of the nation, was never fully upheld as Israel chased after idolatry, forged alliances with pagan nations, and even committed pagan acts. Thus, they were judged with famine, drought, sickness, war, and exile. But this was not the end, and the prophets proclaimed messages of hope, restoration, and a future time of salvation.

The Apostle Paul also affirms this covenant based upon God’s oath with the fathers in Romans 11:28. Here, in greater context, Paul is speaking about how Gentiles have come to faith in Jesus as the Messiah based upon the blindness of the Jewish nation who do not see Him as Messiah. Paul speaks of some of these Jews as “enemies of the Gospel” but he reminds the Roman Gentile believers that, by the Jewish nation opposing the Gospel, it actually works out that it is for the sake of Gentiles. For if the entire Jewish leadership had recognized Jesus as Messiah, Jesus would have had to set up His kingdom and the world would have been judged. Yet, for God’s great love for the world, the gospel was intended to go out into the world. However, despite the fact that most Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah, Paul still reminds his readers that concerning election, Israel is still the beloved of God. This word ‘beloved’ is a word synonymous with how a bride is seen in the eyes of her groom. God has not forgotten His people and loves them dearly, like a bridegroom. 

Mosaic Covenant and the Suzerain-Vassal Treaty

The other covenant we will examine before closing, is the Mosaic Covenant which had a strict outline of what God expected from Israel. This was given at Mount Sinai, preached to the people through Moses and outlined clear blessings and curses. The Mosaic Covenant is clearly based on the Suzerain-Vassal treaty found in ancient history. Archaeology has shed much light on this treaty. In Princeton’s priceless resource by James B. Pritchard, entitled, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, primary sources of the ancient period are consulted and arranged giving the scholar a glimpse into the mythologies, laws, edicts, treaties, funerary rites, and so on of the ancient world. In the “Treaty Between Mursilis and Duppi-Tessub of Amurru” (Hittite) it clearly depicts an individual, Duppi-Tessub, who has been accepted and taken in by the kingdom of the Hatti Land. King Mursilis offers assistance to Duppi-Tessub whose descendants will inherit the land of Amurru. Mursilis looks on Duppi-Tessub as his faithful Vassal. There has been loss in Duppi-Tessub’s life and a legal obligation to the king on behalf of Duppi-Tessub, which prompts the King Mursilis to make a treaty with him (Mursilis often speaking in the third person in the treaty). The treaty spells out the commitment of King Mursilis to Duppi-Tessub and reveals the nature of the Suzerain-Vassal Treaty. Tim Hegg writes, “The Suzerain-Vassal treaty was made between a Great King and his appointed Vassal in order to safe guard the interests of the Great King and assure the loyalty of the Vassal. By their very nature, these treaties were bilateral, meaning that the blessings or rewards from the Great King were dependent upon the obedience and compliance of the Vassal.” If the Vassal fulfilled his duty and remained loyal, the king would reward him, but if the Vassal disobeyed or rebelled, then the Vassal was subject to the curses outlined in the treaty. This was all to ensure the loyalty of the Vassal and that the king’s interests were protected.

In the Mursilis/Duppi-Tessub treaty, the document reads: “When I, the Sun, sought after you in accordance with your father’s word and put you in your father’s place, I took you in oath for the king of the Hatti land, the Hatti land, and for my sons and grandsons. So honor the oath (of loyalty) to the king and the king’s kin! And I, the king, will be loyal toward you, Duppi-Tessub. When you take a wife, and when you beget an heir, he shall be king in the Amurru land likewise. And just as I shall be loyal toward you, even so shall I be loyal toward your son. But you, Duppi-Tessub, remain loyal toward the king of the Hatti land, the Hatti land, my sons (and) my grandsons forever!” It continues with a warning: “Do not turn your eyes to anyone else! Your fathers presented tribute to Egypt; you [shall not do that!]” The treaty outlines blessings upon Duppi-Tessub, evoking the power of the gods and their will, but concludes with the threat of curses should Duppi-Tessub be unfaithful in keeping up his end of the treaty with King Mursilis. “The words of this treaty and the oath that are inscribed on this tablet–should Duppi-Tessub not honor these words of the treaty and the oath, may these gods of the oath destroy Duppi-Tessub together with his person, his wife, his son, his grandson, his house, his land and together with everything that he owns. But if Duppi-Tessub honors these words of the treaty and the oath that are inscribed on this tablet, may these gods of the oath protect him together with his person, his wife, his son, his grandson, his house (and) his country.”

This is the summation of the treaty. In this case, the Great King Mursilis and his treaty with Duppi-Tessub can be compared to the covenant established by YHVH, the God of Israel, with Israel (representing Duppi-Tessub) through the Mosaic Covenant. In the Mosaic Covenant God gives strict instructions to protect His interests, which is, He is holy and wants to separate the people of Israel as a holy people, so they must worship God as He dictates and do what He says. The people, who are the Vassal of the Great King, agree to this covenant, which thereby means, they are agreeing to uphold the covenant given to them by God, the Great King. With this covenant are clear instructions of blessing and curses (Leviticus 26:1-46). If Israel meets the standards of the covenant and is faithful, God will bless Israel with rain, prosperity, childbirth, wealth, no sickness, the absence of war, and security. However, if Israel fails and disobeys the Great King, then curses will befall them in the form of famine, disaster, war, and exile. This is a Suzerain-Vassal styled treaty which God established with the Israelites at the base of Mount Sinai. The people would understand the meaning of such a covenant and submit themselves under God’s authority, in a similar way, but magnified, as Duppi-Tessub would have submitted under the authority of King Mursilis of the Hatti Land.

Despite Israel’s rebellion in their history, and the breaking of the Mosaic Covenant on their part, not God’s, Israel has suffered greatly. However, God continues to uphold his promise to the Jewish people based on their election through the establishment of the Abrahamic/Davidic covenants where God pledged, unconditionally, that He will remember them forever and never forsake His chosen people. The Great King still upholds his royal covenant, and despite Israel’s failing, the Great King of Israel will restore His people, as the prophet Zechariah declares in 14:16-17, when all the nations will come up to Jerusalem to worship the Great King and honour Him through the fulfillment and celebration of Sukkot (Feast of Tabernacles). “And it shall come to pass that everyone who is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the Feast of Tabernacles. And it shall be that whichever of the families of the earth do not come up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, on them there will be no rain.” Israel will be restored, the Law will be written on their hearts as Jeremiah prophesied, and Israel will lead the nations in worship in the city of Jerusalem, the city of the Great King!

By, Rev. Peter J. Fast, BA.IS, BA,BS

Sources Consulted:

All Scripture Quoted from: New King James Bible

Hegg, Tim. The Letter Writer: Paul’s Background and Torah Perspective. Tacoma Washington: Torah Resource, 2008. Pg. 156-157

Pritchard, James B. ed. Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Princeton New Jersey: Princeton University Press,1969. Pg. 203-205.

Friedman, Richard Elliott. Commentary on the Torah. USA: Harper San Francisco Publishers, 2003.

Advertisements

Cultic vessels from 13th century BCE go on display

This is a gift to the world in regards to the understanding and knowledge of the 13th century B.C.E.. It is a wonderful thing that such treasures, as discovered in Israel and other places, can be open to the public for viewing and I know that I will be one of the first in line to see such incredible artifacts and pieces from the ancient world. If I know one thing, the Israel Antiquity Authority handles with excellent and professional care every item and does an outstanding job in their exhibits and relaying to the public their findings and the history behind them. I invite you to click on the link below and read this article written by Sharon Udasin for the Jerusalem Post. Enjoy!

http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=281866

By, Peter J. Fast

Abraham: From Ur to Haran

Not much is known about Abraham prior to Genesis 12:1 where God first called to him and said, “Lech Lecha!” which is Hebrew for, “Go, go out!”What kind of world did Abraham live in and leave behind when he left Ur? Why did he leave in the first place?  Was Abraham truly a pagan before he decided to trust in the voice of the one true God and heed His call? These questions and more we will try to sort out as we examine the world Abraham grew up in, why he left, and what it meant for him to believe in monotheism, and beyond this, to follow the true God in a world of polytheism.

To begin, we must first briefly examine the world of Abraham (his name was first Abram but later it was changed to Abraham in Genesis 17:5, but we shall just refer to him as Abraham to avoid confusion.) Abraham lived in the region of Mesopotamia, which is a Greek term meaning “land between two rivers.” These rivers would be the Tigris and Euphrates and this land would be found in modern day Iraq and Iran. Mesopotamia was a very rich and fertile place due to the existence of these two massive rivers which helped balance the region. Mesopotamia can be divided up into the Southern Plain, Northeastern Foothills, and the Steppe Area which is located in the northwest. The climate today is very much like what it would have been in the time of Abraham around 1950 BC, and apart from the shifting of the rivers since then, examining the geography can help us pinpoint key areas Abraham would have lived. But let’s examine the geographical setting a little more.

The Southern Plain has dry, subtropical summers, yet at the same time winter can fall below freezing. In the south, it generally receives ten inches of rain annually, which in turn massive irrigation systems were developed in the biblical world and still are utilized today. The irrigation system was also needed due to the salinity levels which are given off into the soil from the Tigris and Euphrates. In the region of the Southern Plain barley became the chief crop prior to Abraham and continued flourishing.

In the Northeastern Foothills, the climate would have been temperate much like it is today, rainfall sufficient which meant a lack of dependence on irrigation such as found in the south. However, despite the significant levels of rain and moisture, the terrain was difficult and contained poor farming land, which meant dependence on trade and transporting certain grains and foods from other localities.

Finally, the Steppe area can be found in the northwest part of Mesopotamia. These vast lands, fertile and rich, have led to many discoveries of ancient mounds which have unearthed ample evidence of vast settlements in and around this region. Also, an interesting note was the discovery of cities and towns with walls being erected around them, which begs the question, what were they afraid of and why did they feel they had to lay out defenses?

During the periods of Halaf (5500-4500 BC), Ubaid (5300-3750 BC) and Protoliterate (3750-2900 BC) we see incredible changes take Mesopotamia by storm. We see an increase in pottery design and decoration, the smelting of copper and other metals which replace stone tools and weapons, we see towns increase in size by the thousands, enhanced irrigation systems put in place, temples grow larger and higher, and fertility become a focal point of the peoples. During these times nearly 70% of all children under age five died, and with deaths increasing from people in battles a sense of the progression of life was focused upon. To the peoples of these periods, they also saw fertility as the earth giving back, and pantheons of gods and goddesses began to develop so that by 3000 BC there were over four thousand deities worshiped in the region as mankind worshiped and adored the creation instead of the true Creator.

However, in the later Protoliterate Period, the north of Mesopotamia began to stagnate as cultural unity was lost, while the south flourished and expanded. The fast potter’s wheel was developed which vastly increased production, the stamp seal was replaced with the cylinder seal, the chariot was invented, metals were in full swing of being used. We also see free standing columns and sculpture, the development of writing, and the massive Ziggurat’s were constructed. This would give way into what is known as the Early Dynastic Period where kings began to rule, establish kingdoms which led to city-states, and of these the kings of Ur became very powerful and strong as they believed their dynastic powers came from the heavens.

During the Akkad Period (2334-2193 BC) a strong king named Sargon expanded and unified all of Mesopotamia making his capital the city of Agade. Cuneiform writing was implemented and other massive changes occurred through the work of stone, bronze, silver, and wood.  During his rule the city-state was replaced by the centralized government and widespread law developed. However, this would be short lived for around the year 2112 BC a people called the Guti, who were mountain people invaded the land and ruled for 100 years. During this time they naturally created political unrest, yet soon Ur was rebuilt (for the third time) and founded by a man named Ur-Nammu. This ushered in a Sumerian type of renaissance as peace was restored and father-son succession of throne kings was instituted. At this time the kings ruled absolute and were believed to be gods.

Ur-Nammu developed the oldest known law codes, which predate the Code of Hammurapi by 300 years, with an emphasis on justice. However, this incredible era of change and splendor would close with another invasion yet again in 2004 B.C. when the Elamites would burn Ur to the ground. It would be at this time, shortly after the destruction of Ur III, that Abraham would be born. He would be raised in a world with a strong, proud past, that was civilized and had established life which stretched back thousands of years. In fact, ancient Mesopotamia had more freedoms for people then many countries today in the 21st century.

In Genesis 11:26-29 we see the first mention of Abraham (mentions him as Abram). Through a genealogy we see people such as: his father Terah, his nephew Lot, and in verse 29 we see his marriage with Sarai, later to become Sarah. Now, the Bible does not actually state that Abraham was born in Ur, but it does say in 11:28, “And Haran died before his father Terah in his native land, in Ur of the Chaldeans.” Since Ur is considered the “native land” of Haran, we can then presume this is where Abraham was born and lived as well. Yet, before we move on, one interesting thing is where it states, “Ur of the Chaldeans.” This is the first time in the Bible where the reference to the people of the Chaldeans, is mentioned. The other two major occurrences outside the book of Genesis are in Nehemiah 9:7, and Acts 7:4. What is interesting is that during the time of Abraham the people called, Chaldeans did not exist and when Nehemiah and Acts were written, the Chaldeans had come and gone. So what is this saying then? Well, the book of Genesis is the key. Basically, when Moses wrote what is now called “Genesis” or “Beri’shit” in Hebrew, meaning, “beginning,” the Chaldeans did exist, but there were at least four places called Ur. So Moses attached the people group to the specific city so his readers would know which “Ur” he was speaking about. Thus, we get in all three cases, Abraham being named as coming from Ur of the Chaldeans, or the Ur where the Chaldeans would later settle by. Problem solved.

Now, let’s continue. During the time of Abraham when he was growing up in his father’s house, Mesopotamia was made up of thousands of gods and goddesses with each city having its chief or central god. Some of the main deities we see at the time were: Sin/Nanna god of the moon, Anu the chief god who was replaced by his son Enlil. Enlil would take on many titles, such as “King of the Earth” or “Lord of the Earth.” Enlil was seen as the god of wisdom, protector of arts, crafts, science, literature, and magic which was one thing that highly interested the people of that day. We see the god of sun and magic Marduk, take his place in Babylon, and others such as Ishtar (later Asherah) goddess of sex and war, Shumuqan god of cattle, and Baal god of crops and storms. Amulets were made to keep in homes or wear for protection, and priesthoods were created to be mediators between mankind and the pantheons that ruled the heavens. Pagan worship became very ritualistic as sacrifices (sometimes human) were made, the gods were fed by placing food before them, temple prostitutes appeared as important in matters of fertility, and people adopted household gods to serve. This is the era and world Abraham grew up in. There is no doubt that he would have been influenced heavily by his surroundings.

Many people, both Jewish and Christian, see Abraham as a man who had always rejected the notion of multiple gods. They conjure up a man who, when God called him, obeyed right away because he had never believed in polytheism to begin with. Most likely, this is not an accurate depiction. Did Abraham obey God? Yes he did! Did God call out to Abraham to leave his country? Yes, He did. Genesis 12:1 says that God told Abraham to leave his country, and Acts 7:2 states that God called for Abraham to leave “before he dwelt in Haran” which would mean, when he lived in Ur. In Genesis 12:4 it states that after Abraham heard the word of the Lord he departed, and when he had left Haran he was seventy-five after the death of his father of which the Bible is very clear. From there, he journeyed to Canaan where God would show Himself and bring Abraham to a place of dependence. Simply said, Abraham was a man of faith and believed what God told him.

Yet, was Abraham ever a pagan before God called him? This is possible. There is a story in the Midrash (Jewish collection of stories, translated as ‘to seek, study, or inquire’) where Abram, as a boy, was working for his father who was an idol maker. Abram had come to doubt the validity of idols as being “gods” and so when his father was absent one day, Abram smashed one of the idols and put a hammer into the hand of one of the other idols. When his father returned he was naturally upset and demanded to know what had happened. Abram told his father that one idol had attacked the other and smashed it. His father then declared this to be impossible, for idols were lifeless creations of stone, wood, and metal. Therefore, Abram proved his point, the idols were only man-made, not God. Thus, according to the Midrash, Abram began his journey to discover the real God. Even in the book of Joshua 24:2, it clearly reveals Abraham’s father and family as being pagans. It is then very likely, that having grown up in this home and in a polytheistic city, that Abraham could have spent a portion of his 70+ years either willingly practicing paganism or else in the least going through the motions to please his father. Certainly, he was raised in a pagan home and was heavily exposed to this influence.

It is likely he would have been familiar with stories of past generations from before Noah, the flood and some of the descendants who followed after God (Gen. 5-6) but simply knowing these stories does not entirely mean Abraham followed the true God when he was younger. Even being well versed in the stories of earlier generations, such as Enoch or Noah, does not completely absolve Abraham from the possibility of being a pagan in his early days, as polytheism often syncretizes other beliefs, even adding other ‘gods’ to their pantheons. This can be compared to other pagans in the Bible who, either obeyed a message from God or were said to have believed in God yet, did not completely abandon their polytheism (i.e. people of Nineveh in Jonah, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon, or Cyrus of Persia). However, knowing of these earlier men who “were righteous before God” could indeed point towards a doubt that may have simmered for years in Abraham’s mind as to the possible existence of the gods compared with the One True God. Whether Abraham was a pagan or not, one thing we know for sure, that out of this pagan family and environment he lived in, the True God called out to him and Abraham obeyed. In years to come, he would become the father of the Hebrew nation (Israel) as well as a ‘father of many nations.’

We know that for ourselves in the world we have grown up in, it is nearly impossible to separate oneself from our culture, it is a trademark stamped upon ourselves, almost written into our DNA. It can define us, rule our thoughts, and guide us. Our culture is identity and part of our makeup, it is what is familiar, how we talk, sometimes what we believe spiritually, what we do for fun, where we work, and shapes our thinking. Culture is powerful, and to leave ones culture is a very drastic major life choice. This is exactly what Abraham did, but not right away.

In Genesis 11:31 was see an interesting circumstance develop. It states that Terah took his son Abraham, his grandson Lot, and his daughter-in-law Sarai to go to the land of Canaan, but they only made it as far as Haran and he decided to live there. Now, this is interesting for a couple of reasons. First, the Bible names the main people of importance in this account as Abraham, Lot, and Sarai, yet along with Terah he would have taken his entire household. This would mean animals, servants, concubines, other children of less stature then Abraham, and anybody else associated with him. This was not four people wandering in the desert but a community. When we see Abraham later on moving from Haran to Canaan in Genesis 12:5, again we see that he took even more people that he had acquired there.

But, why did they move to Haran in the first place, apart from God speaking to Abraham? Could there also have been something else to play a part in the move? Since moving to new lands at that period in time was seen as extreme and out of the ordinary, there had to be a purpose to it for Terah to ask such a thing of his family. The Bible does not give us our answer, apart from telling us there had been a word spoken to Abraham from God earlier, but history may also shed some light on this interesting predicament. At the time we find Abraham living in Ur, we see a couple things happen. The Elamites had invaded and continue to be a major problem, we see major crop failures particularly on the barley yields, and political unrest as well as economic strain was prevalent. So, this clearly could have been a strong motivator to find fresh pastures, and for Terah to pack up his belongings, take his family out of Ur, head for Larsa, decide to cross the Tigris, and head to Haran.

Now, one of the final things we will cover is to answer, why Haran? Why did Terah stop there? In Genesis 11:31b it definitively states “…and they went out with them from Ur of the Chaldeans to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran and dwelt there.” Now, if one examines a map, Haran definitely is not Canaan. But why did Terah stop? Well, let’s take a glimpse at what Haran was like in those days and perhaps we will find our key. First, Haran was a caravan city, it was politically stable, and was flourishing. These are all very good reasons to stop, but I think the final one may be the hidden key, and that is Haran’s chief god was Nanna the god of the moon. Why is this so important? Well Nanna or Sin, was also the chief god of Ur, where Terah had just left. Joshua 24:2 says, “And Joshua said to all the people, “Thus says the LORD God of Israel: ‘Your fathers, including Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, dwelt on the other side of the River in old times; and they served other gods.'” Thus, it is possible Terah found a new home in Haran, and wanted to stay because that was a city that honored and worshiped a god he would have revered all his life, Nanna the moon god. So, essentially we get a familiar religious scene, a good economy, and a location which is safe. Although we cannot know for sure why, these could still very well be clues at why Terah chose to live in Haran.

So, why did Abraham stay in Haran and not just move on if God had called him? Well, unlike today and our societies definition of independence which involves people freely moving and traveling and often living very far from family, in Abraham’s day it was not so. The culture in Mesopotamia was a patriarchal society. So, Terah as the father ruled and his sons and extended family obeyed. In this case, Abraham simply acted in a culturally acceptable way by following his father and bidding his time. We clearly see that by the time Terah did die, Abraham would assume the role as patriarch. Then we see everyone following Abraham, just as he had obediently demonstrated his place as a son to Terah in Ur.

In conclusion, the life of Abraham was a real life account and not a myth. He was a man of God who followed and demonstrated a faith which has been modeled after for centuries and centuries. His step of faith was very significant and went completely against the norms of his age and the world at that time. To believe in one God would have been seen as foolish, strange, and weird, but God called Abraham and he obeyed. We do not see him arguing about journeying to Canaan, or lamenting and wanting to return to Ur, we see him as a hero of the faith, and a man whose heart and mind was opened to the incredible character and nature of the God who had created him, and this would forever change history.