661
THE KING’S BUSINESS
(with the conquest of Canaan) passed away, and the Law of Moses in some form or other—as even the Critics themselves would admit—governed Canaan in the “early centuries” of the •Israelitish Monarchy. A Babylonish environment of a fancy story composed in such a period would be an utter an achronism. A TEST CASE. This episode of Sarah and Hagar then is a test case, in which an incident in the life of Abraham can be laid side by side with a Code of Laws contem porary with the period. Every inci dent in the narrative, as we have seen, is affected and ruled by the Code; and this test case of Sarah and Hagar clearly shows that the critical theory that the lives of the Patriarchs as told in Genesis are shadowy myths, or fancy fictions, is quite impossible to be true. It demonstrates on the contrary the genuine character of this story— and its simple truth. As long ago as the year 1900, in an article contributed to the Churchman of December of that year, I pointed out the significance of the curious fact, that the divine title, “Lord of Hosts,” never occurs in the Pentateuch. This I fol lowed up later on by calling attention to the further fact that the name, “Je rusalem,” was also absent from the Pentateuch | and in a letter to the Guardian, which appeared in its issue of March 27, 1907, I pointed out a third peculiarity, namely, that no men tion of Sacred Song is found in the Ritual of the Pentateuch. I have con tinued sirice then on every possible op portunity—by articles and letters in periodicals, and in my Donnellan Lec tures in Dublin University, and pub lished books—-to press home the sig nificance of these three points. To these points no valid answer has ever come from the critical side; and it seems to me that lately the attention
nought. It was only in obedience to the command of God, who intimated that provision elsewhere would be made for Ishmael, that Abraham sent Hagar and her son away. BABYLONIAN CUSTOM. Now it can readily be seen that every point in this incident is ruled by Baby lonian custom and law. The custom of a wife giving her maid-servant to her husband was, it can be seen, a Babylonian custom; and was so freely followed by Babylonian women, that the Code of Hammurabi embodies spe cial enactments in regard to it. And the fact that each point in the narrative is ruled by the Babylonian Code is per fectly consistent with what the Book of Genesis records, namely, that it was from Ur of the Chaldees that Sarai came, and that the home of Rachel and Leah was in Haran in Mesopotamia, a place' dominated by the culture of Babylonia. And not only did Sarai come originally from Babylonia, but we are also told that it was into Ca naan that she came, a land where Bab ylonian ideas and law had for centuries ruled the people. Centuries before, Sargon of Accad had conquered Syria and Canaan, and the influence of Bab ylonia had proved persistent. Dr. Driver and the rest of the Crit ics assign this episode of Sarah and Hagar to the supposed writers, “J ” . and “E” who, according to them, wrote in the “Early Centuries of the Mon archy.” But that was a time when it does not appear from the Bible that Babylonia exercised any influence whatever over the people of Israel. The name, Babylon, 'does not occur in the Historical Books earlier than 2 Kings xvii, 24 —that is to say, not until after the extinction of the Northern Kingdom. And archaeological re search (witness the pottery found at Geser) tells the same story. The reign qf Babylonian law had long before
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker