{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_12434/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_12434","id":"gutenberg_12434","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12434","summary":null,"tags":["Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Children's History","Jews -- History","Judaism"],"text":"THE BIBLE'S MESSAGE TO MODERN LIFE\n\nTwelve Studies on\n\nThe Making of a Nation\n\nThe Beginnings of Israel's History\n\n\n\n\nBY\n\n\n\nCHARLES FOSTER KENT\nJEREMIAH WHIPPLE JENKS\n\n\n\n\n\n1912\n\n\n\nThe best of allies you can procure for us is the Bible.  That will\nbring us the reality--freedom.--_Garibaldi_.\n\nIf the common schools have found their way from the Atlantic to the\nPacific; if slavery has been abolished; if the whole land has been\nchanged from a wilderness into a garden of plenty, from ocean to\nocean; if education has been fostered according to the best lights\nof each generation since then; if industry, frugality and sobriety\nare the watchwords of the nation, as I believe them to be, I say it\nis largely due to those first emigrants, who, landing with the\nEnglish Bible in their hands and in their hearts, established\nthemselves on the shores of America.--_Joseph H. Choate_.\n\nAnd, as it is owned, the whole scheme of Scripture is not yet\nunderstood, so, if it comes to be understood, it must be in the\nsame way as natural knowledge is come at; by the continuance and\nprogress of learning and liberty, and by particular persons\nattending to, comparing and pursuing intimations scattered up and\ndown it, which are overlooked and disregarded by the generality of\nthe world.  Nor is it at all incredible that a book which has been\nso long in the possession of mankind should contain many truths as\nyet undiscovered.--_Butler_.\n\nMr. Lincoln, as I saw him every morning, in the carpet slippers he\nwore in the house and the black clothes no tailor could make really\nfit his gaunt, bony frame, was a homely enough figure.  The routine\nof his life was simple, too; it would have seemed a treadmill to\nmost of us.  He was an early riser, when I came on duty at eight in\nthe morning, he was often already dressed and reading in the\nlibrary.  There was a big table near the centre of the room: there\nI have seen him reading many times.  And the book?  It was the\nBible which I saw him reading while most of the household\nslept.--_William H. Crook_, in _Harper's Magazine_.\n\nThe Bible has such power for teaching righteousness that even to\nthose who come to it with all sorts of false notions about the God\nof the Bible, it yet teaches righteousness, and fills them with the\nlove of it; how much more those who come to it with a true notion\nabout the God of the Bible.--_Matthew Arnold_.\n\nCONTENTS\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\n The Rediscovery of the Bible.\n The Object of These Studies.\n The Plan of Work.\n Books of Reference.\n\n\nSTUDY I.  MAN'S PLACE IN THE WORLD.  The Story of Creation, Gen. 1,\n2\n\n 1. The Different Theories of Creation.\n 2. The Priestly Story of Creation.\n 3. The Early Prophetic Story of Creation.\n 4. A Comparison of the Two Accounts of Creation.\n 5. Man's Conquest and Rulership of the World.\n 6. Man's Responsibility as the Ruler of the World.\n\n\nSTUDY II.  MAN'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS ACTS.  The Story of the\nGarden of Eden, Gen. 3\n\n 1. The Nature of Sin.\n 2. The Origin of Sin According to the Story in Genesis 3.\n 3. The Different Theories Regarding the Origin of Sin.\n 4. The Effects of Sin upon the Wrong-doer.\n 5. God's Attitude toward the Sinner.\n 6. The Effect of Sin upon Society.\n\n\nSTUDY III.  THE CRIMINAL, AND HIS RELATION TO SOCIETY.  The Story\nof Cain, Gen. 4:1-16\n\n 1. The Meaning of the Story of Cain.\n 2. The Making of a Criminal.\n 3. The Criminal's Attitude toward Society.\n 4. The Ways in which Society Deals with the Criminal.\n 5. How to Deal with Criminals.\n 6. The Prevention of Crime.\n\n\nSTUDY IV.  THE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST.  The Story of the Great\nFlood, Gen. 6-9\n\n 1. The Two Biblical Accounts of the Flood.\n 2. The Corresponding Babylonian Flood Stories.\n 3. History of the Biblical Flood Stories.\n 4. Aim of the Biblical Writers in Recounting the Flood Stories.\n 5. The Survival of the \"Fittest\" in the Natural World.\n 6. In Social and Political Life.\n\n\nSTUDY V.  THE PIONEER'S INFLUENCE UPON A NATION'S IDEAL.  Abraham,\nthe Traditional Father of the Race, Gen. 12:1-8; 13:1-13; 16; 18;\n19; 21:1-7; 22:1-19\n\n 1. The Reasons for Migration.\n 2. The Prophetic Stories about Abraham.\n 3. The Meaning of the Early Prophetic Stories about Abraham.\n 4. The Prophetic Portrait of Abraham.\n 5. The Tendency to Idealize National Heroes.\n 6. The Permanent Value and Influence of the Abraham Narratives.\n\n\nSTUDY VI.  THE POWER OF AMBITION.  Jacob the Persistent, Gen.\n25:10-33:20\n\n 1. The Two Brothers, Jacob and Esau.\n 2. The Man with a Wrong Ambition.\n 3. Jacob's Training in the School of Experience.\n 4. The Invincible Power of Ambition and Perseverance.\n 5. The Different Types of Ambition.\n 6. The Development of Right Ambitions.\n\n\nSTUDY VII.  A SUCCESSFUL MAN OF AFFAIRS.  Joseph's Achievements,\nGen. 37; 39-48; 50\n\n 1. The Qualities Essential to Success.\n 2. The Limitations and Temptations of Joseph's Early Life.\n 3. The Call of a Great Opportunity.\n 4. The Temptations of Success.\n 5. The Standards of Real Success.\n 6. The Methods of Success.\n\n\nSTUDY VIII.  THE TRAINING OF A STATESMAN.  Moses in Egypt and the\nWilderness, Ex. 1:1-7:5\n\n 1. The Egyptian Background.\n 2. The Making of a Loyal Patriot.\n 3. The School of the Wilderness.\n 4. Moses' Call to Public Service.\n 5. The Education of Public Opinion.\n 6. The Training of Modern Statesmen.\n\n\nSTUDY IX.  THE ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF LAW.  Moses' Work as Judge and\nProphet, Ex. 18:5-27; 33:5-11\n\n 1. The Needs that Give Rise to Law.\n 2. The Growth of Customary Law.\n 3. The Authority Underlying all Law.\n 4. Moses' Relations to the Old Testament Laws.\n 5. The Development of Modern Law.\n 6. The Attitude of Citizens toward the Law.\n\n\nSTUDY X.  THE FOUNDATIONS OF GOOD CITIZENSHIP.  The Ten\nCommandments, Ex. 20:1-17\n\n 1. The History of the Prophetic Decalogue.\n 2. Obligations of the Individual to God.\n 3. The Social and Ethical Basis of the Sabbath Law.\n 4. The Importance of Children's Loyalty to Parents.\n 5. Primary Obligations of Man to Man.\n 6. The Present-day Authority of the Ten Commandments.\n\n\nSTUDY XI.  THE EARLY TRAINING OF A RACE.  Israel's Experience in\nthe Wilderness and East of the Jordan, Num. 11-14; 21:21-31;\n32:39-42\n\n 1. The Wilderness Environment.\n 2. Influence of the Nomadic Life upon Israel's Character and Ideals.\n 3. The Influence of the Wilderness Life Upon Israel's faith.\n 4. The Significance of the East-Jordan Conquests.\n 5. The Significance of Moses' Work.\n 6. The Early Stages in the Training of the Human Race.\n\n\nSTUDY XII.  A NATION'S STRUGGLE FOR A HOME AND FREEDOM, Israel's\nVictories over the Canaanites, Josh. 2-9; Judg. 1, 4, 5.\n\n 1. The Crossing of the Jordan.\n 2. The Canaanite Civilization.\n 3. The Capture of the Outposts of Palestine.\n 4. Ways by which the Hebrews Won Their Homes.\n 5. Deborah's Rally of the Hebrews.\n 6. The Final Stage in the Making of the Hebrew Nation.\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION\n\nTHE REDISCOVERY OF THE BIBLE\n\nIn the early Christian centuries thousands turned to the Bible, as\ndrowning men to a life buoy, because it offered them the only way\nof escape from the intolerable social and moral ills that attended\nthe death pangs of the old heathenism.  Then came the Dark Ages,\nwith their resurgent heathenism and barbarism, when the Bible was\ntaken from the hands of the people.  In the hour of a nation's\ndeepest humiliation and moral depravity, John Wycliffe, with the\naid of a devoted army of lay priests, gave back the Bible to the\npeople, and in so doing laid the foundations for England's\nintellectual, political and moral greatness.  The joy and\ninspiration of the Protestant Reformers was the rediscovery and\npopular interpretation of the Bible.  In all the great forward\nmovements of the modern centuries the Bible has played a central\nrole.  The ultimate basis of our magnificent modern scientific and\nmaterial progress is the inspiration given to the human race by the\nProtestant Reformation.\n\nUnfortunately, the real meaning and message of the Bible has been\nin part obscured during past centuries by dogmatic interpretations.\nThe study of the Bible has also been made a solemn obligation\nrather than a joyous privilege.  The remarkable discoveries of the\npresent generation and its new and larger sense of power and\nprogress have tended to turn men's attention from the contemplation\nof the heritage which comes to them from the past.  The result is\nthat most men know little about the Bible.  They are acquainted\nwith its chief characters such as Abraham, David and Jesus.  A few\nare even able to give a clear-cut outline of the important events\nof Israel's history; but they regard it simply as a history whose\nassociations and interests belong to a bygone age.  How many\nrealize that most of the problems which Israel met and solved are\nsimilar to those which to-day are commanding the absorbing\nattention of every patriotic citizen, and that of all existing\nbooks, the Old Testament makes the greatest contributions to the\npolitical and social, as well as to the religious thought of the\nworld?  National expansion, taxation, centralization of authority,\ncivic responsibility, the relation of religion to politics and to\npublic morality were as vital and insistent problems in ancient\nIsrael as they are in any live, progressive nation to-day.  The\ngradual discovery of this fact explains why here and there\nthrough-out the world the leaders in modern thought and progress\nare studying the Bible with new delight and enthusiasm; not only\nbecause of its intrinsic beauty and interest, but because in it\nthey find, stated in clearest form, the principles which elucidate\nthe intricate problems of modern life.\n\n\n\nTHE OBJECTS OF THESE STUDIES,\n\nThere are two distinct yet important ways of interpreting the\nBible: The one is that of the scholar who knows the Bible from the\nlinguistic, historical and literary point of view; the other, that\nof the man who knows life and who realizes the meaning and value of\nthe Bible to those who are confronted by insistent social, economic\nand individual problems.  These studies aim to combine both methods\nof interpretation.\n\nBriefly defined the chief objects of these studies are:\n\n(1) To introduce the men and women of to-day to that which is most\nvital in the literature and thought of the Old Testament.\n\n(2) To interpret the often neglected Old Testament into the\nlanguage of modern life simply and directly and in the light of\nthat which is highest in the teachings of Christianity.\n\n(3) To present the constructive results of the modern historical\nand literary study of the Bible, not dogmatically but tentatively,\nso that the reader and student may be in a position to judge for\nhimself regarding the conclusions that are held by a large number\nof Biblical scholars and to estimate their practical religious\nvalue.\n\n(4) To show how closely the Old Testament is related to the life of\nto-day and how it helps to answer the pressing questions now\nconfronting the nations.\n\n(5) To lead strong men to think through our national, social and\nindividual problems, and to utilize fearlessly and practically the\nconstructive results of modern method and research in the fields of\nboth science and religion.\n\n\n\nTHE PLAN OF WORK.\n\nThese studies are planned to meet the needs of college students and\nadult Bible classes.  Those who are able to command more time and\nwish to do more thorough work will find in the list of _Parallel\nReadings_ on the first page of each study carefully selected\nreferences to the best authorities on the subject treated.  For\ntheir guidance are also provided _Subjects for Further Study_.  In\nusing this text-book the student may proceed as follows:\n\n(1) Read carefully the Biblical passage indicated in connection\nwith each title; for example, in the first study, Genesis 1 and 2.\n\n(2) Read the Biblical and other quotations on the first page of\neach study.  Unless otherwise indicated the Biblical quotations are\nfrom the American Revised Version.  They include the most important\nBiblical passages.  The other quotations embody some of the best\ncontributions of ancient and modern writers to the subject under\nconsideration.\n\n(3) Read and think through the material presented under each\nparagraph.  This material is arranged under six headings for the\nconvenience of those who wish to follow the plan of daily reading\nand study.\n\n\n\nBOOKS OF REFERENCE.\n\nThe books suggested in connection with this course have been\ncarefully selected in order that each person may have for his\nindividual use a practical working library.  The following should\nbe at hand for constant reference.\n\nKent, C. F., _The Historical Bible_, Vols. I and II.  Contains the\nimportant Biblical passages arranged in chronological order and\nprovided with the historical, geographical and archaeological notes\nrequired for their clear understanding.  The translation is based\non the oldest manuscripts and embodies the constructive results of\nmodern Biblical research.  New York, $1.00 each.\n\nJenks, J. W., _Principles of Politics_.  New York, $1.25.  Prepared\nto explain the principles by which political action is governed and\nthus to aid thoughtful citizens both to gain a clear outlook on\nlife and wisely to direct their own political activity.\n\nAristotle, _Politics_.  The greatest masterpiece of scientific\npolitical thought.  Its different point of view will suggest many\nilluminating comparisons between Greek and modern political ideals\nand institutions and give the reader a broad basis for the\nappreciation of that which is essential and enduring in the\nstatecraft of all ages.  $2.50.\n\nFor further parallel study the following books are suggested:\n\nBreasted, J. H., _History of the Ancient Egyptians_.  Clear,\nconcise and authoritative.  New York, $1.25.\n\nBryce, James, _The American Commonwealth_, Vols. I, II.  New York,\n$2.00 each.  Best commentary on American Government.\n\nCooper, C. S., _The Bible and Modern Life_.  Presents the point of\nview from which the Bible may most profitably be studied and\ncontains valuable suggestions regarding the organization and work\nof college and adult classes.  New York, $1.25.\n\nDriver, S. R., _Introduction to the Literature of the Old\nTestament_.  New York, $2.50.  A sane, thorough study of the\norigin, history, and contents of the Old Testament books.'\n\nGoodspeed, G. S., _History of the Babylonians and Assyrians_.  New\nYork, $1.25.  A comprehensive and attractive picture of the life of\nthese ancient people.\n\nHadley, A. T., _Standards of Public Morality_.  New York, $1.00.  A\nsuggestive study of the application of moral principles to the life\nof society.\n\nHastings, James, _Dictionary of the Bible_, Vols. 1-5.  New York,\n$6.00 each.  A summary of the historical, literary, geographical\nand archaeological facts which constitute the background of the\nlife and thought of the Bible.\n\nKent, C. F., _The Beginnings of Hebrew History and Israel's\nHistorical and Biographical Narratives_.  (Vols. I and II of\nStudent's Old Testament.) $2.75 each.  Presents in a clear, modern\ntranslation the original sources incorporated in the historical\nbooks of the Old Testament, the origin and literary history of\nthese books, and the important parallel Babylonian and Assyrian\nliterature.\n\nKent, C. F., _Biblical Geography and History_.  New York, $1.50.  A\nclear portrayal of the physical characteristics of Palestine and of\nthe potent influences which that land has exerted throughout the\nages upon its inhabitants.\n\nMcFadyen, J. E., _Messages of the Prophets and Priestly\nHistorians_.  New York, $1,25.  A fresh and effective\ninterpretation of the historical and spiritual messages of the Old\nTestament historical books into the language and thought of to-day.\n\nSmith, H. P., _Old Testament History_.  New York, $2.50.  A\nthorough, well-proportioned presentation of the unfolding of\nIsrael's history.\n\nWilson, Woodrow, _Constitutional Government in the United States_.\n$1.50.  A constructive judgment of the American constitution.\n\nSeeley, J. R., _Introduction to Political Science_.  $1.50.  An\neffective example of the application of the historical methods to\npolitics.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY I\n\nMAN'S PLACE IN THE WORLD.\n\nTHE STORY OF CREATION -- Gen. 1 and 2.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  Kent, _Historical Bible_, Vol. I, pp. 1-7, 231-3.\n  Articles, \"Evolution\" and \"Cosmogony,\" in _Ency. Brit_. or _Inter.\n    Ency_., or any standard encyclopedia.\n\nGod created man in his own image, in the image of God created he\nhim, male and female created he them.  And God blessed them, and\nGod said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the\nearth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea,\nand over the birds of the heavens, and over every living thing that\nmoveth upon the earth.--_Gen. 1:27, 28_.\n\n When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers,\n The moon and the stars which thou hast ordained;\n What is man, that thou art mindful of him?\n And the son of man that thou visitest him?\n For thou hast made him but little lower than God,\n And crownest him with glory and honor.\n Thou makest him to have dominion over the works of thine hands,\n Thou hast put all things under his feet.--_Ps. 8: 8-6_.\n\n God clothed men with strength like his own,\n And made them according to his own image.\n He put the fear of them upon all flesh,\n That they should have dominion over beasts and birds.\n Mouth and tongue, eyes and ears,\n And a mind with which to think he gave them;\n With insight and wisdom he filled their minds,\n Good and evil he taught them.  Ben Sira. 17, 3-7 (_Hist. Bible_).\n\nAll things were made through him; and without him was not any thing\nmade that hath been made.--John 1:3.\n\n\nI.\n\nDIFFERENT THEORIES OF CREATION.\n\nEvery early people naturally asked the questions, How were things\nmade?  How were men created?  First of all, Who made the world?\nThey necessarily answered them according to their own dawning\nknowledge.\n\nThe most primitive races believed that some great animal created\nthe earth and man.  In the Alaskan collection in the museum of the\nUniversity of Pennsylvania there is a huge crow, sitting upon the\nmask of a man's face.  This symbolizes the crude belief of the\nAlaskan Indians regarding the way man was created.  The early\nEgyptians thought that the earth and man were hatched out of an\negg.  In one part of Egypt it was held that the artisan god Ptah\nbroke the egg with his hammer.  In another part of the land and\nprobably at a later date the tradition was current that Thoth the\nmoon god spoke the world into existence.  The earliest Babylonian\nrecord states that:\n\n  The god Marduk laid a reed on the face of the waters,\n  He formed dust and poured it out beside the reed;\n  That he might cause the gods to dwell in the dwellings\n    of their heart's desire,\n  He formed mankind.\n\nLater he formed the grass and the rush of the marsh and the forest.\nThen he created the animals and their young.\n\nThe Parsee teachers held that the rival gods, Ahriman and Ormuzd,\nevolved themselves out of primordial matter and then through the\nlong ages created their attendant hierarchies of angels.  The\nphilosophers of India anticipated in some respects our modern\nevolutionary theory.  Brahma is thought of as self-existent and\neternal.  He gradually condenses himself into material objects,\nsuch as ether, fire, water, earth and the elements.  Last of all he\nmanifests himself in man.  The Greek philosophers were the first to\nattempt to describe creation as a purely physical, generative\nprocess.  They taught the evolution of the more complex from the\nsimpler forms.  Plato and Aristotle believed in a transcendental\ndeity and found in the world indications of a vital impulse toward\na higher manifestation of life--man.\n\nMichael Angelo, with wonderful dramatic power, in his painting in\nthe Sistine Chapel at Rome has portrayed how lifeless clay in form\nof man, when touched by the finger of God, by sheer vitalizing\npower is transformed into a living soul.\n\nVery different yet equally impressive is the modern scientific\nview.  The origin of matter and of life is so absolutely unknown\nthat scientists have not as yet formulated definite theories\nconcerning it.  Even the theories regarding the origin of the solar\nsystem are still conflicting and none is generally accepted.  The\nold nebular hypothesis is discredited and the theory of the spiral\nmovement of the solar matter seems to be confirmed by phenomena\nobservable in the heavens.  The one principle generally held by\nscientists is that, given matter and life and some creating force,\nour present marvelous complex universe has come into being\naccording to laws usually called natural.  These laws are so\ninvariable that they may be considered unchanging.\n\nEven more definitely established is the so-called theory of\nevolution which is based on the careful observation and comparison\nof countless thousands of natural phenomena.  According to the\nEncyclopedia Britannica it is the history of the physical process\nby which all living beings have acquired the characteristics,\nphysical, mental, moral, and spiritual, which now distinguish them.\nIt recognizes the gradual development from the simplest to the most\ncomplex forms.  It is merely an attempt to describe in the light of\ncareful observation and investigation the process of growth by\nwhich the world and the beings which inhabit it have grown into\nwhat they are.\n\nA comparison of the Hebrew account of creation with those of other\nraces and times is extremely suggestive.\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE PRIESTLY STORY OF CREATION.\n\nNote that the first and second chapters of Genesis contain two\ndistinct accounts of creation.\n\nRead Genesis 1:1--2:3 (see _Hist. Bib_., I, pp. 231-3 for modern\ntranslation), noting its picture of conditions in the universe\nbefore the actual work of creation began.  The creative power is\nthe spirit or breath of God.  The Hebrew word for spirit (_ruah_)\nrepresents the sound of the breath as it emerges from the mouth or\nthe sound of the wind as it sighs through the trees.  It is the\neffective symbol of a real and mighty force that cannot be seen or\ntouched yet produces terrific effects, as when the cyclone rends\nthe forest or transforms the sea into a mountain of billows and\ntwists like straws the masts of wood and steel.  In the Old\nTestament the \"spirit of God\" or the \"spirit of the Holy One\" is\nGod working (1) in the material universe, as in the work of\ncreation, (2) in human history, as when he directs the life of\nnations, or (3) in the lives of men.\n\nNote the method of creation and the distinctive work of each day.\nThe process is that of separation.  It is orderly and progressive.\nThe first three days of preparation in which (1) light and\ndarkness, (2) air and water (separated by the firmament) and (3)\nland and vegetation are created, correspond to the work of the\nsecond three days in which are created (1) the heavenly bodies, (2)\nthe birds and fishes (which live in the air and water) and (3) land\nanimals and man.  The underlying conception of the universe is that\nheld by most early peoples.  Compare the diagram in _Hastings'\nDictionary of the Bible_ I, 503 or Kent's _Student's Old\nTestament_, Vol. I, p.  52 which illustrates it.\n\nGod's benign plan is revealed by the recurring words: \"God saw that\nit was good.\"  What was the culminating act of creation?  \"Created\nman in his image\" can not mean with a body like that of God (for in\nthis story God is thought of as a spirit), but rather with a\nGod-like spirit, mind, will, and power to rule.\n\n\nIII\n\nTHE EARLY PROPHETIC STORY OF CREATION.\n\nThe opening words of the second account of creation, which begins\nin the fourth verse of the second chapter of Genesis, imply that\nthe earth and the heavens have already been created.\n\n\"In the day that Jehovah made earth and heaven, no plant of the\nfield was yet on the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung\nup, for Jehovah had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there\nwas no man to till the ground; but a mist used to rise from the\nearth and water the whole face of the ground.\"\n\nIt is possible that here only a part of the original story is\npreserved.  What is the order in the story of creation found in\nthis second chapter?  The method of man's creation?\n\nAccording to this account, the tree of life was planted in the\ngarden that man, while he lived there, might enjoy immortality.\nWas the tree of the knowledge of good and evil placed in the garden\nto develop man's moral nature by temptation or merely to inculcate\nobedience?\n\nThe love between the sexes is apparently implanted in all living\nbeings primarily for the conservation of the species, but the early\nprophet also recognized clearly the broader intellectual and moral\naspects of the relation.  \"It is not good for man to be alone\" were\nthe significant words of Jehovah.  Hence animals, birds, and, last\nof all, woman, were created to meet man's innate social needs.\nMan's words on seeing woman were:\n\n  \"This, now, is bone of my bone\n    And flesh of my flesh.\n  This one shall be called woman,\n    For from man was she taken.\"\n\nWhat fundamental explanation is here given of the institution of\nmarriage?  Compare Jesus' confirmation of this teaching in Matthew\n19:4-5:\n\n\"And he answered and said, Have ye not read, that he who made them\nfrom the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this\ncause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to\nhis wife: and the two shall become one flesh?\"\n\n\nIV.\n\nA COMPARISON OF THE TWO ACCOUNTS OF CREATION.\n\nThe account of creation found in the second chapter suggests the\nsimple, direct ideas of a primitive people; while the account in\nGenesis 1 has the exact, repetitious, majestic literary style of a\nlegal writer.  Are the differences between these two accounts of\ncreation greater than those between the parallel narratives in the\nGospels?  We recognize that the differences in detail between the\nGospel accounts of the same event are due to the fact that no two\nnarrators tell the same story in the same way.  Are the variations\nbetween the two Biblical accounts of creation to be similarly\nexplained?  A growing body of Biblical scholars hold, though many\ndiffer in judgment, that the account in the first chapter of\nGenesis was written by a priestly writer who lived about four\nhundred B.C., and the second account four hundred years earlier by\na patriotic, prophetic historian.\n\nObserve that the two accounts agree in the following fundamental\nteachings: (1) One supreme God is the Creator; (2) man is closely\nakin to God; (3) all else is created for man's best and noblest\ndevelopment.\n\nIs the primary aim of these accounts to present scientific facts or\nto teach religious truths?  Paul says in Timothy that \"Every\nscripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for\nreproof, for correction, for instruction which is in\nrighteousness.\"  Is their religious value, even as in the parables\nof the New Testament, entirely independent of their historical or\nscientific accuracy?  Is there any contradiction between the\ndistinctive teachings of the Bible and modern science?  Do not the\nBible and science deal with two different but supplemental fields\nof life: the one with religion and morals, the other with the\nphysical world?\n\n\nV.\n\nMAN'S CONQUEST AND RULERSHIP OF THE WORLD.\n\nIn the story of Genesis 1 man is commanded to subdue the earth and\nto have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the\nheavens and over every living thing that creeps upon the earth.\nHow far has man already subdued the animals and made them serve\nhim? How far has he conquered the so-called natural forces and\nlearned to utilize them?  Is the latter day conquest of the air but\na step in this progress?  Are all inventions and developments of\nscience in keeping with the purpose expressed in Genesis 1?  Does\nthe command imply the immediate or the gradual conquest of nature?\nWhy?  Do science and the Bible differ or agree in their answers to\nthese questions?\n\n\nVI.\n\nMAN'S RESPONSIBILITY AS THE RULER OF THE WORLD.\n\nConsider the different ways in which the Biblical accounts of\ncreation state that man is akin to God.  In the one account man was\ncreated in the image of God; in the other Jehovah formed man of the\ndust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils his own\nlife-giving breath.  In what sense is man God-like?  Are all men\n\"made in the image of God\"?  Does this story imply that every man\nhas the right and capacity to become God-like?\n\nA high official of China, whose power of authority extends to\nquestions of life and death, is called \"the father and mother of\nhis people.\"  If he fails in the responsibility which his authority\nimposes upon him, and the people in consequence create a\ndisturbance, he is severely punished, sometimes by death.  Does\nauthority always imply responsibility?  Of what value to man is the\nconquest of the forces of nature?  President Roosevelt said that he\nconsidered the conservation of the natural resources of the United\nStates the most important question before the American people.  Is\nthis political question also a religious question?\n\nWhy did God give man authority over the animal world?  Does the\nresponsibility that comes from this authority rest upon every man?\nOne of the laws of the Boy Scouts reads:\n\n\"A scout is kind.  He is a friend to animals.  He will not kill nor\nhurt any living creature needlessly, but will strive to save and\nprotect all harmless life.\"  Is this a practical application of the\nteaching in Genesis 1?\n\nIf God's purpose is to make everything good, man's highest\nprivilege, as well as duty, is to co-operate with him in realizing\nthat purpose.  Are men to-day as a whole growing happier and\nnobler?  In what practical ways may a man contribute to the\nhappiness and ennobling of his fellow men?\n\nIs your community growing better?  What would be the result if you\nand others like yourself did your best to improve conditions?  If\nso, how?\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nIs man's possession of knowledge and power the ultimate object of\ncreation?  If not, what is?  Does human experience suggest that\nman's life on earth is, in its ultimate meaning, simply a school\nfor the development of individual character and for the perfecting\nof the human race?\n\nIs there any other practical way in which a man can serve God\nexcept by serving his fellowmen?  If so, how?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Origin and Content of the Babylonian Stories of\nCreation.--Hastings, _Dictionary of the Bible_, 1, 501-7; Kent,\n_Student's O. T._, I, 360-9.\n\n(2) The Relation of the Biblical Story of the Creation to the\nBabylonian.--Kent, _Student's O. T._, I, 369-70.\n\n(3) The Seeming Conflict Between the Teachings of the Bible and\nScience and the Practical Reconciliation.--Sir Oliver Lodge:\n_Science and Immortality_, Section 1.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY II\n\nMAN'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR HIS ACTS.\n\nTHE STORY OF THE GARDEN OF EDEN.--Gen.  3.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_, Vol. I, 37-42.\n  Drummond, _Ideal Life_, Chaps. on Sin.\n\nAnd when the woman saw that the tree was good for food and that it\nwas a delight to the eye, and that the tree was to be desired to\nmake one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat; and she\ngave also unto her husband with her and he did eat.  And the eyes\nof them both were opened and they beard the voice of Jehovah God\nwalking in the garden in the cool of the day: and the man and his\nwife hid themselves from the presence of Jehovah God amongst the\ntrees of the garden.--_Gen. 3:6-8_.\n\nBlessed is the man that endureth temptation; for when he hath been\napproved, he shall receive a crown of life, which the Lord promised\nto them that love him.  Let no man say when he is tempted, I am\ntempted of God; for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself\ntempteth no man; but each man is tempted when he is drawn away by\nhis own lust and enticed.  Then the lust, when it hath conceived,\nbeareth sin: and the sin, when it is full grown, bringeth forth\ndeath.--_James 1:12-15_.\n\n  For the love of God is broader\n    Than the measure of man's mind,\n  And the heart of the eternal\n    Is most wonderfully kind.--_Frederick W. Faber_.\n\nNone could enter into life but those who were in downright earnest\nand unless they left the wicked world behind them; for there was\nonly room for body and soul, but not for body and soul and\nsin.--_John Bunyan_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE NATURE OF SIN.\n\nHenry Drummond has said that sin is a little word that has wandered\nout of theology into life.\n\nMembers of a secret organization known as the Thugs of India feel\nat times that it is their solemn duty to strangle certain of their\nfellow men.  Do they thereby commit a sin?  A Parsee believes that\nit is wrong to light a cigar, for it is a desecration of his emblem\nof purity--fire.  Others in the western world for very different\nreasons regard the same act as wrong.  Is the lighting or smoking\nof a cigar a sin for these classes?  Is the act necessarily wrong\nin itself?\n\nWhen a trained dog fails to obey his master, does he sin?  Is man\nalone capable of sinning?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE DIFFERENT THEORIES REGARDING THE ORIGIN OF SIN.\n\nMany and various have been the definitions of sin and the\nexplanations of its origin.  Most primitive peoples defined it as\nfailure to perform certain ceremonial acts, or to bring tribute to\nthe gods.  Morality and religion were rarely combined.  The Hebrew\npeople were the first to define right and wrong in terms of\npersonal life and service.  Sin as represented in Genesis 3 was the\nresult of individual choice.  It was yielding to the common rather\nthan the nobler impulses, to desire rather than to the sense of\nduty.  The temptation came from within rather than from without,\nand the responsibility of not choosing the best rested with the\nindividual.  The explanation is as simple and as true to human\nexperience to-day as in the childhood of the race.\n\nThe Persian religion, on the contrary, conceived of the world as\ncontrolled by two hostile gods, with their hosts of attendant\nangels.  One god, Ormuzd, was the embodiment of light and goodness.\nThe other, Ahriman, represented darkness and evil.  They traced all\nsin to the direct influence of Ahriman and the evil spirits that\nattended him.  During the Persian period a somewhat similar\nexplanation of the origin of evil appeared in Jewish thought.\nSatan, who in the book of Job appears to be simply the prosecuting\nattorney of heaven, began to be thought of as the enemy of man,\nuntil in later times all sin was traced directly or indirectly to\nhis influence.  This was the conception prevalent among the\nPuritans.  This view tended to relieve man of personal\nresponsibility for he was regarded as the victim of assaults of\nhosts of malignant spirits.  Does your knowledge of the heart of\nman confirm the insight of the prophet who speaks through the\nwonderful story of Genesis 3?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE ORIGIN OF SIN ACCORDING TO THE STORY IN GENESIS 3.\n\nIn your judgment is the story of the man and the woman in Genesis 3\na chapter from the life of a certain man and woman, or a faithful\nreflection of universal human experience?  Most of the elements\nwhich are found in the story may likewise be traced in earlier\nSemitic traditions.  The aim of the prophet who has given us the\nstory was, according to the view of certain interpreters, to\npresent in vivid, concrete form the origin, nature, and\nconsequences of sin.  This method of teaching was similar to that\nwhich Jesus used, for example, in the parable of Dives and Lazarus.\nThe tree of the knowledge of good and evil, with the command not to\neat of it, apparently symbolizes temptation.  Is temptation\nnecessary for man's moral development? The serpent was evidently\nchosen because of its reputation for craft and treachery.  The\nserpent's words represent the natural inclinations that were\nstruggling in the mind of the woman against her sense of duty.\nNote that in the story the temptation did not come to man through\nhis appetite or his curiosity or his esthetic sense but through his\nwife whom God had given him.  Was the man's act in any way\nexcusable?  Strong men and women often sin through the influence of\nthose whom they love and admire.  Are they thereby excused?  What\nnatural impulses impelled the woman to disobey the divine command?\nWere these impulses of themselves wrong?  How far did her\nexperience reflect common human experience?  What was the real\nnature of her act?  Was it wrong or praise-worthy for her to desire\nknowledge?\n\nIn what form did temptation come to the man in Genesis 3.  Does\ntemptation appeal in a different form to each individual?  The\nHebrew word for sin (which means to miss the mark placed before\neach individual) vividly and aptly describes the real nature of\nsin.  The ideal placed before each individual represents his sense\nof what is right.  If he acts contrary to that ideal or fails to\nstrive to realize it, does he sin?\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE EFFECTS OF SIN UPON THE WRONG-DOER.\n\nWhat was the effect of their consciousness of having disobeyed upon\nthe man and woman in the ancient story?  Did they believe that they\nhad done wrong, or merely that they had incurred a penalty?  Does\nsin tend to make cowards of men?  Were the feelings of shame, and\nthe sense of estrangement in the presence of one who loved them,\nthe most tragic effect of their sin?  When a child disobeys a\nparent or a friend wrongs a friend is the sense of having injured a\nloved one the most painful consequence of sin?  Was the penalty\nimposed on the man and woman the result of a divine judgment or the\nnatural and inevitable effect of wrong-doing?  Why did the man and\nwoman try to excuse their disobedience?  Was it natural?  Was it\ngood policy?  Was it right?  If not, why not?\n\n\nV.\n\nGOD'S ATTITUDE TOWARD THE SINNER.\n\nJehovah in the story evidently asked the man and woman a question,\nthe answer to which he already knew, in order to give them an\nopportunity to confess their wrong-doing.  Parents and teachers\noften seek to give the culprit the opportunity to confess his sin.\nWhat is the attitude of the law towards the criminal who pleads\nguilty?  What is the reason for this attitude?  A loving parent or\neven the state might forgive an unrepentant sinner, but the effect\nof the wrong-doing upon the sinner and upon others may still remain.\n\nWhile the man and woman remained conscious of their wrong-doing,\nthough defiant, to abide in Jehovah's presence was for them\nintolerable.  Are toil and pain essential to the moral development\nof sinners who refuse to confess their crime?  Are toil and pain in\nthemselves curses or blessings to those who have done wrong?  The\npicture in Genesis 3 clearly implies that God's intention was not\nthat man should suffer but that he should enjoy perfect health and\nhappiness.  Jehovah's preparation of the coats of skin for the man\nand woman is convincing evidence that his love and care continued\nunremittingly even for the wrong doers.  Modern psychology is\nmaking it clear that the effect of sin upon the unrepentant sinner\nis to increase his inclination toward sinning.  But when a man in\npenitence for his sin has turned toward God and changed his\nrelation to his fellow men, God becomes to him a new Being with a\nnearness and intimacy impossible before!  May the Christian believe\nthat this new sense of nearness and love to God is met by a\ncorresponding feeling on God's part?  In the light of Christian\nexperience is there not every reason to believe that God himself\nalso enters into a new and joyous relationship with the man?  This\nthought was evidently in the mind of Jesus when be declared that\nthere was joy in heaven over one sinner that repented.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE EFFECT OF SIN UPON SOCIETY.\n\nMen are often heard to remark that they are willing to bear the\nconsequences of their sin.  Is it possible for any individual to\nexperience in himself the entire result of his wrong-doing?  In the\nGenesis story the woman's deliberate disobedience would seem to\nhave had very direct influence upon her husband.  Mankind has\nalmost universally come to regard certain acts as wrong and to\nprescribe definite modes of punishment.  Such decisions have come\nabout not simply because of the effect of sin upon the individual\nbut more especially because the sin of the individual affects\nsociety.  State the different influences that deter men from sin\nand note those which from your experience seem the strongest.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nIs an act that is wrong for one man necessarily a sin if committed\nby another?  Are men's tendencies to sin due to their inheritance\nor to impulses which they share in common with brutes, or to\ninfluences that come from their environment?  In the light of this\ndiscussion formulate your own definition of sin.\n\nIs the final test of sin a man's consciousness of guilt, or the\nultimate effect of his act upon himself, or upon society?\n\nMay the woman in the Garden of Eden be regarded as the prototype of\nthe modern scientist?  Are there ways in which the scientist may\nsin in making his investigations?  Illustrate.  How about\nvivisection?\n\nDoes sin bring moral enlightenment?  Distinguish between Jesus'\nattitude toward sin and toward the sinner.  What should be our\nattitude toward the sinner?\n\nIf the man and woman had frankly confessed their sin, what, by\nimplication, would have been the effect: first, upon themselves,\nand second, upon the attitude and action of God?\n\nDoes temptation to sin, as in the case of Adam, often come in the\nguise of virtue?  What is the value of confession to the sinner?\nTo society?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Babylonian and Egyptian Idea of Sin.  _Hastings, Dictionary\nof the Bible_, extra vol. 566-567; Breasted, _History of Egypt_,\n173-175; Jastrow, _Religion of the Babylonians and Assyrians_,\n313-327.\n\n(2) Milton's Interpretation of Genesis 3 in Paradise Lost.\n\n(3) The Right and Wrong of the Attempted Surrender of West Point\nfrom the Point of View of Benedict Arnold, Andre and Washington.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY III\n\nTHE CRIMINAL AND HIS RELATION TO SOCIETY.\n\nTHE STORY OF CAIN.--Gen. 4:1-16.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_, Vol. 1, 42-46.\n  Jenks, _Prin. of Pol_. 1-16.\n  August Drahms, _The Criminal_.\n\nNow in the course of time it came to pass, that Cain brought some\nof the fruit of the ground as an offering to Jehovah.  And Abel\nalso brought some of the firstlings of his flock and of their fat.\nAnd Jehovah looked favorably upon Abel and his offering: but for\nCain and his offering he had no regard.\n\nTherefore, Cain was very angry and his countenance fell.  And\nJehovah said to Cain,\n\n  Why art thou angry?\n  And why is thy countenance fallen?\n  If thou doest well, is there not acceptance?\n  But if thou doest not well,\n  Does not sin crouch at the door?\n  And to thee shall be its desire,\n  But thou shouldst rule over it.\n\nThen Cain said to Abel his brother, Let us go into the field.  And\nwhile they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel his brother\nand slew him.\n\nAnd when Jehovah said to Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? he said,\nI, know not; am I my brother's keeper.--Gen. 4:3-9 (_Hist. Bible_).\n\nAnd the Scribes and the Pharisees bring a woman taken in adultery;\nand having set her in the midst, they say unto Jesus, Teacher, this\nwoman hath been taken in adultery, in the very act.  Now in the law\nMoses commanded us to stone such: what then sayest thou of her?\nAnd this they said trying him, that they might have whereof to\naccuse him.  But Jesus stooped down and with his finger wrote on\nthe ground.  And when they continued asking him, he lifted himself,\nand said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first\ncast a stone at her.  And again he stooped down and with his finger\nwrote on the ground.  And they, when they heard it, went out one by\none, beginning from the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was\nleft alone, and the woman, where she was, in the midst.  And Jesus\nlifted himself up and said unto her, Woman, where are they?  Did no\nman condemn thee?  And she said, No man, Lord.  And Jesus said,\nNeither do I condemn thee.  Go thy way; from henceforth sin no\nmore.--_John 8:3-11_.\n\nEvery experiment by multitudes or individuals that has a sensual or\nselfish aim will fail.--_Emerson_.\n\nWhen you meet one of these men or women be to them a Divine man; be\nto them thought and virtue; let their timid aspirations find in you\na friend; let their trampled instincts be genially tempted out in\nyour atmosphere; let their doubts know that you have doubted, and\ntheir wonder feel that you have wondered.--_Emerson_.\n\nBut I still have a good heart and believe in myself and fellow men\nand the God who made us all.--_Robert Louis Stevenson_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE MEANING OF THE STORY OF CAIN.\n\nIn Arabia and Palestine to-day, as in the past, a man's prosperity\nor misfortune is universally regarded as the evidence of divine\napproval or disapproval.  Even Jesus' disciples on seeing a blind\nman by the wayside, raised the question: \"Did this man sin or his\nparents?\"  Among the Arabs of the desert the tribal mark, either\ntattooing or a distinctive way of cutting the hair, insures the\npowerful protection of the tribe.  Each tribesman is under the most\nsacred obligation to protect the life of a member of his tribe, or\nto avenge, if need be with his own life-blood, every injury done\nhim.  Without the tribal mark a man becomes an outlaw.  Many\nscholars, therefore, think that the mark placed upon Cain was not\nprimarily a stigma proclaiming his guilt, but rather a token that\nprotected him from violence at the hands of Jehovah's people and\ncompelled them to avenge any wrongs that might befall him.\n\nIn the light of these facts would it not seem possible that Cain's\ncharacter and conduct are the reason why his offering was not\naccepted?\n\nWhat is the meaning and purpose of Jehovah's question, Where is\nAbel thy brother?  Is it probable that in the question, Am I my\nbrother's keeper, the writer intended to assert the responsibility\nof society for the acts of its members?  In China where to-day, far\nmore than in the West, there exists the responsibility of\nneighbors, those who fail to exert the proper influence over the\ncharacter and conduct of a criminal neighbor often have their\nhouses razed to the ground and the sites sown with salt.  Is\nsociety responsible for producing criminals?  How far am I\npersonally responsible for my neighbor's acts?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE MAKING OF A CRIMINAL.\n\nPaul said, \"All men have sinned.\"  Are all men therefore criminals?\nWhat constitutes a criminal?  Was Cain a criminal before he slew\nhis brother?  Legally?  Morally?\n\nWas Cain's motive in the worship of God truly religious or merely\nmercenary?  This portrait of Cain illustrates the fact that formal\nreligious worship does not necessarily deter a man from becoming a\ncriminal.  Sometimes men prominent in religious work become\ndefaulters or commit other crimes.  Does this story suggest the\nfundamental reason why great crimes are sometimes committed by\nreligious leaders?  The motive rather than the form is clearly the\none thing absolutely essential in religious worship.\n\nWas the slaying of Abel the result simply of jealousy or a sudden\nfit of anger or of a gradual deterioration of character?  Compare\nthe gradual development of the criminal instincts in Shakespeare's\nMacbeth.  Think of the different influences tending to make\ncriminals!  Most criminals are made before they reach the age of\ntwenty-one.  The development of the criminal is the result either\nof wrong education or the lack of right education.  Parents by\ntheir failure to guard carefully their children's associates and to\ndevelop in them habits of self-control, respect for the rights of\nothers, and a sense of social and civic obligation, are perhaps\nmore than any other class responsible for the growth of criminals.\nIn what ways does the State through its negligence also contribute\nto the making of criminals?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE CRIMINAL'S ATTITUDE TOWARDS SOCIETY.\n\nEvery criminal act is anti-social.  Few if any criminals realize\nthis fact.  A superintendent of the Elmira Reformatory after years\nof experience said that he had never seen a criminal who felt\nremorse; while criminals usually regretted being caught, they\nalways excused their crime.  The criminal repudiates his social\nobligations, not acknowledging the fact that the basis of all\nsociety is the recognition of the rights of others.  The thief\noften excuses his acts by asserting that society owes him a living.\nIs this position right or do you agree with the following\nstatement?  \"The criterion of what is for the benefit of the\ncommunity at large must be settled by the community itself, not by\nan individual.  The citizen, then, may and must do what the\ncommunity determines it is best for him to do; he must stand in the\nforefront of battle if so ordered.  He must not do what the State\nforbids; he may be deprived of liberty and life if he does.\"--\n_Jenks_.\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE WAYS IN WHICH SOCIETY DEALS WITH THE CRIMINAL.\n\nCain's punishment was banishment rather than imprisonment.  What\nwas the fate that Cain specially feared?  Cain and Abel in the\noriginal story, some writers believe, represented tribes (see\n_Hist. Bible_, I, 44).  Among nomadic peoples in the early East, as\nto-day, the punishment of murder was left to the family or tribe of\nthe murdered man.  Was this just or effective?  The same crude\nmethod of avenging wrongs is found in the vendetta of Italy and the\nfamily feuds in certain sparsely settled regions in the United\nStates.  The survival of this institution is to-day one of the\ngreatest obstacles to civilization in those regions.  Why?\n\nIn most criminal legislation the chief emphasis is placed on\npunishment.  For example, thieves are punished with imprisonment.\nWhy?  A radical change in public opinion is now taking place.  The\nprevailing method of dealing with crimes advocated by penologists\nto-day is the protection of society if possible by the reform of\nthe criminal.  Does this method protect society effectually?  Why\nis it that criminals generally prefer a definite term in prison\nrather than an indefinite sentence with the possibility of release\nin less than half the time? Which method of treatment is best in\nthe end for the wrong-doer?\n\nIt is important to distinguish clearly between the private and the\nofficial attitude toward the criminal.  As individuals, who cannot\nknow the motives, we should heed the maxim of Jesus: \"Judge not!\"\nAs public officials whose duty it is to protect society, we are\nunder obligation to deal firmly and effectively with the criminal.\nWhat would probably have been the result had Cain confessed his\ncrime?  God was far more lenient even with the unrepentant Cain\nthan were his fellow men.  Did God, however, remit Cain's sentence?\nCain said, \"I shall become a fugitive and a wanderer on the face of\nthe earth.\"  Was this sense of being an outcast the most painful\nelement in Cain's punishment?  All crime thus in a sense brings its\nown punishment.  If in placing upon Cain a tribal mark, thereby\nprotecting him from being killed, God apparently aimed to give him\nan opportunity to reform, the clear implication is that the divine\nlove and care still follow him.  That love and that care never\ncease toward even the most depraved.  Compare Jesus' attitude\ntoward the criminal, as illustrated in his ministry and especially\nin his dealing with the woman taken in adultery.  His forgiveness\nof the woman's sin did not cancel the social results, but gave her\na new basis for right living in the future.  She realized that some\none believed in her.  Is this one of the most important influences\nto-day in assisting weak men and in redeeming criminals?  Henry\nDrummond when asked the secret of his success with men said, \"I\nlove men.\"\n\n\nV.\n\nHOW TO DEAL WITH CRIMINALS.\n\nThe purpose of criminal legislation and administration is clearly\nthe protection of society.  The criminals are punished, not for the\nmere sake of the punishment or for vengeance, but to deter them\nfrom further crime or to serve as a warning to others.  Only on\nthis account can punishment be justified.\n\nTo prove an effective warning the punishment for crime should be\ncertain, prompt and just.  For these reasons effective police,\nupright judges and fair methods of procedure are absolutely\nessential.  Efforts should be made not to influence the courts by\npublic opinion, and the pernicious prejudgment of cases by popular\nnewspapers should be discountenanced.\n\nThe surest method of stopping a criminal's dangerous activity is to\nreform him; to give him a new and absorbing interest.  Experience\nat our best reformatories shows that with the indeterminate\nsentence a very large majority of young criminals can be\ntransformed into safe and useful citizens.  This method is both\ncheaper and more effective than direct punishment for fixed terms.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE PREVENTION OF CRIME.\n\nThe best method of dealing with crime is that of prevention.  The\nwork of protecting society against crime should begin with arousing\nparents to the sense of their responsibilities and by training them\nthoroughly in the duties of parenthood.  Philanthropic agencies,\nthe church, the schools, the State, may do much both by training\ncharacter and by removing temptation.  The maintenance of good\neconomic conditions, provision for wholesome amusements, improved\nsanitation, all tend to remove pernicious influences and strengthen\nthe power of resistance to temptation.  The public press and the\ntheatre, which are at times exceedingly harmful agencies, may be\nand should be transformed into active moral forces.  In furthering\nall these reform measures and preventive movements each individual\nhas a personal responsibility, and, as an active citizen, he may\nrender most important service.  The home, the school, the church\nand the State, all touch the individual on every side and create\nand together control the influences that make or unmake character.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nWhat was the effect of Cain's anger upon his own life?\n\nGladstone said, \"I do not have time to hate anybody.\"\n\nIn what way do anger and hatred hamper one's greatest usefulness?\nDo you believe in the modern theories regarding the effect of\njealousy and hatred upon the body?\n\nIs capital punishment at times a necessity?\n\nWhat is the most effective argument which can be used to restore\nhonor and manhood to a criminal?\n\nIs there any particular agency at work in your community to assist\nmen who have committed crimes?\n\nIs the chief object of punishment to avenge the wrong, to punish\nthe criminal, to deter others from committing similar crimes, or to\nreclaim the wrong-doer?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Effect of the Semitic Law of Blood-revenge upon (_a_) the\ncriminal, (_b_) society and (_c_) possible criminals.  Kent,\n_Israel's Laws and Legal Precedents_, 91, 114-116; Smith, _Religion\nof the Semites_, 72, 420.\n\n(2) Mrs. Ballington Booth's Work for Released Prisoners.    _After\nPrison--What_?\n\n(3) The Practical Effects of the Indeterminate Sentence.  Reports\nof the Prison Reform Association.\n\n(4) Influence of Contract Prison Labor.  American Magazine, 1912,\nJan., Feb., Mar., April.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY IV\n\nTHE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST.\n\nTHE STORY OF THE GREAT FLOOD.--Gen. 6-8.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  Hist. Bible I, 52-65.\n  Darwin, _Origin of Species_; Wallace, _Darwinism_; 3. William Dawson,\n    _Modern Ideas of Evolution_; Article _Evolution_ in leading\n    encyclopedias.\n\nWhen Jehovah saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth,\nand that every purpose in the thoughts of his heart was only evil\ncontinually, it was a source of regret that he had made man on the\nearth and it grieved him to his heart.  Therefore Jehovah said, I\nwill destroy from the face of the ground man whom I have created,\nfor I regret that I have made mankind.\n\nThen Jehovah said to Noah, enter thou and all thy house into the\nark; for thee I have found righteous before me in this generation.\n\nAnd Noah did according to all that Jehovah commanded him.\n\nThen Jehovah destroyed everything that existed upon the face of the\nground, both man and animals, and creeping things, and birds of the\nheavens, so that they were destroyed from the earth; and Noah only\nwas left and they who were with him in the ark.--Gen. 6:5-8; 7:1,\n5, 23 (_Hist. Bible_).\n\nAnd without faith it is impossible to be well-pleasing with God;\nfor he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a\nrewarder of them that seek after him.  By faith Noah, being warned\nof God concerning things not seen as yet, moved with godly fear,\nprepared an ark to the saving of his house, through which he\ncondemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is\naccording to faith.--_Heb. 11:6, 7_.\n\nRare is the man who can look back over his life and not confess, at\nleast to himself, that the things which have made him most a man\nare the very things from which he tried with all his soul to escape.\n\n  If we would attain happiness,\n  We must first attain helpfulness.\n\n  But stay! no age was e'er degenerate\n  Unless men held it at too cheap a rate,\n  For in our likeness still we shape our fate.\n    --_Lowell_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE TWO BIBLICAL ACCOUNTS OF THE FLOOD.\n\nCareful readers of Genesis 6-9 have long recognized certain\ndifficulties in interpreting the narrative as it now stands.  Thus,\nfor example, in 6:20 Noah is commanded to take into the ark two of\nevery kind of beast and bird; but in 7:2, 3 he is commanded to take\nin seven of all the clean beasts and birds.  According to 7:4, 12\nthe flood came as the result of a forty days' rain; but according\nto 7:11 it was because the fountains of the great deep were broken\nup and the windows of heaven were opened.  Again, according to\n7:17, the flood continued on the earth forty days; while according\nto 7:24 its duration was a hundred and fifty days.\n\nThese fundamental variations and the presence of duplicate versions\nof the same incidents point, some writers think, to two originally\ndistinct accounts of the flood which have been closely woven\ntogether by the final editor of the book of Genesis.  When these\ntwo accounts are disentangled, they are each practically complete\nand apparently represent variant versions of the same flood story.\n(See _Hist. Bible_, I, 53-56, for these two parallel accounts.) The\none, known as the prophetic version, was written, these writers\nbelieve, about 650 B.C.  It has the flowing, vivid, picturesque,\nliterary style and the point of view of the prophetic teacher.  In\nthis account the number seven prevails.  Seven of each clean beast\nand bird are taken into the ark to provide food for Noah and his\nfamily.  Seven days the waters rose, and at intervals of seven days\nhe sent out a raven and a dove.  The flood from its beginning to\nthe time when Noah disembarked continued sixty-eight days.  At the\nend, when he had determined by sending out birds that the waters\nhad subsided, he went forth from the ark and reared an altar and\noffered sacrifice to Jehovah of every clean beast and bird.\n\nThe other and more detailed account is apparently the sequel of the\nlate priestly narratives found in Genesis 1 and 5.  The style is\nthat of a legal writer--formal, exact and repetitious.  In this\naccount only two of each kind of beast and bird are taken into the\nark.  The flood lasts for over a year and is universal, covering\neven the tops of the highest mountains.  No animals are sacrificed,\nfor according to the priestly writer this custom was first\ninstituted by Moses.  When the flood subsides, however, a covenant\nis concluded and is sealed by the rainbow in accordance with which\nman's commission to rule over all other living things is renewed\nand divine permission is given to each to eat of the flesh of\nanimals, provided only that men carefully abstain from eating the\nblood.  This later account is dated by this group of modern\nBiblical scholars about 400 B.C.\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE CORRESPONDING BABYLONIAN FLOOD STORIES.\n\nClosely parallel to these two variant Biblical accounts of the\nflood are the two Babylonian versions, which have fortunately been\nalmost wholly recovered.  The older Babylonian account is found in\nthe eleventh tablet of the Gilgamesh epic, which comes from the\nlibrary of Asshurbanipal.  This great conqueror lived\ncontemporaneously with Manasseh during whose reign Assyrian\ninfluence was paramount in the kingdom of Judah.  In his quest for\nhealing and immortality Gilgamesh reached the abode of the\nBabylonian hero of the flood.  In response to Gilgamesh's question\nas to how he, a mortal, attained immortality the Babylonian Noah\nrecounts the story of the flood.  It was brought about by the\nBabylonian gods in order to destroy the city of Shurippak, situated\non the banks of the Euphrates.  The god Ea gave the warning to his\nworshipper, the hero of the flood, and commanded him:\n\n  Construct a house, build a ship,\n  Leave goods, look after life,\n  Forsake possessions, and save life,\n  Cause all kinds of living things to go up into the ship.\n  The ship which thou shalt build,--\n  Exact shall be its dimensions:\n  Its breadth shall equal its length;\n  On the great deep launch it.\n  I understood and said to Ea, my lord:\n  \"Behold, my lord, what thou hast commanded,\n  I have reverently received and will carry out.\"\n\nA detailed account then follows of the building of the ark.  Its\ndimensions were one hundred and twenty cubits in each direction.\nIt was built in six stories, each of which was divided into nine\nparts.  Plentiful provisions were next carried on board and a great\nfeast was held to commemorate the completion of the ark.  After\ncarrying on board his treasures of silver and gold he adds:\n\n  All the living creatures of all kinds I loaded on it.\n  I brought on board my family and household;\n  Cattle of the field, beasts of the field, the craftsmen,\n  All of them I brought on board.\n\nIn the evening at the command of the god Shamash the rains began to\ndescend.  Then the Babylonian Noah entered the ship and closed the\ndoor and entrusted the great house with its contents to the\ncaptain.  The description of the tempest that follows is\nexceedingly vivid and picturesque.\n\n  When the first light of dawn shone forth,\n  There rose from the horizon a dark cloud, within which Adad thundered,\n  Nabu and Marduk marched at the front,\n  The heralds passed over mountains and land;\n  Nergal tore out the ship's mast,\n  Ninib advanced, following up the attack,\n  The spirits of earth raised torches,\n  With their sheen they lighted up the world.\n  Adad's tempest reached to heaven,\n  And all light was changed to darkness.\n  So great was the havoc wrought by the storm that\n  The gods bowed down, sat there weeping,\n  Close pressed together were their lips.\n\nFor six days and nights the storm raged, but on the seventh day it\nsubsided and the flood began to abate.  Of the race of mortals,\nhowever, every voice was hushed.  At last the ship approached the\nmountain Nisir which lay on the northern horizon, as viewed from\nthe Tigris-Euphrates valley.  Here the ship grounded.  Then,\n\n  When the seventh day arrived,\n  I sent forth a dove and let it loose,\n  The dove went forth, but came back;\n  Because it found no resting-place, it returned:\n  Then I sent forth a swallow, but it came back;\n  Because it found no resting-place, it returned.\n  Then I sent forth a raven and let it loose,\n  The raven went forth and saw that the waters had decreased;\n  It fed, it waded, it croaked, but did not return.\n  Then I sent forth everything in all directions, and offered a sacrifice,\n  I made an offering of incense on the highest peak of the mountain,\n  Seven and seven bowls I placed there,\n  And over them I poured out calamus, cedar wood and fragrant herbs.\n  The gods inhaled the odor,\n  The gods inhaled the sweet odor,\n  The gods gathered like flies above the sacrifice.\n\nAt the intercession of Ea, the Babylonian Noah and his wife were\ngranted immortality and permitted \"to dwell in the distance at the\nconfluence of the streams.\"\n\nA later version of the same Babylonian flood story is quoted by\nEusebius from the writings of the Chaldean priest Berossus who\nlived about the fourth century B.C.  According to this version the\ngod Kronos appeared in a dream to Xisuthros, the hero, who, like\nNoah in the priestly account, was the last of the ten ancient\nBabylonian kings.  At the command of the god he built a great ship\nfifteen stadia long and two in width.  Into this he took not only\nhis family and provisions, but quadrupeds and birds of all kinds.\nWhen the flood began to recede, he sent out a bird, which quickly\nreturned.  After a few days he sent forth another bird, which\nreturned with mud on its feet.  When the third bird failed to\nreturn, he took off the cover of the ship and found that it had\nstranded on a mountain of Armenia.  The mountain in the Biblical\naccount is identified with Mount Ararat.  Disembarking, the\nBabylonian Noah kissed the earth and, after building an altar,\noffered a sacrifice to the gods.\n\nThus the variations between the older and later Babylonian accounts\nof the flood correspond in general to those that have been already\nnoted in the Biblical versions.  Which Biblical account does the\nearliest Babylonian narrative resemble most closely?  In what\ndetails do they agree?  Are these coincidences merely accidental or\ndo they point possibly to a common tradition?  How far do the later\nBiblical and Babylonian accounts agree?  What is the significance\nof these points of agreement?\n\n\nIII.\n\nHISTORY OF THE BIBLICAL FLOOD STORIES.\n\nOn the basis of the preceding comparisons some writers attempt to\ntrace tentatively the history of the flood tradition current among\nthe peoples of southwestern Asia.  A fragment of the Babylonian\nflood story, coming from at least as early as 2000 B.C., has\nrecently been discovered.  The probability is that the tradition\ngoes back to the earliest beginnings of Babylonian history.  The\nsetting of the Biblical accounts of the flood is also the\nTigris-Euphrates valley rather than Palestine.  The description of\nthe construction of the ark in Genesis 6:14-16 is not only closely\nparallel to that found in the Babylonian account, but the\nmethod--the smearing of the ark within and without with bitumen--is\npeculiar to the Tigris-Euphrates valley.  Many scholars believe,\ntherefore, that Babylonia was the original home of the Biblical\nflood story.\n\nIts exact origin, however, is not so certain.  Many of its details\nwere doubtless suggested by the annual floods and fogs which\ninundate that famous valley and recall the primeval chaos so\nvividly pictured in the corresponding Babylonian story of the\ncreation.  It may have been based on the remembrances of a great\nlocal inundation, possibly due to the subsidence of great areas of\nland.  In the earliest Hebrew records there is no trace of this\ntradition, although it may have been known to the Aramean ancestors\nof the Hebrews.  The literary evidence, however, suggests that it\nwas first brought to Palestine by the Assyrians.  During the\nreactionary reign of Manasseh, Assyrian customs and Baylonian\nideas, which these conquerors had inherited, inundated Judah.  Even\nin the temple at Jerusalem the Babylonians' gods, the host of\nheaven, were worshipped by certain of the Hebrews.  The few\nliterary inscriptions which come from this period, those found in\nthe mound at Gezer, are written in the Assyrian script and contain\nthe names of Assyrian officials.\n\nLater when the Jewish exiles were carried to Babylonia, they\nnaturally came into contact again with the Babylonian account of\nthe flood, but in its later form, as the comparisons already\ninstituted clearly indicate.  It is thus possible, these scholars\nbelieve, to trace, in outline at least, the literary history of the\nSemitic flood story in its various transformations through a period\nof nearly two thousand years.\n\n\nIV.\n\nAIM OF THE BIBLICAL WRITERS IN RECOUNTING THE FLOOD STORY.\n\nThe practical question which at once suggests itself is, What place\nor right has this ancient Semitic tradition, if such it is, among\nthe Biblical narratives?  At best the historical data which it\npreserves are exceedingly small and of doubtful value.  Is it\npossible that the prophetic and priestly historians found these\nstories on the lips of the people and sought in this heroic way to\ndivest them of their polytheistic form and, in certain respects,\nimmoral implications?  A minute comparison of the Babylonian and\nBiblical accounts indicates that this may perhaps be precisely what\nhas been done; but the majestic, just God of the Biblical\nnarratives is far removed from the capricious, intriguing gods of\nthe Babylonian tradition, who hang like flies over the battlements\nof heaven, stupefied with terror because of the destruction which\nthey had wrought.\n\nEach of the Biblical narrators seems to be seeking also by means of\nthese illustrations to teach certain universal moral and religious\ntruths.  In this respect the two variant Biblical narratives are in\nperfect agreement.  The destruction of mankind came not as the fiat\nof an arbitrary Deity, but because of the purpose which God had\nbefore him in the work of creation, and because that purpose was\ngood.  Men by their sins and wilful failure to observe his benign\nlaws were thwarting that purpose.  Hence in accord with the just\nlaws of the universe their destruction was unavoidable, and it came\neven as effect follows cause.  On the other hand, these ancient\nteachers taught with inimitable skill that God would not destroy\nthat which was worthy of preservation.\n\nIn each of the accounts the character of Noah stands in striking\ncontrast with those of his contemporaries.  The story as told is\nnot merely an illustration of the truth that righteousness brings\nits just reward, but of the profounder principle that it is the\nmorally fit who survive.  In both of the versions Noah in a very\ntrue sense represents the beginning of a new creation: he is the\ntraditional father of a better race.  To him are given the promises\nwhich God was eager to realize in the life of humanity.  In the\npoetic fancy of the ancient East even the resplendent rainbow,\nwhich proclaimed the return of the sun after the storm, was truly\ninterpreted as evidence of God's fatherly love and care for his\nchildren.  In the light of these profound religious teachings may\nany one reasonably question the right of these stories to a place\nin the Bible?  Did not Jesus himself frequently use illustrations\ndrawn from earlier history or from nature to make clear his\nteachings?  Is it not evidence of superlative teaching skill to use\nthat which is familiar and, therefore, of interest to those taught,\nin order to inculcate the deeper moral and religious truths of life?\n\n\nV.\n\nSURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST IN THE NATURAL WORLD.\n\nIt is interesting and illuminating to note how the ancient Hebrew\nprophets in their religious teaching forecast the discoveries and\nscientific methods of our day.  This was because they had grasped\nuniversal principles.\n\nSince the memorable evening in July, 1858, in which the views of\nDarwin and Wallace on the principles of variation and selection in\nthe natural world were sent to the Linnaean Society in London, the\nleading scientists have laid great stress upon the doctrine of the\nsurvival of the \"fittest\" as the true explanation of progress in\nthe natural world.  It was apparently made clear by Darwin, and\nsupported by sufficient evidence, that \"any being, if it vary\nhowever slightly, in any manner profitable to itself, under the\ncomplex and somewhat varying conditions of life, will have a better\nchance of surviving, and thus be naturally selected.\"\n\nThis principle, since that day, has been thoroughly worked out in\npractically all the important fields of both the plant and animal\nworld.  Moreover, the doctrine of evolution, dependent upon this\nprinciple, has exerted so great an influence upon the process of\ninvestigation and thinking in all fields of activity that the\nresulting change in method has amounted to a revolution.  The\nprinciple is applied not only in the field of biology, but also in\nthe realm of astronomy, where we study the evolution of worlds, and\nin psychology, history, social science, where we speak of the\ndevelopment of human traits and of the growth of economic,\npolitical and social institutions.\n\nIt is necessary to remember in applying such a brief statement of a\nprinciple, that the words are used in a highly technical sense.\nThe word \"fittest\" by no means need imply the best from the point\nof view of beauty or strength or usefulness in nature; nor does it\nnecessarily mean, in reference to society, best from the point of\nview of morals or a higher civilization.  Rather the \"fittest\"\nmeans the being best adapted to the conditions under which it is\nliving, or to its environment.  As a matter of fact, it is the\ngeneral opinion that in practically all fields this principle works\ntoward progress in the highest and best sense; but it is always a\nmatter for specific study as well as of great scientific interest\nand importance, to determine where and how the variation and the\ncorresponding selection tend to promote the morally good.\nEspecially is this true in the study of society, where we should\nendeavor to see whether or not the \"fittest\" means also the highest\nfrom the moral and religious point of view.\n\nThe story of the flood gives us a most interesting example of the\nway in which the ancient Hebrews looked upon such a process of\nselection in the moral and religious world and taught it as a\ndivine principle.  It is, therefore, one of the most suggestive and\ninteresting of the writings of the early Israelites.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST IN SOCIAL AND POLITICAL LIFE.\n\nFrom our modern point of view, the ancient Hebrew writers had a far\ndeeper knowledge of moral and religious questions than of natural\nscience.  They had a far keener sense of what was socially\nbeneficial than of what was scientifically true.  However we may\nestimate their knowledge of geology and biology, we must grant that\ntheir beliefs regarding the good and ill effects of human action\nhave in them much that is universally true, even though we may not\nfollow them throughout in their theories of divine wrath and\nimmediate earthly punishment of the wicked.\n\nBut is it not true almost invariably, if we look at social\nquestions of every kind in a comprehensive way, that the survival\nof the fittest means the survival of the morally best?  That the\nreligion which endures is of the highest type?  Business success in\nthe long run, is so strongly based upon mutual confidence and\ntrust, that, especially in these later days of credit organization,\nthe dishonest man or even the tricky man cannot prosper long.  A\nsales manager of a prominent institution said lately that the chief\ndifficulty that he had with his men was to make them always tell\nthe truth.  For the sake of making an important sale they were\noften inclined to misrepresent his goods.  \"But nothing,\" he added,\n\"will so surely kill all business as misrepresentation.\"  Even a\ngambling book-maker on the race tracks in New York, before such\nwork was forbidden by law, is said to have proudly claimed that\nabsolute justice and honesty toward his customers was essential to\nhis success and had therefore become the rule of his life.\nAlthough it is sometimes said that the man who guides his life by\nthe maxim, \"Honesty is the best policy,\" is in reality not honest\nat heart, it must nevertheless be granted that in business the\nsurvival of the fittest means the survival of the most honest\nbusiness man.\n\nIt may perhaps have been true in the days of Machiavelli that\ncruelty and treachery would aid the unscrupulous petty despot of\nItaly to secure and at times to maintain his dukedom; but certainly\nin modern days, when in all civilized countries permanently\nprosperous government is based ultimately upon the will of the\npeople, the successful ruler can no longer be treacherous and\ncruel.  Even among our so-called \"spoils\" politicians and corrupt\nbosses, who hold their positions by playing upon the selfishness of\ntheir followers and the ignorance and apathy of the public, there\nmust be rigid faithfulness to promises, and, at any rate, the\nappearance of promoting the public welfare.  Otherwise their term\nof power is short.\n\nIf we look back through the history of modern times, we shall find\nthat the statesmen who rank high among the successful rulers of\ntheir countries are men of unselfish patriotism, and almost\ninvariably men of personal uprightness and morality, and usually of\ndeep religious feeling.  Think over the names of the great men of\nthe United States, and note their characters.  Pick out the leading\nstatesmen of the last half century in England, Germany and Italy.\nDo they not all stand for unselfish, patriotic purpose in their\nactions, and in character for individual honor and integrity?\n\nThe same is true in our social intercourse.  Brilliancy of\nintellect, however important in many fields of activity, counts for\nrelatively little in home and social life, if not accompanied by\ngraciousness of manner, kindness of heart, uprightness of\ncharacter.  It may sometimes seem that the brilliant rascal\nsucceeds, that the unscrupulous business man becomes rich, and that\nthe hypocrite prospers through his hypocrisy.  If all society were\nmade up of men of these low moral types, would such cases perhaps\nbe more often found than now?  In a society of hypocrites, would\nthe fittest for survival be the most skilful deceiver?  Or, even\nthere, would the adage, \"There must be honor among thieves,\" hold,\nwhen it came to permanent organization?  But, whatever your answer,\nsociety fortunately is not made up of hypocrites or rascals of any\nkind.  With all the weakness of human nature found in every\nsociety, the growing success of the rule of the people throughout\nthe world proves that fundamentally men and women are honest and\ntrue.  Generally common human nature is for the right.  Almost\nuniversally, if a mooted question touching morals can be put simply\nand squarely before the people, they will see and choose the right.\n\nFortunate it is for the world that the lessons taught by the early\nHebrew writers regarding the survival of the moral and upright are\ntrue, and that good sense and religion both agree that in the long\nrun, honor and virtue and righteousness not only pay the\nindividual, but are essential to the prosperity of a nation.\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nHad most primitive peoples a tradition regarding the flood?  How do\nyou explain the striking points of similarity between the flood\nstories of peoples far removed from each other?\n\nIs there geological evidence that the earth, during human history,\nhas been completely inundated?\n\nWhat do you mean by a calamity?  Is it a mere accident, or an\nessential factor in the realization of the divine purpose in human\nhistory?\n\nAre appalling calamities, like floods and earthquakes, the result\nof the working out of natural laws?  Are they unmitigated evils?\nWere the floods in China and the plagues in India, which destroyed\nmillions of lives, seemingly essential to the welfare of the\nsurviving inhabitants of those overpopulated lands?\n\nWhat were the effects of the Chicago fire and the San Francisco\nearthquake upon these cities?  How far was the development of the\nmodern commission form of city government one of the direct results\nof the Galveston flood?\n\nTo what extent is the modern progress in sanitation due to natural\ncalamities?  What calamities?\n\nIs a great calamity often necessary to arouse the inhabitants of a\ncity or nation to the development of their resources and to the\nrealisation of their highest possibilities?  What illustrations can\nyou cite?\n\nHow do changes in the environment of men affect the moral quality\nof their acts?  How do circumstances affect the kind of act that\nwill be successful?  During the Chinese revolution of 1912 in\nPeking and Nanking, looting leaders of mobs and plundering soldiers\nwhen captured were promptly decapitated without trial.  Was such an\nact right?  Was it necessary?  What conditions would justify such\nan act in the United States?  Would the same act tend equally to\npreserve the government in both countries?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) Flood Stories among Primitive Peoples.  Worcester, _Genesis_\n361-373; Hastings, _Dict. of Bible_ Vol. II, 18-22; Extra Vol.\n181-182; _Encyc. Brit_.\n\n(2) The Scientific Basis of the Biblical Account of the Flood.\nRyle, _Early Narratives of Gen_. 112-113; Davis, _Gen. and Semitic\nTraditions_ 130-131; Driver, _Genesis_ 82-83, 99; Sollas, _Age of\nthe Earth_, 316 ff.\n\n(3) Compare the treatment accorded their rivals and competitors for\npower in their various fields by the following persons: Solomon,\nCaesar Borgia, the late Empress Dowager of China (Tz'u-hsi),\nBismarck, the great political leaders of today in Great Britain and\nthe United States and the modern combinations of capital known as\ntrusts.\n\nI Kings 1; Machiavelli, _The Prince_; Douglas, _Europe and the Far\nEast_, Ch. 17.\n\nDid these different methods under the special circumstances result\nin the survival of the fittest?  The fittest morally?\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY V\n\nTHE PIONEER'S INFLUENCE UPON A NATION'S IDEALS.\n\nABRAHAM, THE TRADITIONAL FATHER OF HIS RACE.--Gen. 12:1-8; 13:1-13;\n16; 18, 19; 21:7; 22:1-19.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 73-94.\n  _Prin of Pol_., 160-175.\n\nJehovah said to Abraham, Go forth from thy country, and from thy\nkindred, and from thy father's house, to the land that I will show\nthee, that I may make of thee a great nation; and I will surely\nbless thee, and make thy name great, so that thou shalt be a\nblessing, I will also bless them that bless thee, and him that\ncurseth thee will I curse, so that all the families of the earth\nshall ask for themselves a blessing like thine own.  So Abraham\nwent forth, as Jehovah had commanded him.--Gen. 12:1-4.  (_Hist.\nBible_.)\n\nBy faith Abraham when he was called, obeyed to go out into a place\nwhich he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out not\nknowing whither he went.  By faith he became a sojourner in the\nland of promise as in a land not his own, dwelling in tents, with\nIsaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise; for he\nlooked for the city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker\nis God.--_Heb_. 11:8-10.\n\nHe that findeth his life shall lose it; and he that loseth his life\nfor my sake shall find it--_Matt_. 10:39.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE PROPHETIC STORIES ABOUT ABRAHAM.\n\nMany Biblical scholars claim that the data point to variant\nversions of the different stories about Abraham.  Thus, for\nexample, there are two accounts of his deceptions regarding Sarah,\none in 12:9-13:1, and the other in 20:1-17.  The oldest version of\nthe story they believe is found in 26:1-14 and is told not of\nAbraham but of Isaac, whose character it fits far more\nconsistently.  Similarly there are three accounts of the covenant\nwith Abimelech (Gen. 21:22-31, 21:25-34, and 26:15-33).  The two\naccounts of the expulsion of Hagar and the birth of Ishmael, in\nGenesis 16:1-16 and 21:1-20 differ rather widely in details.  In\none account Hagar is expelled and Ishmael is born after the birth\nof Isaac, and in the other before that event.  Do these variant\nversions indicate that they were drawn from different groups of\nnarratives?  The differences in detail are in general closely\nparallel to those which the New Testament student finds in the\ndifferent accounts of the same events or teachings in the life of\nJesus.  They suggest to many that the author of the book of Genesis\nwas eager to preserve each and every story regarding Abraham.\nInstead, however, of preserving intact the different groups of\nstories, as in the case of the Gospels, they have been combined\nwith great skill.  Sometimes, as in the case of the expulsion of\nHagar, the two versions are introduced at different points in the\nlife of the patriarch.  More commonly the two or more versions are\nclosely interwoven, giving a composite narrative that closely\nresembles Tatian's Diatessaron which was one continuous narrative\nof the life and teachings of Jesus, based on quotations from each\nof the four Gospels.   Fortunately, if this theory is right, the\ngroup of stories most fully quoted and therefore best preserved is\nthe early Judean prophetic narratives.  When these are separated\nfrom the later parallels they give a marvelously complete and\nconsistent portrait of Abraham.\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE MEANING OF THE EARLY PROPHETIC STORIES ABOUT ABRAHAM.\n\nRead the prophetic stories regarding Abraham (_Hist. Bible_ I, 73,\n74, 79-81, 84-87, 90-92).  Are these stories to be regarded simply\nas chapters from the biography of the early ancestor of the Hebrews\nor, like the story of the Garden of Eden, do they have a deeper, a\nmore universal moral and religious significance?  Back of the story\nof Abraham's call and settlement in Canaan clearly lies the\nhistoric fact that the ancestors of the Hebrews as nomads migrated\nfrom the land of Aram to seek for themselves and their descendants\na permanent home in the land of Canaan.  Abraham, whose name in\nHebrew means, \"Exalted Father,\" or as it was later interpreted,\n\"Father of a Multitude,\" naturally represents this historic\nmovement, but the story of his call and settlement in Canaan has a\nlarger meaning and value.  It simply and vividly illustrates the\neternal truths that (1) God guides those who will be guided.  (2)\nHe reveals himself alone to those who seek a revelation.  (3) His\nrevelations come along the path of duty and are confined to no\nplace or land.  (4) For those who will be led by him God has in\nstore a noble destiny.  (5) Blessed are the peacemakers for they\nshall be called the children of God.  (6) Blessed are the meek for\nthey shall inherit the earth.  Thus this marvelous story presents\ncertain of the noblest fruits of Israel's spiritual experiences.\nIncidentally it also deals with the relationship between the\nHebrews and their neighbors, the Moabites, across the Jordan and\nthe Dead Sea, for Lot in these earlier stories stands as the\ntraditional ancestor of the Moabites and Ammonites.  It is evident\nthat, like the opening narratives of Genesis, this story aimed to\nexplain existing conditions, as well as to illustrate the deeper\ntruths of life.\n\nSimilarly the story of the expulsion of Hagar, it is thought, aims\nprimarily to explain the origin of Israel's foes, the nomadic\nIshmaelites, who lived south of Canaan.  In the inscriptions of the\nAssyrian king Sennacherib, Hargaranu is the name of an Aramean\ntribe.  A tribe bearing a similar name is also mentioned in the\nsouth Arabian inscriptions.  The Hagar of the story is a typical\ndaughter of the desert.  When she became the mother of a child, the\nhighest honor that could come to a Semitic woman, she could not\nresist the temptation to taunt Sarah.  In keeping with early\nSemitic customs Sarah had full authority to demand the expulsion of\nHagar, for in the eye of the law the slave wife was her property.\nThe tradition of the revelation to Hagar also represented the\npopular explanation of the sanctity of the famous desert shrine\nBeer-lahal-roi.  Like most of the prophetic stories, this narrative\nteaches deeper moral lessons.  Chief among these is the broad truth\nthat the sphere of God's care and blessing was by no means limited\nto Israel.  To the outcast and needy he ever comes with his message\nof counsel and promise.  Was Abraham right or wrong in yielding to\nSarah's wish?  Was Sarah right or wrong in her attitude toward\nHagar?  Was Hagar's triumphal attitude toward Sarah natural?  Was\nit right?\n\nIn the story of the destruction of Sodom Lot appears as the central\nfigure.  His choice of the fertile plain of the Jordan had brought\nhim into close contact with its inhabitants, the Canaanites.\nAbandoning his nomadic life, he had become a citizen, of the\ncorrupt city of Sodom.  When at last Jehovah had determined to\ndestroy the city because of its wickedness, Abraham persistently\ninterceded that it be spared.  Its wickedness proved, however, too\ngreat for pardon.  Lot, who, true to his nomad training, hospitably\nreceived the divine messengers, was finally persuaded to flee from\nthe city and thus escaped the overwhelming destruction that felt\nupon it.  What was the possible origin of this story?  (_Hist.\nBible_ I, 87.)  What are the important religious teachings of this\nstory?  Were great calamities in the past usually the result of\nwickedness?  Are they to-day?  Do people so interpret the\ndestruction of San Francisco and Messina?  The great epidemic of\ncholera in Hamburg in 1892 was clearly the result of a gross\nneglect of sanitary precautions in regard to the water supply.  At\nthat date the cholera germ had not been clearly identified and\nthere was some doubt regarding the means by which the disease was\nspread.  Was sanitary neglect then as much of a sin as it would be\nnow?  May we properly say that the pestilence was a calamity\nvisited on that city as a punishment for its sin of neglect?\n\nWhy did the prophets preserve the story of the sacrifices of Isaac?\nCompare the parallel teaching in Micah 6:6-8.\n\n  With what shall I come before Jehovah,\n  Bow myself before the God on high?\n  Shall I come before him with burnt-offerings,\n  With calves a year old?\n  Will Jehovah be pleased with thousands of rams,\n  With myriads of streams of oil?\n  Shall I give him my first-born for my guilt,\n  The fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?\n\nWhich is the most important teaching of the story: the importance\nof an unquestioning faith and obedience, or the needlessness of\nhuman sacrifice?  Does God ever command any person to do anything\nthat the person thinks wrong?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE PROPHETIC PORTRAIT OF ABRAHAM.\n\nIn the so-called later priestly stories regarding Abraham (see\nespecially Gen. 17) he is portrayed as a devoted servant of the\nlaw, chiefly intent upon observing the simple ceremonial\ninstitutions revealed to him in that primitive age.  With him the\nlater priests associated the origin of the distinctive rite of\ncircumcision.  In Genesis 14 Abraham is pictured as a valiant\nwarrior who espoused the cause of the weak and won a great victory\nover the united armies of the Eastern kings.  Like a knight of\nolden times, he restored the captured spoil to the city that had\nbeen robbed and gave a liberal portion, to the priest king\nMelchizedek, who appears to have been regarded in later Jewish\ntradition as the forerunner of the Jerusalem priesthood.  In the\nstill later Jewish traditions, of which many have been preserved,\nhe is pictured sometimes as an invincible warrior, before whom even\nthe great city of Damascus fell, sometimes as an ardent foe of\nidolatry, the incarnation of the spirit of later Judaism, or else\nhe is thought of as having been borne to heaven on a fiery chariot,\nwhere he receives to his bosom the faithful of his race.  Thus each\nsucceeding generation or group of writers made Abraham, as the\ntraditional father of their race, the embodiment of their highest\nideals.\n\nThe Abraham of the early prophetic narratives, however, is a\nremarkably consistent character.  He exemplifies that which is\nnoblest in Israel's early ideals.  How is Abraham's faith\nillustrated in the prophetic stories considered in the preceding\nparagraph?  His unselfishness and generosity?  His courtly\nhospitality?  Was his politeness to strangers simply due to his\ntraining and the traditions of the desert or was it the expression\nof his natural impulses?  Was Abraham's devoted interest in the\nfuture of his descendants a noble quality?  How are his devotion\nand obedience to God illustrated?  In the light of this study\ndescribe the Abraham of the prophetic narratives.  Is it a perfect\ncharacter that is thus portrayed?  Is it the product of a primitive\nstate of society or of a high civilization?\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE TENDENCY TO IDEALIZE NATIONAL HEROES.\n\nIs Shakespeare right in his statement that \"The evil that men do\nlives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones\"?  Why\ndo men as a rule idealize the dead?  Does the primitive tendency to\nancestor worship in part explain this?  Is the tendency to idealize\nthe men of the past beneficial in its effect upon the race?  What\nwould be the effect if all the iniquity of the past were\nremembered?  The tendency to idealize national heroes is by no\nmeans confined to the Hebrews.  Greek, Roman and English history\nabounds in illustrations.  Cite some of the more striking.  Why are\nthey often thought of as descendants of the gods?  Compare the\npopular conception of the first president of the United States and\nhis character as portrayed in Ford's \"The Real George Washington.\"\nThe portraits of national heroes, even though they are idealized,\nexert a powerful and wholesome influence upon the nations who honor\ntheir memory.  The noblest ideals in each succeeding generation are\noften thus concretely embodied in the character of some national\nhero.  Compare the great heroes of Greek mythology with the early\nheroes of the Old Testament.  Do these differences correspond to\nthe distinctive characteristics of the Greeks and the Hebrews?  Are\nthese differences due to the peculiar genius of each race or in\npart to the influence exerted by the ideals thus concretely\npresented upon each succeeding generation?  Is it probable that in\nthe character of Abraham the traditional father of the Hebrew race\nwas idealized?  Is it possible that teachers of Israel, consciously\nor unconsciously, fostered this tendency that they might in this\nconcrete and effective way impress their great teachings upon their\nrace?  If so, does it decrease or enhance the value and authority\nof these stories?\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE REASONS FOB MIGRATION.\n\nIn the early history of most countries there comes a pressure of\npopulation upon the productive powers of the land.  As numbers\nincrease in the hunting stage game becomes scarce and more hunting\ngrounds are needed.  Tribes migrate from season to season, as did\nthe American Indians, and eventually some members of the tribe are\nlikely to go forth to seek new homes.  Later in the pastoral stage\nof society, as the wealth of flocks and herds increases, more\npasturage is needed and similar results follow.  Even after\nagriculture is well established and commerce is well begun, as in\nAncient Greece, colonies have a like origin.  In the England of the\nnineteenth century Malthus and his followers taught the tendency of\npopulation to outgrow the means of subsistence--a tendency overcome\nonly by restraints on the growth of population, or by new\ninventions that enable new sources of supply to be secured or that\nrender the old ones more efficient.  Emigration and pioneering are\nthus a normal outgrowth of a progressive growing people in any\nstage of civilization.  What does the statement about Abraham's\nwealth in cattle and silver and gold show regarding the country\nfrom which he came and the probable cause of God's direction for\nhis removal?\n\nImmigrants and pioneers are usually the self-reliant and\ncourageous, who dare to endure hardships and incur risks to secure\nfor their country and posterity the benefits of new lands and\nbroader opportunity.  The trials of new and untried experiences and\noften of dire peril strengthen the character already strong, so\nthat the pioneers in all lands and ages have been heroes whose\nexploits recounted in song and story have stirred the hearts and\nmolded the faith of their descendants through many generations.  In\nthe light of later history what was the profound religious\nsignificance to his race and to the world, of the migration\nrepresented by Abraham?  The Biblical narrative does not state the\nexact way in which Jehovah spoke to Abraham.  Is it possible and\nprobable that God spoke to men in that early day as he speaks to\nthem now, through their experiences and inner consciousness?  In\nwhat sense was Abraham a pioneer?\n\nWas it for Abraham's material interest to migrate to Canaan?\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE PERMANENT VALUE AND INFLUENCE OF THE ABRAHAM NARRATIVES.\n\nScholars will probably never absolutely agree regarding many\nproblems connected with Abraham.  Some have gone so far as to\nquestion whether he was an historical character or not.  Is the\nquestion of fundamental importance?  Other writers declare it\nprobable that a tribal sheik by the name of Abraham led one of the\nmany nomad tribes that somewhere about the middle of the second\nmillenium B.C. moved westward into the territory of Palestine.  It\nis probable that popular tradition has preserved certain facts\nregarding his life and character.  It is equally clear that the\ndifferent groups of Israel's teachers have each interpreted his\ncharacter and work in keeping with their distinctive ideals.  Each\nindividual narrative has an independent unity and the connection\nbetween the different accounts is far from close.  Some of them aim\nto explain the derivation of popular names, as for example,\nAbraham, Isaac, and Ishmael, the sanctity of certain sacred places,\nas for example, Beersheba, the origin of important institutions, as\nfor example, circumcision and the substitution of animal for human\nsacrifice, and the explanation of striking physical phenomena, as\nfor example the desolate shores of the Dead Sea.\n\nSome of these accounts, like the table of nations in Genesis 10,\npreserve the memory of the relationship between Israel and its\nneighbors.  They preserve also the characteristic popular record of\nthe early migrations which brought these peoples to Palestine,\nwhere they crystalized into the different nations that figure in\nthe drama of Israel's history.  The permanent and universal value\nof these stories lies, however, in the great moral principles which\nthey vividly and effectively illustrate.  The prophetic portrait of\nAbraham was an inspiring example to hold up before a race.  The\ncharacteristics of Abraham can be traced in the ideals and\ncharacter of the Israelites.  They were unquestionably an important\nforce in developing the prophet nation.  He was, therefore,\npre-eminently a spiritual pioneer.  How far do these stories, and\nespecially the accounts of the covenant between Jehovah and\nAbraham, embody the national and spiritual aspirations of the race?\nAre the Abraham stories of practical inspiration to the present\ngeneration?  What qualities in his character are essential to the\nall-around man of any age?  How far would the Abraham of the\nprophetic stories succeed, were he living in America to-day?  Would\nhe be appreciated by a majority of our citizens?  Are spiritual\npioneers of the type of Abraham absolutely needed in every nation\nand generation if the human race is to progress?\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nAre God's purposes often contrary to man's desires?  Ever to man's\nbest interests?\n\nWhat qualities must every true pioneer possess?\n\nWhat is the ultimate basis of all true politeness?\n\nWho are some of the great pioneers of early American history?  What\nwere their chief contributions to their nation?\n\nIs your own conscientious conception of your duty to be considered\nas God's command to you?  Does he give any other command?\n\nDoes a high stage of civilization ennoble character or tend to\ndegrade it?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) Abraham in Late Jewish Tradition.  Hastings, _Dict. Bib_.  I,\n16, 17, Ginsberg, _The Legends of the Jews_, I, pp. 185-308.\n\n(2) The Geological History of the Dead Sea Valley.  Hastings,\n_Dict.  Bib_. I, 575-7; _Encyc. Bib_. I, 1042-6; Kent, _Bib. Geog.\nand Hist_., 45-54; Smith, _Hist. Geography_, 499-516.\n\n(3) The Original Meaning of Sacrifice.  _St. O. T_., IV, 238;\nHastings, _Dict. Bib_. IV, 329-31; _Encyc. Bib_. IV, 4216-26;\nSmith, _Relig. of the Semites_, 213-43, 252-440; Gordon, _Early\nTraditions of Genesis_, 212-16.\n\n(4) A Comparison of the Motives that Inspired the Migrations of the\nAncestors of the Hebrews and our Pilgrim Fathers.  Cheyney,\n_European Background of American History_; Andrews, _Colonial\nSelf-Government_.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY VI\n\nTHE POWER OF AMBITION.\n\nJACOB, THE PERSISTENT.--Gen. 28, 10-33, 20.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 101-21.\n  Hastings, _Dict. Bible_ II, 526-535.\n  _Prin. of Politics_ Ch. II.\n\nNow as the boys grew Esau became a skilful hunter, but Jacob was a\nquiet man, a dweller in tents.  And Isaac loved Esau--for he had a\ntaste for game--and Rebekah loved Jacob.\n\nOnce when Jacob was preparing a stew, Esau came in from the field,\nand he was faint; therefore Esau said to Jacob, Let me eat quickly,\nI pray, some of that red food, for I am faint.  (Therefore his name\nwas called Edom, Red.) But Jacob said, Sell me first of all your\nbirthright.  And Esau replied, Alas! I am nearly dead, therefore of\nwhat use is this birthright to me?  And Jacob said, Swear to me\nfirst; so he swore to him, and sold his birthright to Jacob.  Then\nJacob gave Esau bread and stewed lentils, and when he had eaten and\ndrank, he rose up and went his way.  Thus Esau despised his\nbirthright.--_Hist. Bible_.\n\nCharles Darwin when asked for the secret of his success said, \"It's\ndogged as does it.\"\n\n  Oh well for him whose will is strong!\n  He suffers, but he will not suffer long;\n  He suffers, but he cannot suffer wrong:\n  For him nor moves the loud world's random mock,\n  Nor all Calamity's hugest waves confound,\n  Who seems a promontory of rock,\n  That, compasst round with turbulent sound\n  In middle ocean meets the surging shock,\n  Tempest-buffetted but citadel-crowned.\n    --_Tennyson_.\n\nLife is comic or pitiful, as soon as the high ends of being fade\nout of sight and man becomes near-sighted and can only attend to\nwhat addresses the senses--_Emerson_.\n\n  Who rises every time he falls\n  Will sometime rise to stay.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE TWO BROTHERS, JACOB AND ESAU.\n\nSouth of the Dead Sea, bounded by the rocky desert on the east and\nthe hot barren Arabah on the west, extends the wild picturesque\nrange of Mount Seir.  It is a land of lofty heights and deep,\nalmost inaccessible valleys, the home of the hunter and the nomad.\nFrom a few copious springs there issue clear, refreshing brooks,\nwhich run rippling through the deep ravines, but soon lose\nthemselves in their hot, gravelly beds.  A few miles further on\nthey emerge and again disappear, as they approach the borders of\nthe hot, thirsty wilderness that surrounds Mount Seir on every\nside.  Here in early times lived the Edomites, a nomadic people who\nestablished themselves in this borderland of Palestine long before\nthe Hebrews gained a permanent foothold in the land of Canaan.  The\nname, Edom, is found in an inscription of a king of the eighth\nEgyptian Dynasty,\n\nIn the Biblical narrative, Esau evidently is the traditional\nancestor of the Edomites, even as Jacob figures as the father of\nthe twelve tribes.  One of the aims of these narratives, it seems\nto many scholars, is to explain why the Israelites, the younger\npeople, who settled latest in Palestine, ultimately possessed the\nland and conquered the Edomites.\n\nThe portraits of Esau and Jacob are remarkably true to the\ncharacteristics of these two rival nations.  They are also faithful\nto human nature as we find it to-day.  Of these two brothers which,\non the whole, is the more attractive? Which resembles his father\nand which his mother?  (Read the accounts of their lives, Gen.\n24-27.)  What noble virtues does Esau possess?  What was his great\nfault?  Reckless men or drifters with generous impulses but with no\ndefinite purpose, of whom gypsies and hoboes are extreme types, are\nfound in every age and society.  Why is it that men of the type of\nEsau so often in time become criminals?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE MAN WITH A WRONG AMBITION.\n\nThe modern tendency to idealize the character of Jacob, simply\nbecause he was one of the famous patriarchs, is both unfortunate\nand misleading.  Although he vividly typifies certain\ncharacteristics of his race, the Jacob of these early prophetic\naccounts is portrayed with absolute fidelity and realism.  His\nfaults are revealed even more clearly than his virtues.  The\ndominant motive in his life is ambition, but it is a thoroughly\nselfish ambition.  In the light of the stories, state in your own\nwords what was the exact nature of Jacob's ambition.  How did it\ndiffer from that of Abraham?  What methods did he use to achieve\nhis ambition?  Were these methods justifiable?  What is your view\nof the statement, \"The end justifies the means\"?  Try to define\nexactly the method of determining justifiable means.  May Jacob's\naction be excused because he was acting under the direction of his\nmother?\n\nDoes a man with a selfish ambition always injure others?  Does he\nin the end injure himself most of all?  How?  Every type of\nselfishness is directly opposed to a man's highest self-interest.\nJesus continually had this large truth in mind when he declared,\n\"He that findeth his life shall lose it, but he that loseth his\nlife for my sake shall find it.\"  Jesus himself illustrated this\nprinciple.  Cite other illustrations from history.  From your own\nobservation or experience.\n\nWas Jacob, even with his wrong ambition, a stronger and more\npromising character than his brother Esau?  Why?\n\nWould you rather have your son a boy of strong character with\nvicious tendency or a weakling with harmless, virtuous inclinations?\n\n\nIII.\n\nJACOB'S TRAINING IN THE SCHOOL OF EXPERIENCE.\n\nJacob's experiences as a fugitive well illustrate the homely\nproverb, \"The way of the transgressor is hard.\"  He who deceived\nand cheated his brother soon became the victim of deception and\nfraud.  Most painful of all was the ever-haunting sense of fear\nbecause of the consequences of his wrong acts that followed him\neven in his life as an exile and, like a spectre, confronted him as\nhe returned again to the scenes of his boyhood.  These painful\nexperiences were probably essential to the development of Jacob's\ncharacter.  Are there any other ways in which men of this type can\nbe led to appreciate that their ambitions are wrong?  Was Laban any\nmore unjust or tricky in his dealing with Jacob than Jacob had been\nwith Esau, or than Jacob was with Laban?  Note the grim humor\nrunning through these stories.  They are the type of stories that\nwould be especially appreciated when told by shepherds beside the\ncamp fire.\n\nThe most significant point in these stories is that they declare\nthat Jehovah's care and guidance followed the selfish deceiver even\nas he fled the consequences of his own misdeeds.  Why should that\ndivine care shield him from the consequences of his misdeeds?  Do\nwe find such instances to-day?  How do you explain them?  What is\nthe meaning of the story of Jacob's vision at Bethel?  What\npromising elements did Jehovah find in Jacob's character?  What\npractical lessons did Jacob learn during his sojourn in Aram?\n\nWas Jacob really a hypocrite, or did he in fact fail to see any\ninconsistency between, his trickery and meanness and his worship of\nJehovah?  A man may be sincere in his religious worship on Sunday\nand yet cheat a neighbor on Monday.  Analyze carefully the nature\nof his religion.\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE INVINCIBLE POWER OP AMBITION AND PERSEVERANCE.\n\nHistory and modern life abound in illustrations of what can be\naccomplished by the combination of ambition and perseverance.\nCyrus, the king of a little upland province, through a remarkable\nseries of victories became the undisputed master of south-western\nAsia and laid the foundations of the great Persian Empire.  Julius\nCaesar, who transformed Rome from a republic into an empire, and\nNapoleon the Corsican, are the classic illustrations of the power\nof great ambition and dauntless persistency.  Far nobler is that\nquiet, courageous perseverance which led Livingston through the\ntrackless swamps and forests of Africa and blazed the way for the\nconquest of the dark continent.  Equally significant is that noble\nambition, coupled with heroic perseverance, that has enabled\nsettlement workers to bring light to the darkest parts of our great\ncities.\n\nAmbition without persistency is but a dream or hope.  Observe\nJacob's persistency in the Biblical stories.  Does persistency,\nwhich has always been a marked characteristic of the Hebrew race,\nlargely explain the achievements of the Jews throughout the world?\nNote the apparently scientific knowledge regarding breeding of\nlambs by Jacob in his dealings with Laban.  Is it a fact recognized\nby science to-day?  If he knew this and Laban did not, can you\njustify his acts?  Can you justify the act of the director of a\ncorporation who uses his prior knowledge of the business of his\ncorporation to make profit from buying or selling its stocks?  Who\nloses?  Is he a trustee for their interests?\n\nWhat is the meaning of the strange story of Jacob's midnight\nstruggle with the angel?  (_Hist. Bible_ I, 119-20.)  What lessons\ndid Jacob learn from this struggle?  Would you call Jacob a truly\nreligious man, according to his light and training, or were his\nreligious professions only hypocritical?  May he have been sincere,\nbut have had a wrong conception of religion?  What is hypocrisy?\nDid Jacob's faith in Jehovah, in the end prove the strongest force\nin his life?  Is there any trace in his later years, of the selfish\nambition which earlier dominated him?  What are his chief interests\nin the latter part of his life?  Did he become the strong and noble\ncharacter that he might have been had he from the first been guided\nby a worthy ambition?  Were the misfortunes that came to him in his\nold age due largely to his own faults reappearing in the characters\nof his sons?\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE DIFFERENT TYPES OF AMBITION.\n\nIn the ultimate analysis it is the man's motive which determines\nhis character as well as his acts.\n\n  \"As he thinketh within himself, so is he.\"--_Prov. 23:7_.\n\n  \"Man looketh on the outward appearance, but Jehovah on\n  the heart.\"--_I Sam_. 16:7.\n\nWith many men the strongest motive is the desire to surpass others.\nIt not only leads them to perform certain acts, but in so doing\nshapes their habits; and character is largely the result of man's\nhabitual way of acting.  Jacob grew up narrow and crafty because of\nthe selfish, dwarfing nature of his ambition, At first his ambition\nwas of a low type, that of the child which desires to acquire\npossessions and power simply for himself.  In the child this\nimpulse is perfectly natural.  In the normally developed\nindividual, during the years of early adolescence (the years of 14\nto 16) the social and altruistic impulses begin to develop and to\ntake the place of those which are purely egoistic or selfish.  When\nthe fully developed man fails, as did Jacob, to leave behind\nchildish things and retains the ambitions and impulses of the\nchild, his condition is pitiable.\n\nMen of this type of ambition often achieve great things from the\neconomic or political point of view.  Economically they are of\ngreater value to society than the drifter.  Sometimes, however,\nthey bring ruin and disaster to society, as well as to themselves.\nDespots like Herod the Great and Napoleon, corrupt political\nbosses, who play into the hands of certain classes at the expense\nof the general public, and men who employ grafting methods in\nbusiness or politics, belong to this class.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT OF RIGHT AMBITIONS.\n\nThe desire to spare one's energies is natural to man.  To gain\nwealth with the least expenditure of energy is said to be the chief\neconomic motive.  Most men are by nature lazy.  This law of inertia\napplies not only in the physical world, but also in the\nintellectual, moral and spiritual fields.  The great majority of\nmen follow the line of least resistance.  In politics and morals\nthey accept the standards of their associates.  Unconsciously they\njoin the great army of the drifters, or followers, who preserve the\ntraditions of the past, but contribute little to the future\nprogress of the race.  To deliver man from the control of his\nnatural inertia he must be touched by some strong compelling power.\nAmbition is one great force that enables most men to overcome this\ninertia.  The influences, therefore, which kindle ambition are\namong the most important which enter the life of man.\n\nIn the Orient the mother stands in especially close relation to the\nson.  How far was Jacob's desire to surpass his brother inspired by\nhis mother?  Many of the world's greatest leaders trace the impulse\nwhich has led them to achieve directly to their parents and\nespecially to their mothers.  The mother of Charles and John Wesley\nis but one of the many mothers to whom the human race owes an\ninestimable debt.  Of all the heritages which parents can leave\ntheir children none is greater than a worthy ambition.  Sometimes\nit is the personality of a great teacher which inspires the\nyouthful ambition and directs it in lines of worthy achievement.\nHow much of England's greatness may be traced to the quiet\ninfluence of Arnold of Rugby!  Consider the unparalleled influence\nof Socrates, Plato, Aristotle--all primarily teachers.\n\nThe true pastor with the spirit of a prophet is often able to guide\nthose with whom he comes into intimate contact to great fields of\nservice.  In encouraging Sophia Smith to found Smith College that\nquiet New England pastor, the Reverend John M.  Greene, won a high\nplace among those in America who first appreciated the importance\nof education of woman.  Equally great opportunities may lie before\nevery pastor and teacher and citizen.  Frequently it is the contact\nthrough literature or in life with men or women who have done\nheroic deeds or have won success in the face of great obstacles\nthat kindles the youthful ambition and stirs the latent motives\nwhich in turn develop strong and noble characters.  Therein lies\nthe perennial value of the Biblical narratives.\n\nFor many men that which arouses their ambitions is the call of a\ngreat opportunity or responsibility.  Note the change in General\nGrant's life with the outbreak of the Civil War.  The unambitious\ntanner becomes the untiring, rigid, unconquerable soldier.\nStriking illustrations of this fact are many men, whose character,\nas well as conduct after they have been called to positions of\npolitical or judicial trust, is in marked contrast to their\nprevious record.  A corrupt lawyer has sometimes become an upright\njudge.  The pride of office, the traditions of the bench have\nsustained him.  It is the privilege and duty of each man, by\nthoughtful deliberation and study to shape and develop his own\nindividual ambitions that they may conform to the highest ideals\nand thus guide him to the noblest and most worthy achievement.  Of\nwhat value to a man is biography in forming his ambitions?  Mention\nsome biographies that you consider of the greatest help.  In what\nways are the life and teachings of Jesus of practical service in\ndeveloping the ambitions of a man to-day?\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nIs it possible for a man without ambition to develop or to achieve\nanything really significant?\n\nIn your judgment, what percentage of the men in your community\nreally think out and carefully plan their lives?  What proportion\ndrift or take the way shown them by others?\n\nSome people consider mental or moral inertia the chief force that\nsustains the corrupt political boss.  Is this true?\n\nWhat proportion of the voters in your voting district actually\nstudy and appreciate the issues in each election?\n\nWhat proportion of church members drift into their church\nmembership, and what proportion join only after a careful study of\nthe relative merits of the different churches?\n\nWhat are the chief ambitions that stir men to action?\n\nWhat was Jesus' ambition?  Paul's?  Florence Nightingale's?\nAbraham Lincoln's?  Peter Cooper's?  Garibaldi's?  Dwight L.\nMoody's?  Was there a common element in the ambition of each of\nthese leaders of men?\n\nIs the realization of the ambition to serve one's fellow-men\nlimited to those who possess unique powers or opportunities?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Law of Inheritance among the Early Semites.  Hastings,\n_Diet. Bib_. II, 470-473; Kent, _Student's O. T_., III; Johns,\n_Bab. and Assyr. Laws, Contracts and Letters_, 161-167.\n\n(2) The Arameans.  Hastings, _Dict. Bible_ I, 138-139; _Encyc.\nBib_. I, 276-280; Peters, _Early Heb. Story_, 45-47, 115-116;\n133-134; Maspero, _Struggle of the Nations_, 126.\n\n(3) The Psychological Connection between Ambition, Habits,\nCharacter and Public Life.  _Prin. of Politics_ Ch. II and III.\nJames, _Talks to Teachers_ Ch. II.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY VII\n\nA SUCCESSFUL MAN OF AFFAIRS.\n\nJOSEPH'S ACHIEVEMENTS.--Gen. 37, 39-48, 50.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_, I, 121-150.\n  Hastings' _Dict. Bible_, II, 770-772.\n  Emerson, _Essay on Character_.\n\nNow Israel loved Joseph more than all his other children, because\nhe was the son of his old age; and he had made him a long tunic\nwith sleeves.  And when his brothers saw that their father loved\nhim more than all his other sons, they hated him, and could not\nspeak to him.\n\nBut Jehovah was with Joseph so that he became a prosperous man, and\nwas in the house of his master the Egyptian.  When his master saw\nthat Jehovah was with him, and that Jehovah caused everything that\nhe did to prosper in his hands, Joseph found favor in his eyes, as\nhe ministered to him, so that he made him overseer of his house,\nand all that he had he put in his charge.\n\nAnd Jehovah was with Joseph and showed kindness to him, and gave\nhim favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison, so that the\nkeeper of the prison gave to Joseph's charge all the prisoners who\nwere in the prison, and for whatever they did he was responsible.\n\nAnd Pharaoh said to Joseph, See, I have appointed you over all the\nland of Egypt.  And Pharaoh took off his signet ring from his\nfinger and put it upon Joseph's finger, and clothed him in garments\nof fine linen, and put a gold chain about his neck, and made him\nride in the second chariot which he had.  Then they cried before\nhim, Bow the knee!  Thus he set him over all the land of Egypt.\nPharaoh also said to Joseph, I am Pharaoh, but without your consent\nshall no man lift up his hand or his foot in all the land of\nEgypt.--_Hist. Bible_.\n\nFor what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world and\nlose his own soul?--_Matt. 16:36_.\n\nMen at some time are masters of their fates: The fault, dear\nBrutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves, that we are\nunderlings.--_Shakespeare_ (Julius Caesar, Act. I, Sc. 2, L. 139).\n\nI find the great thing in this world is not so much where we stand\nas in what direction we are moving.  To reach the port of Heaven we\nmust sail sometimes with the wind, and sometimes against it; but we\nmust sail and not drift, nor lie at anchor.--_O. W. Holmes_.\n\n  He that respects himself is safe from others;\n  He wears a coat of mail that none can pierce.\n\nIt is more important to make a life than to make a\nliving.--_Ex-Governor Russell of Massachusetts_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE QUALITIES ESSENTIAL TO SUCCESS.\n\nThe late Samuel L. Clemens (Mark Twain) advised a young man who\ndesired to enter business to select the firm with which he wished\nto be associated, then ask that they give him work, without\nmentioning the subject of compensation.  Having secured this\nopportunity to demonstrate his ability and willingness to work,\nrecognition would come in due time.  This advice received the\napproval of many prominent business men.  It concretely illustrates\nthe fact that the first essential of success is the willingness to\nserve.  It also emphasizes the necessity of being ready to do the\nwork in accordance with the employer's wishes.  Ultimate success\nalso requires knowledge and trained ability.  These, however, come\nthrough apprenticeship and a faithful improvement of opportunities.\nThe Hebrew sages, with true insight, emphasized the importance of\nknowledge; but they taught also that wisdom, which is not only\nknowledge, but the power to apply it practically in the various\nrelations of life, was far more important.\n\nWhat other qualities are essential to the highest success?  Is it\nvery important that a man should have the right moral standards?\nHow do a man's habits affect his efficiency?\n\nIs it only the genius who is able to attain the highest success\nto-day in business and professional life?  Do you accept George\nEliot's definition of genius as \"the capacity for unlimited work\"?\nTo what extent does a man's faith in God and in his fellow men\ndetermine his ability to win success?  How far are they essential\nto the attainment of the highest type of success?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE LIMITATIONS AND TEMPTATIONS OF JOSEPH'S EARLY LIFE.\n\nThe Hebrew sage who uttered the prayer:\n\n  Remove far from me falsehood and lies;\n  Give me neither poverty nor riches;\n  Feed me with the food that is needful for me.\n    --_Prov. 30:8_.\n\nvoiced a great economic as well as moral principle.  The men who\nare handicapped to-day in the race for success are either those who\nare born in homes of extreme poverty or of extreme wealth where\nthey are unnaturally barred or shielded from the real problems and\ntasks of life.  Which is probably the greater handicap?  To which\nclass did Joseph belong?\n\nIn what ways did his father show his favoritism towards Joseph?\nThe Hebrew word rendered in the older translations, \"coat of many\ncolors,\" means literally, \"long-sleeved tunic.\" This garment, like\nthose worn by wealthy Chinese when in native costume, distinguished\nthe rich or the nobility, who were not under the necessity of\nengaging in manual labor.\n\nThe dreams which Joseph told to his brothers reveal his high\nestimate of his own importance and were probably suggested by his\nfather's attitude toward him.  They were indeed a revelation of the\nambitions already stirring in the young boy's mind.  But Joseph\nrequired closer contact with real life in order to transform his\nambitions into actual achievements.\n\nJoseph gave his brothers cause for hatred toward him, but their\naction in selling him to the Ishmaelites was by no means\njustifiable.  Nevertheless it brought to Joseph the experiences and\nopportunities absolutely essential to the attainment of his\nultimate success.  Often what seem man's greatest misfortunes are\nin reality the door that opens to the new and larger opportunities.\nIn what two ways may a man meet misfortune?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE CALL OF A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.\n\nEgypt, with its marvelous natural resources, its peculiar climate,\nits irrigation, which usually guarantees good crops, and its\nversatile people, has always been pre-eminently the land of\nopportunity.  Especially was this true during the reigns of the\npowerful despots of the eighteenth dynasty, when the relations\nbetween Egypt and Palestine were exceedingly close.  Thus, for\nexample, according to contemporary records, during the reign of the\ngreat reformer king, Amenhotep IV, several Semites rose to\npositions of great authority.  A certain Dudu (David) was one of\nthe most trusted officials of this king.  He is addressed by one of\nthe Egyptian governors as \"My lord, my father.\"  Another Semite\nnamed Yanhamu not only had control of the storehouses of grain in\nthe eastern part of the Nile Delta, but also directed the Egyptian\nrule of Palestine.  The local governors of Palestine refer to him\nin terms which suggest that his authority was almost equal to that\nof Pharaoh himself.  This was perhaps the Joseph of the Biblical\naccount.\n\nIs there any evidence that Joseph complained because of the\ninjustice of his brothers?  By loyal attention to his duties he\nmade himself indispensable to his Egyptian master.  A great\ntemptation came to him in the new home.  What influences led him to\nresist this temptation?  Analyze his probable motives in detail.\n\nThe great injustice which he suffered and the seeming misfortune\nproved in turn a new door of opportunity, but this would not have\nbeen the case had not Joseph forgotten his own personal wrongs and\ngiven himself to the service of his fellow-prisoners.  Was the\nprosperity which generally attended Joseph a miraculous gift or the\nnatural consequences of his courageous, helpful spirit and his\nskill in making the best of every situation?\n\nIn modern life as in the ancient story, the place usually seeks the\nman who is fitted to fill it.  The ever recurring complaint of\nemployers is the scarcity of good men, especially of men able to\nexercise discretion in positions of responsibility.  Was it\nJoseph's skill in interpreting Pharaoh's dreams, or his wise\ncounsel in suggesting methods of providing for the people during\nfamine that gave him his position of high trust and authority?  Was\nthe policy which made Pharaoh practical owner of all the land first\ninstituted by Joseph, or was it already in force in Egypt?  (_Hist.\nBible_, I, 133.)  In the thought of the prophetic narrative, was\nJoseph's fiscal system regarded as evidence of his loyalty to his\nmaster rather than of disloyalty to the interests of the people?\nWas the system suited to that stage and kind of civilization?  Can\nthis be cited by Socialists to-day as a valid argument in favor of\npublic ownership of all land?  If not, why not?\n\nThree principles, illustrated by Joseph's life, are true to all\ntime: (1) The only successful way to forget one's own burdens is to\nhelp bear another's; (2) God makes all things work together for\ngood to those that love him; (3) he alone who improves the small\nopportunities will not miss the great chances of life.\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE TEMPTATIONS OF SUCCESS.\n\nModern life, and especially that in America to-day, is full of\nillustrations of the overwhelming temptations which come to the man\nwho has had great success.  Many a man has enjoyed the confidence\nand respect of his associates until his abilities have won for him\nlarge wealth with which apparently comes at times a misleading\nsense of immunity from the ordinary moral obligations.  The result\nhas been that the sterling virtues which have enabled him to win\nsuccess have been quickly undermined and his public and private\nacts have become the theme of the public press.  Instead of being\nan honor he has become a disgrace to his nation.\n\nJoseph's sudden rise to power surpassed anything told in the\nArabian Nights' Tales, and yet he remained the same simple,\nunaffected man, more thoughtful for another's interests than for\nhis own.  The supreme test came in his contact with his brothers,\nwho had insulted and cruelly wronged him.  They were completely at\nhis mercy and he had abundant reason for ignoring the obligations\nof kinship.  Did Joseph hide his cup in Benjamin's sack and later\nhold him as a hostage in order to punish his brothers or to test\ntheir honor and fidelity?  Was this action wise?  Did the brothers\nstand the test?\n\nNo class was regarded by the Egyptians with greater scorn and\ncontempt than the shepherds to whom they entrusted their flocks,\nbecause the task of herding sheep was regarded as too menial for an\nEgyptian.  The public recognition of his shepherd kinsmen,\ntherefore, revealed in Joseph the noblest and most courageous\nqualities.\n\nWhy is such loyalty a primary obligation?  Is it to-day regarded by\nall thoughtful men as one of the clearest evidences of a strong\ncharacter?  Can you give any modern illustrations, perhaps among\nyour acquaintances?  What is a snob?  Did Joseph leave undone any\nact which loyalty to his kinsmen could prompt?  Is Joseph's\ncharacter as portrayed by the prophetic account practically\nperfect?  Of the three characters, Abraham, Jacob and Joseph, which\noffers more practical suggestions to the man of to-day?  Which has\nexerted the most powerful influence upon the ideals and conduct of\nthe human race?\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE STANDARDS OF REAL SUCCESS.\n\nIt is natural and inevitable that the various social classes of\neach succeeding generation should define their standards of success\nconcretely, that is, by the lives and achievements of those who\nhave done great things.  In certain social groups the world's\nchampion prize fighter is the beau ideal of success.  Among the\nCamorrists of Italy that ideal is the successful blackmailer.  In\nmany sections of our great cities the powerful ward boss, whatever\nbe his methods, is regarded as the embodiment of success.  Too\noften in America to-day, both in the public press and in the public\nmind, the multi-millionaire is regarded as the pre-eminently\nsuccessful man.  Although the power to amass wealth is evidence of\nmarked ability, the homage paid to it is one of the most sinister\ntendencies in American life.  Ordinarily it means that the\nambitions and achievements of a Jacob, rather than those of a\nJoseph, are set before the youth as the supreme goal for which to\nstrive.  A most hopeful element in the present situation is that\nmany of the world's wealthiest men are proclaiming their sense of\nresponsibility to society in ways both practical and impressive.\nFar more significant than their actual gifts is this public\ndeclaration that each man is indeed his brother's keeper, and that\nno man has a right to use his wealth simply for his own pleasure.\n\nLeonidas and his fearless patriotic followers at Thermopylae left\nan impress upon Greek life and character that did not fade for\ncenturies.  The spirit of Robert Bruce still lingers among the\ncrags and heather-clad hills of Scotland.  The patriotic devotion\nof Garibaldi has imparted a new character to the Italian race.  Two\nhundred million of the world's inhabitants still bear the imprint\nof the fiery faith and fanaticism of Mahomet.\n\nAmerica is rich in its memories of the achievements of such as\nWashington, Lincoln, Morse, Beecher and Emerson.  What characters\nin all history seem to you the best examples of real success?  What\nmen and women in the present generation?  How can the great\nmajority of the boys and girls and the men and women of to-day be\nled to accept those higher ideals of success which are the\nlodestones drawing on the race to higher achievement?\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE METHODS OF SUCCESS.\n\nThe story is told of the late President Garfield that in the heat\nof a political campaign one of his lieutenants suggested that he\nadopt an exceedingly questionable policy.  When Mr. Garfield\nobjected, his lieutenant replied, \"No one will know it.\"  \"But I\nshall know,\" was the quick reply.\n\n  --\"To thine own self be true,\n  And it must follow, as the night the day,\n  Thou canst not then be false to any man.\"\n    --_Hamlet, Act I, Sc. 3_.\n\nWealth and power are worthy goals for which to strive.  One of the\nfirst duties of a political party is to capture the offices, for\nwithout them in its power it cannot carry out the principles for\nwhich it stands.  The possession of wealth represents vast\npossibilities for service.  Thousands of tragic experiments have\ndemonstrated, however, the fallacy of the seductive doctrine that\nthe end justifies the means.  The tragedy that overshadows many of\nthe seemingly most successful men of to-day is the memory of the\niniquitous methods whereby they have acquired wealth or mounted to\npower.  Lavish philanthropy and the beneficent use of power can\nnever wholly blot out from the public mind or from the mind of the\nsuccessful man the memory of certain questionable acts that at the\ntime seemed essential to the realization of a great policy.\n\nA keen, well-informed student of modern economic conditions has\nasserted that no man can succeed in business life today and remain\ntrue to the teachings of Jesus.  Is this true?  Is it true in\nprofessional life?  Is it true in politics?  One of our most\nprominent statesmen has said that he would have found it impossible\nto succeed and maintain his independence if he had been compelled\nto earn his living.  He would have been compelled either to yield\nto the boss or quit politics.  Who are some of the men in public\nlife who are gaining success and yet maintaining Christian\nprinciples?  If the ultimate ideal of real success is service, is\nthere any other way in which men may obtain success?  Is this true\nof every department of human effort?  Does this principle make it\npossible for every man, however limited his ability and\nopportunities, to attain real success?\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nHow would you define genius?  Edison called it 2% of inspiration\nand 98% of perspiration.  (But see James, _Talks to Teachers_.)\n\nIs the chief difference between the successful and the unsuccessful\nman the ability to recognize and seize opportunities?\n\nWould Joseph's policy in dealing with Pharaoh's subjects meet with\npublic approval to-day?\n\nCould Joseph have succeeded as well in a republic?\n\nDoes Joseph's land policy justify the single tax?  Or serfdom such\nas Joseph countenanced?\n\nWhat place does loyalty to humble friends and kinsmen take in the\nmaking of great and noble characters?\n\nWould you say that the ultimate standard of all real success is\nservice?\n\nWould it be wise for the state to enforce service for the public\ngood by a heavy, progressive inheritance tax?\n\nWhat justification is there for such a modification of Joseph's\nland policy, as the single tax? (See George, _Progress and\nPoverty_; Seligman, _Essays on Taxation_, 64-94.)\n\nDo you think that a man earning his own living can expect to-day to\nsucceed in politics and maintain his self-respect as an independent\nthinker?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Origin and Literary Form of the Joseph Narratives.  Kent,\n_Student's O. T_. I, 126-127; Hastings, _Dict. Bible_ II, 767-769;\nSmith, _O. T. History_, 54-55.\n\n(2) Contemporary Parallels to the Joseph of the Biblical\nNarratives.  Hastings' _Dict. Bible_ II, 772-775.\n\n(3) Compare and Contrast the Achievements of Joseph, Bismarck and\nCecil Rhodes.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY VIII\n\nTHE TRAINING OF A STATESMAN.\n\nMOSES IN EGYPT AND THE WILDERNESS.--EX. 1:1; 7:5.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  Goodnow, F. J., _Comparative Administrative Law_.\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 151-69.\n\nAnd he went out on the following day and saw two men of the Hebrews\nstriving together; and he said to the one who was doing the wrong,\nWhy do you smite your fellow-workman?  But he replied, Who made you\na prince and a judge over us?  Do you intend to kill me as you\nkilled the Egyptian?  Then Moses was afraid and said, Surely the\nthing is known.  When, therefore, Pharaoh heard this thing, he\nsought to him Moses.  But Moses fled from the presence of Pharaoh\nand took up his abode in the land of Midian.\n\nAnd Jehovah said, I have surely seen the affliction of my people\nthat are in Egypt, and have heard their cry of anguish, because of\ntheir taskmasters, for I know their sorrows; and I am come down to\ndeliver them out of the power of the Egyptians, and to bring them\nup out of that land to a land, beautiful and broad, to a land\nflowing with milk and honey; Go and gather the elders of Israel\ntogether and say to them, Jehovah, the God of your fathers, the God\nof Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, hath appeared to me, saying, I have\nsurely visited you, and seen that which is done to you in Egypt,\nand I have said I will bring you up out of the affliction of Egypt\nto a land flowing with milk and honey.  And they shall hearken to\nthy voice; and thou shalt come, together with the elders of Israel,\nto the king of Egypt, and ye shall say to him, \"Jehovah, the God of\nthe Hebrews, hath appeared to us; and now let us go, we pray thee,\nthree days' journey into the wilderness, that we may sacrifice to\nJehovah our God.\"--_Hist. Bible_.\n\nHold on; hold fast: hold out--patience is genius.\n\nLet us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith let us\ndare to do our duty as we understand it.--_Lincoln_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE EGYPTIAN BACKGROUND OF THE BONDAGE.\n\nThe one contemporary reference to Israel thus far found in the\nEgyptian inscriptions comes from the reign of Merneptah the son of\nRamses II.  It implies that at the time at least part of the\nHebrews were in the land of Palestine:\n\n  Plundered is Canaan with every evil;\n  Askalon is carried into captivity,\n  Gezer is taken;\n  Yenoam is annihilated,\n  Israel is desolated, her seed is not,\n  Palestine has become a widow for Egypt.\n  All lands are united, they are pacified.\n  Every one who is turbulent has been found by King Merneptah.\n\nThe testimony of the oldest Biblical narratives regarding the\nsojourn of the Hebrews in Egypt is, also, in perfect accord with\nthe picture which the contemporary Egyptian inscriptions give of\nthe period.  Furthermore, the Egyptian historians never\ndistinguished the different races in their midst, but rather\ndesignated the foreign serf class by a common name.  The absence of\ndetailed reference to the Hebrews is therefore perfectly natural.\nIt seems probable that not all but only part of the tribes which\nultimately coalesced into the Hebrew nation found their way to\nEgypt.  The stories regarding Joseph, the traditional father of\nEphraim and Manasseh, imply that these strong central tribes,\npossibly together with the southern tribes of Benjamin and Judah,\nwere the chief actors in this opening scene in Israel's history.\n\nThe Biblical narratives apparently disagree regarding the duration\nof the sojourn in Egypt.  The reference in Gen. 15:16, which, some\nwriters think, comes from the northern Israelite group of stories,\nimplies that it was a period of between one hundred and one hundred\nand fifty years.  The same duration is suggested by the priestly\nwriter in Numbers 26:57-59.  The later traditions tend to extend\nthe period.  If, as seems probable, the Hebrews first found their\nway to Egypt during the reign of Amenhotep IV, who reigned between\n1375 and 1358 B.C., the older Hebrew chronology would make Ramses\nII, who reigned between 1292 and 1225, the Pharaoh of the\noppression.  Of all the Pharaohs of this period in Egypt's history\nthe great builder and organizer Ramses II corresponds most closely\nto the Biblical description.  He it was who filled Egypt from one\nend to the other with vast temples and other buildings which could\nhave been reared only through the services of a huge army of serfs.\nThe excavations of the Egypt Exploration fund have identified the\nBiblical Pithom with certain ruins in the Wady Tumilat near the\neastern terminus of the modern railroad from Cairo to the Suez\nCanal.  This probably lay in the eastern boundary of the Biblical\nland of Goshen, which seems to have included the Wady Tumilat and\nto have extended westward to the Nile delta.  Here were found\nseveral inscriptions bearing the Egyptian name of the city P-Atum,\nhouse of the god Atum.  The excavations also laid bare a great\nsquare brick wall with the ruins of store chambers inside.  These\nrectangular chambers were of various sizes and were surrounded by\nwalls two or three yards in thickness.  Contemporary inscriptions\nindicate that they were filled with grain from the top and were\nprobably used for the storing of supplies to be used by the armies\nof Ramses II in their Asiatic campaigns.  This city was founded by\nRamses II, who during the first twenty years of his reign,\ndeveloped and colonized the territory east of the Nile delta\nincluding the Biblical land of Goshen.  A contemporary inscription\nalso states that he founded near Pithum the house of Ramses, a city\nwith a royal residence and temples.  Thus the inferences in the\nfirst chapter of Exodus regarding the historical background are in\nperfect accord with the facts now known from other sources\nregarding the reign of Ramses II.  In transforming the land of\nGoshen into a cultivated, agricultural region the nomadic Hebrews\nwere naturally put to task work by the strong-handed ruler of\nEgypt.  That the Hebrews were restive under this tyranny was\nnatural, inevitable.  Apparently their rebellious attitude also\nincreased the burden which was placed upon them.  The memory of the\ncrushing Hyksos invasion, which meant the rule of Egypt by nomadic\ninvaders from Asia, was still fresh in the minds of the Egyptians.\nThey both looked down upon and feared the nomad immigrants on their\neastern border.  In the light of these facts it is possible to\nunderstand the motives which influenced Ramses II cruelly to\noppress the Hebrews.  He endeavored, by forced labor and rigorous\npeonage, not only to avail himself of their needed services, but\nalso to crush their spirit and by force to hold in subjection the\nalarmingly large serf class which was found at this time in the\nland of Egypt.  Was any other procedure to be expected from a\ndespotic ruler of that land and day?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE MAKING OF A LOYAL PATRIOT.\n\nThe story of Moses' birth and early childhood is one of the most\ninteresting chapters in Biblical history.  It is full of human and\ndramatic interest.  The great crisis in Moses' early manhood came\nwhen he woke to a realization of his kinship with the despised and\noppressed serfs and an appreciation of the cruel injustice of which\nthey were the helpless victims.  Was Moses justified in resisting\nthe Egyptian taskmaster?  Are numbers essential to the rightness of\na cause?  What right had Ramses II to demand forced labor from the\nimmigrants within his border?  Was he justified in his method of\nexacting tribute?  Is peonage always disastrous not only to its\nvictims but also to the government imposing it?\n\nDid Moses show himself a coward in fleeing from the land of Egypt?\nNaturally he went to the land of Midian.  The wilderness to the\neast of Egypt had for centuries been the place of refuge for\nEgyptian fugitives.  From about 2000 B.C. there comes the Egyptian\nstory of Sinuhit, an Egyptian prince, who, to save his life, fled\neastward past the \"Wall of the Princes\" which guarded the\nnortheastern frontier of Egypt.  On the borders of the wilderness\nhe found certain Bedouin herdsmen who received him hospitably.\nThese \"sand wanderers\" sent him on from tribe to tribe until he\nreached the land of Kedem, east of the Dead Sea, where he remained\nfor a year and a half.  Later he found his way to the court of one\nof the local kings in central Palestine where he married and became\nin time a prosperous local prince.\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE SCHOOL OF THE WILDERNESS.\n\nThe story of Moses is in many ways closely parallel to that of\nSinuhit.  Among the Midianite tribes living to the south and\nsoutheast of Palestine he found refuge and generous hospitality.\nThe priest of the sub-tribe of the Kenites received him into his\nhome and gave him his daughter in marriage.  Note the\ncharacteristic Oriental idea of marriage.  Here Moses learned the\nlessons that were essential for his training as the leader and\ndeliverer of his people.\n\nThe Kenites figure in later Hebrew history as worshippers of\nJehovah and are frequently associated with the Israelites.  After\nthe capture of Jericho certain of them went up with the southern\ntribes to conquer southern Palestine.  (Judg. 1:16.) It was Jael,\nthe wife of Heber the Kenite (Judg. 5:24), who rendered the Hebrews\na signal service by slaying Sisera, the fleeing king of the\nCanaanites, after the memorable battle beside the River Kishon.\nMany modern scholars draw the conclusion from the Biblical\nnarrative that it was from the Kenites that Moses first learned of\nYahweh (or, as the distinctive name of Israel's God was translated\nby later Jewish scribes, Jehovah).  Furthermore it is suggested\nthat gratitude to the new God, who delivered the Israelites from\ntheir bondage, was the reason why they proved on the whole so loyal\nto Jehovah.  This conclusion is possible and in many ways\nattractive, but it is beset with serious difficulties.  We know, in\nancient history, of no other example of a people suddenly changing\ntheir religion.  When there have been such sudden and wholesale\nconversions in later times they have been either under the\ncompulsion of the sword, as in the history of Islam, or under the\ninfluence of a far higher religion, as when Christianity has been\ncarried to heathen peoples on a low stage of civilization.  Do the\nearliest Hebrew traditions imply that the ancestors of the\nIsraelites were worshippers of Jehovah?  Is it not probable that\nMoses fled to the nomadic Midianites not only because they were\nkinsmen but because they were also worshippers of Jehovah?\n\nIn any case Moses' life in Midian tended to intensify his faith in\nJehovah.  The title of his father-in-law implies that this priest\nministered at some wilderness sanctuary.  In the light of the\nsubsequent Biblical narrative was this possibly at the sacred\nspring of Kadesh or on the top of the holy mountain Horeb\n(elsewhere called Sinai) where Kenites and Hebrews believed that\nJehovah dwelt, or at least manifested himself?  Moses, in the home\nof the Midian priest, was brought into direct and constant contact\nwith the Jehovah worship.  The cruel fate of his people and the\npainful experience in Egypt that had driven him into the wilderness\nprepared his mind to receive this training.  His quest was for a\njust and strong God, able to deliver the oppressed.  The wilderness\nwith its lurking foes and the ever-present dread of hunger and\nthirst, deepened his sense of need and of dependence upon a power\nable to guide the destinies of men.  The peasants of the vast\nAntolian plain in central Asia Minor still call every life-giving\nspring, \"God hath given.\"  The constant necessity of meeting the\ndangers of the wilderness and of defending the flocks entrusted to\nMoses' care developed his courage and power of leadership and\naction.  What other great leaders of Israel were trained in this\nsame school?  What was the effect of their wilderness life upon the\nearly New England pioneers?\n\n\nIV.\n\nMOSES' CALL TO PUBLIC SERVICE.\n\nThe solitude of the wilderness gave Moses ample opportunity for\nprofound reflection.  His previous experiences made such reflection\nnatural, indeed inevitable.  Borne by the caravans over the great\nhighway from the land of the Nile or from desert tribe to tribe\ncame occasional reports of the cruel injustice to which his kinsmen\nin Egypt were subjected.  In these reports he recognized the divine\ncall to duty.  When perhaps at last the report came that the mighty\ndespot Ramses II was dead, Moses like his later successor Isaiah\n(Is. 6) saw that the moment had come for decision and action.\n\nIt looks to many scholars as if three originally distinct versions\nof Moses' call have been welded together in the narrative of Exodus\n3, 4 and 6.  Each differs in regard to detail (Hist. Bible I,\n161-5).  According to the early Judean prophetic account Jehovah\nspoke audibly to Moses from the flaming thorn bush.  In the\nNorthern Israelite version the moment of decision came to him as he\nstood with his flock on the sacred mountain Horeb.  Like Isaiah in\nhis memorable vision of Jehovah's presence, the inner consciousness\nof God and the compelling sense of duty led him to cry out: \"Here\nam I.\"  Likewise in the late priestly story God's presence and\ncharacter were so deeply impressed upon him that he seemed to bear\nan audible voice, according to the view of those who accept this\ninterpretation, even though the later priests believed and taught\nthat God was a spirit, not like man clothed in flesh and blood.\nThus the different groups of Hebrew narratives in their\ncharacteristic way record the essential facts in Moses' call to\npublic service.  Each has preserved certain important elements in\nthat call, and the late editor has done well to combine them.  Even\nas Isaiah caught his supreme vision of Jehovah and of duty in the\ntemple, so to Moses the prophetic call probably came on the lofty\nheights of the mountain in which he, in common with the Kenites,\nbelieved God dwelt.  The wilderness with its flaming bush spoke to\nhim God's message.  Recent writers have felt and forcibly\ninterpreted the fascination and the message of the desert and\nplain, none more vividly than the Welsh writer Rhoscomyl in\ndescribing the experience of one of his rough, self-reliant cowboy\nheroes:\n\n\"Two days ago he was riding back, alone, in the afternoon, from an\nunsuccessful search after strayed horses, and suddenly, all in the\nlifting of a hoof, the weird prairie had gleamed into eerie life,\nhad dropped the veil and spoken to him; while the breeze stopped,\nand the sun stood still for a flash in waiting for his answer.  And\nhe, his heart in a grip of ice, the frozen flesh a-crawl with\nterror upon his loosened bones, white-lipped and wide-eyed with\nfrantic fear, uttered a yell of horror as he dashed the spurs into\nhis panic-stricken horse, in a mad endeavor to escape from the\nAwful Presence that filled all earth and sky from edge to edge of\nvision.\n\n\"Then almost in the same flash, the unearthly light died out of the\ndim prairie, the veil swept across into place again; and he managed\nto check his wild flight, and look about him.  His empty lips were\ngibbering without a sound escaping them, and his very heart\nshivered with cold, for all the brassy heat of the day.  But the\nbreeze was wandering on again; under the great sun the prairie\nspread dim to the southwest, and tawny to the northeast; only\nbetween his own loose knees the horse trembled in every limb, and\nmumbled the bit with dry mouth.  All was as before in earth and\nsky, apparently, but not in his own self.  It was as if his spirit\nstood apart from him, putting questions which he could not answer,\nand demanding judgment upon problems which he dare not reason out.\n\n\"Then he remembered what this thing was which had happened.  The\nprairie had spoken to him, as sooner or later it spoke to most men\nthat rode it.  It was a something well known amongst them, but\nknown without words, and as by a subtle instinct, for no man who\nhad experienced it ever spoke willingly about it afterwards.  Only\nthe man would be changed; some began to be more reckless, as if a\ndumb blasphemy rankled hidden in their breasts.  Others, coming\nwith greater strength perhaps to the ordeal, became quieter,\nlooking squarely at any danger as they face it, but continuing\nahead as though quietly confident that nothing happened save as the\ngods ordained.\"\n\nThe motive power in all of Moses' later work was that transforming,\nvivid sense of Jehovah's presence that came to him on the barren\nmountain peak.\n\nAlso fundamental to his call was the recognition of the crying need\nof his disorganized, oppressed kinsmen in Egypt.  This appealed to\nall the instincts begotten by his shepherd training; for they were\na shepherdless flock in the midst of wolves.  Through the ages the\ninhabitants of the parched, stony wilderness had looked with hungry\neyes upon the tree-clad hills and green fields of Palestine.  The\nearly traditions of his ancestors also glorified this paradise of\nthe wilderness wanderer and led Moses to look to it as the haven of\nrefuge to which he might lead his helpless kinsmen.  Vividly and\nconcretely the ancient narrative tells of the struggle in the mind\nof Moses between his own diffidence and consciousness of his\nlimitations on the one side and on the other his sense of duty and\nthe realization of Jehovah's power to accomplish what seemed to man\nmiraculous.  Was Moses' inner experience like that of the other\ngreat Hebrew prophets?  Who?  Like that of Jesus?  Does every man\nwho undertakes a great service for humanity to-day pass through a\nsomewhat similar struggle?  How about Grant on leaving his home at\nGalena, Illinois?  Lincoln at the great crisis of his life?\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE EDUCATION OF PUBLIC OPINION.\n\nLike every man who catches a vision of a great need and undertakes\nto meet it, Moses had to educate public opinion.  Whatever the form\nof government may be, whether monarchy or democracy, it must\nultimately rest upon the will of the people, and the shaping of\nthat will is often a statesman's task.  In a democracy the\nexpression of the people's will is readily determined at every\nelection, although in many cases, owing to the number of issues,\nthis result is not clearly seen.\n\nIn a despotism like Egypt there is no ready expression of a\npeople's will.  However great their sufferings, they must endure\nuntil they feel that the evils of revolt are less than the evils of\noppression.  Then, by means of a revolution, they carry out their\nwill.  In what ways did the Exodus resemble, in what ways differ\nfrom a revolution?  Compare Moses with Washington or Samuel Adams\nas leader of a revolution.  During the last few years in China\nthere has been great dissatisfaction on the part of many millions\nof the people with the rule of the Manchu dynasty.  It was,\nnevertheless, for many years the people's will rather to endure the\nevils of a corrupt government than to take the risk of war.  At\nlength, however, after years of propaganda by skilful leaders war\nappeared to them the lesser evil and their will was carried out by\nforce of arms.  The government, in this direct way, was forced to\nrecognize the will of the people and to grant their requests.\n\nA statesman considers not merely his own views regarding the best\nmethods of governing his country or of gaining special ends, but he\nmust carefully consider also what plans can in practice be carried\nout.  In all free governments only those policies can be put into\neffect that meet the approval of the people; and one of the\ngreatest gifts of a statesman is the ability to ascertain, with few\nmistakes, how far his proposed policies meet the public will and\nhow he can so put his plans before the people as to convince them\nof their benefits.\n\nIn the later days of the Egyptian bondage the Israelites made\nfrequent complaint of the oppression of the Pharaohs, bemoaning\ntheir fate as serfs, but for many years after their sufferings had\nbecome severe they had not yet been roused to a determination to\nthrow off the yoke of the oppressor.  Even when Moses first\nattempted to rouse them to make a struggle for freedom, he could\nnot breathe into them his own bold spirit.  What measures did Moses\ntake to incite the Israelites to action?  What measures did he take\nto convince Pharaoh of his duty toward the Israelites?  Did he\npresent his case truthfully?  Was he justified in the measures\ntaken?\n\nAt length, not from the acts of the Israelites, but from the\nplagues that afflicted the Egyptians and the insistent demand of\nMoses, coupled with the belief that the plagues were sent on\naccount of divine displeasure, as a punishment for unjust\noppression, the Hebrews were enabled to escape.  What is the\ncontemporary Egyptian testimony regarding the plagues?  (_Hist.\nBible_ I, 176-7.)  Do the earliest Hebrew records imply that these\nwere miracles or natural calamities peculiar to the land of Egypt?\nThe statesmanship of Moses led him to seize the opportune time for\nfreeing his people from bondage.  Only the influence of the\nreligious sentiments among his people and their belief in Jehovah\ntogether with the religious awe felt by the Egyptian rulers,\nenabled him to take advantage of the circumstances so that he could\nrescue his people.  In most countries religion is a powerful\ninfluence often made use of by rulers, sometimes for good,\nsometimes for ill, to direct the action of their subjects.  The\nGreek church in Russia has for many decades been, perhaps, the most\nimportant weapon by which the Russian Czars have kept their people\nin peaceful submission.  If China loses her Mongolian provinces, it\nwill be because the religious leaders of Mongolia are controlling\ntheir people.  Can you give in the United States an example of a\npeople largely dominated by the religious motive which controls\nmost of the affairs of their every-day life?  How far was the\nreligious motive responsible for the settlement and upbuilding of\nthe New England Colonies?  How far and in what ways may a statesman\nto-day appeal to the moral and religious feelings of the people in\norder to promote national and international welfare?\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE TRAINING OF MODERN STATESMEN.\n\nIn training administrative officers in the leading countries of\nEurope and in the United States, emphasis is laid upon a knowledge\nof history, of constitutional, administrative and international\nlaw, politics, economics, diplomacy and any other subjects that may\nfall within the scope of action of the special official.  When,\nhowever, a law-maker or a high administrative official deals at\nfirst hand with a great population, it is extremely important that\nhe be so experienced and so fitted by temperament that he may know\nhis people.  He must see how far he can go without arousing too\nmuch opposition.  Even in promoting good measures, it is often\nessential not to go too fast, if he is to succeed.\n\nEvery statesman of modern times, as well as those of bygone days,\nmust have the interests of the people genuinely at heart if he is\nto be, in the best sense of the word, successful.  What did Moses\nseek for his people?  Liberty?  Prosperity?  Religious freedom?\n\nConfucius, the great Chinese sage, from his study of human nature\nand of government five centuries before Christ, had learned that\nthe rule of justice in the state promoted prosperity.  At length a\nyoung ruler made him his prime minister.  The result of his wise\nand just measures was to bring into his country so large a number\nof immigrants who preferred to live in a country where justice\nreigned, that the prosperity aroused the envy and hostility of the\nneighboring states.  In consequence measures were taken to put an\nend to this just rule, which was felt to be so detrimental to other\nkings, unwilling to adopt the same just means.   Finally the wise\nConfucius was treacherously driven from his post, not, however,\nuntil he had proved that the counsels of justice and religion were\nthose best suited to the welfare of the state.  This is a common\nexperience in all lands and ages; but perhaps nowhere else has the\nlesson been so frequently and so thoroughly taught as in the\nhistory of the Hebrews, that the most essential factor in a\nstatesman's training is the acceptance of the principles of justice\nand righteousness.  In other words--\"God is the most important\nfactor in human progress.\"\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nIs it the duty of a government, in order to promote the welfare of\nits people, to set aside at times the personal convenience, even\nthe personal welfare of individuals or of certain classes?  If an\ninheritance tax falls heavily upon the heirs of a rich man, ought\nthe state to collect it?  On what grounds is a state justified in\nwithholding liberty from criminals?  From children?\n\nMany of our states compel citizens to work in repairing country\nroads.  Is this temporary peonage?  How do you justify a state in\ncompelling citizens to risk their lives in war?  In what\ncircumstances would a state be justified in compelling its citizens\nto labor?  Did circumstances justify Pharaoh?  Why were he and his\nkingdom punished?\n\nIs it ever right, for an individual to raise his hand against a\nrecognized and established authority?  Or, when there is an\nestablished government, should an individual ever attempt to punish\ncrime or avenge personal wrong?  Were our revolutionary forefathers\nright in resisting the demands of King George?  Are numbers\nessential to the rightness of a cause?\n\nIn what ways does God to-day call men to do an important task? Do\nyou consider Lincoln a man raised up by God for a purpose and\ncalled by him to service?  If so, how did the call come?  Was\nMoses' call similar?  Should a clergyman have a definite call to\nhis life-work?  Should every man?  Does every man have such a call,\nif he but interprets rightly his experiences?\n\nA working girl had seen the story of Moses at a moving picture\nshow.  Afterwards she commented as follows: \"Our walking delegate\nis a  regular Moses.  He said to the factory boss, 'You let my\npeople go.'\"  In what respect is the labor struggle to-day similar\nto that in Egypt under Moses?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Egyptian System of Education.  Breasted, _Hist. of the\nAncient Egyptians_, 92-94, 395; _Hist. of Egypt_, 98-100; Maspero,\n_Dawn of Civilization_, 288; Erman, _Life of the Ancient\nEgyptians_, 328-368.\n\n(2) Origin of the Jehovah Religion.  Budde, _Religion of Israel_,\n1-38; Gordon, _Early Traditions of Gen_., 106-110; Hastings, _Dict.\nof the Bible_, Extra Vol. 626-627.\n\n(3) The Practical Training for Statesmanship of Augustus, Gladstone\nand Lincoln.  Plutarch, _Lives of the Emperors_; Morley, _Life of\nGladstone_; A.  good Biographical Dictionary; Brown, _The Message\nof the Modern Pulpit_.\n\n(4) Compare the government of Egypt under Pharaoh with that in\nChina in the days of Confucius and with that of Greece in the days\nof the siege of Troy.  Homer, _Iliad and Odyssey; Life of\nConfucius_.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY IX\n\nTHE ORIGIN AND GROWTH OF LAW.\n\nMOSES' WORK AS JUDGE AND PROPHET.--Ex. 18; 1-27; 33:5-11.\n\n_Parallel References_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 198-203.\n  _Prin. of Politics_, Ch. VI.\n  Maine, _Ancient Law_.\n\nJehovah spake to Moses face to face, as a man speaketh unto his\nfriend--Ex. 33: 11.\n\nAnd Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads\nover the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of\nfifties, and rulers of tens.  And they judged the people at all\nseasons: the hard cases they brought unto Moses, but every small\nmatter they judged themselves--Ex. 18:25, 26.\n\nLove is the fulfilling of the law.--St. Paul.\n\n  Now this is the Law of the Jungle--as old and as true\n    as the sky;\n  And the Wolf that shall keep it may prosper, but the Wolf\n    that shall break it must die.\n  As the creeper that girdles the tree-trunk the Law runneth\n    forward and back--\n  For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength\n    of the Wolf is the Pack.\n  Now these are the Laws of the Jungle, and many and mighty\n    are they;\n  But the head and the hoof of the Law and the haunch and\n    the bump is \"_Obey_!\"\n    --_Kipling_.\n\nNothing is that errs from law.--_Tennyson_.\n\n  In vain we call old notions fudge,\n    And bend conventions to our dealing,\n  The Ten Commandments will not budge,\n    And stealing still continues stealing.\n      --_Lowell_.\n\n  If chosen men could never be alone,\n  In deep mid-silence, open-doored with God\n  No greatness ever had been dreamed or done.\n\n  These roots bear up Dominion: Knowledge, Will,--\n    These twain are strong, but stronger yet the third,--\n  Obedience,--'tis the great tap-root that still,\n    Knit round the rock of Duty, is not stirred,\n  Though Heaven-loosed tempests spend their utmost skill.\n    --_Lowell_ (_The Washers of the Shroud_).\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE NEEDS THAT GIVE RISE TO LAW.\n\nKipling's _Law of the Jungle_, in which he lays down the principles\nby which the wolf pack secured united action in its hunting, names\nthe rules that apply almost universally to peoples in the savage\nstage of society.  According to the researches of the best\nanthropologists, savages live in very loosely organized groups,\nwith no permanent ruler, no regular family law.  Each separate\ngroup has its totem, its general rules with reference to the\nmarriage relation, to hunting and fishing, to shelter and\nprotection.  Practically there are no regular laws.  The rules\nfixed by custom deal primarily with the marriage relation and with\nthe securing of food and shelter.  They are largely negative.  If a\nmember of the group has met with a misfortune in a certain by-path\nor from eating certain food or in other ways, by the action of the\nleader of his group that path or that food becomes taboo, and from\nthat time on it is forbidden.  The rules seem generally to be\nlargely the product of instinct or of experience, without any law\nmaking, and they are enforced almost as instinctively by the common\nconsent of the people.\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE GROWTH OF CUSTOMARY LAW.\n\nAs this loosely associated group condenses into the tribe, all the\nmembers of which regard themselves as descended from a common\nancestor, the organization becomes much more definite under a\npatriarchal ruler.  Soon through his activities these almost\ninstinctive habits, guided by rules, assume the nature of customs\nthat have a sanction, often of religion, practically always of\nenforcement through the patriarch.  No better illustration of the\ncrystallization of customs into laws can be found than that given\nin Exodus 18:1-27 (_Hist. Bible_, I, 198-202).  Moses sat all day\nlong as judge to decide cases for the people until his\npractical-minded father-in-law, Jethro, seeing the waste of time\nand energy of the ruler upon whom the welfare of the tribe\ndepended, proposed a wise plan.  He advised that, instead of\nrendering decisions regarding each individual case, Moses should\nformulate the principles and leave their application to minor\njudges appointed by himself as rulers over thousands and over\nhundreds and fifties and tens.  In modern days the law-making body\nis distinct from the judicial.  Is there any reason why the judge\nshould not be the maker of the law he interprets?\n\nDoubtless many of the customs thus formulated by Moses had come\ndown through the preceding ages from the Babylonian and common\nSemitic ancestors of the Hebrews.  The most striking example of the\npre-Mosaic formulation of custom into law under the sanction of the\ndeity is found in the so-called code of Hammurabi, which comes from\nabout 1900 B.C.  At the top of the stele which records these laws\nthis enlightened king depicted himself in a bas-relief as receiving\nthem from the sun god, Shamash.  Hammurabi looked upon himself as a\nshepherd chosen by the gods to care for his people.  It was his\nduty to see \"that the great should not oppress the weak, to counsel\nthe widow and orphan, to render judgment and decide the decisions\nof the land, and to succor the injured,\" in order that \"by the\ncommand of Shamash, the judge supreme of heaven and earth, justice\nmight shine in the land.\"  Many of the principles laid down by him\nare also found among the laws attributed to Moses which were\nafterward codified in the early decalogues.\n\nAt times, though rarely among the Hebrews, we may study custom in\nthe making, as when in a new situation a ruler renders a decision\nwhich henceforth becomes a law.  Thus David, dividing the spoil\nafter his victory over the Amalekites, established a precedent that\nhenceforth had binding force upon his followers (I Sam. 30); but in\nthe majority of such cases the ruler, even when be establishes new\nprecedents, represents himself as simply interpreting ancient\ncustom.\n\nAs society becomes more and more complex and the interests of\nindividuals and classes in society clash, besides the judges we\nfind legislatures making new rules in the form of law.  In the\nearlier communities practically all law relates to the preservation\nof life and of the tribe.  Later, as the tribe enters the pastoral\nstate, private property is established and laws for its care are\nmade.  Still later, with the development of a higher civilization\nand with the individual conscience stimulating men to care for the\nwelfare not merely of their family, but of their nation,\nlegislation considers primarily the welfare of society.  Yet, as\none of our great judges has lately explained, in practically all\nstages of society, whenever the population becomes numerous and\nbusiness is so developed that we may recognize different classes in\na community, legislation has been primarily in the interests of a\nruling class, often at the expense of the other classes.  This\nprinciple is illustrated by certain of the later Jewish ceremonial\nlaws that brought to the priests a large income at the expense of\nthe people.  Many laws in Europe and in the United States to-day\nhave been made clearly in the interests of certain classes in\nsociety.  Can you think of some?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE AUTHORITY UNDERLYING ALL LAW.\n\nBack of all laws and rules, as the fundamental consideration,\nwhether consciously expressed in laws or carried out instinctively,\nlies the welfare of society.  Among the wolves the pack that is\nbest disciplined by the strongest and most successful leader is the\none that survives.  In the earlier savage groups the rules which\nguided united action grew up as a result of successful experience\nin securing food and warding off enemies.  Among them the less\ndisciplined, the less intelligently directed groups perish.\n\nThrough his fear of the unknown, stimulated by the terrible\nvindications of nature's laws, when poison and pestilence and\nstorms and floods do their deadly work, the savage feels the\npresence of unknown forces that he calls gods, and he thus gives to\nhis rules of action the sanction of divinity.  And as society\ndevelops through the pastoral, agricultural and industrial stages\ninto the tribe and state, with the development of religion and the\ngrowing sense of right and of responsibility to one's fellow men,\nthis religious sanction of the law still abides.  In the earlier\ndays the sanction was due to fear of the vengeance of the gods.  In\nlater society it is the sense of right and justice and love for\none's fellow men, springing from the firm belief in the divine\ncreation and direction of the universe and in God's care for men.\n\nBut as this sense of fear or right or justice or love, associated\nwith a Being felt to be divine, is not universal, inasmuch as many\nmembers of society are found ready to act selfishly, taking the law\ninto their own hands, force is needed in all stages of society to\nput the rules and laws into effect.  With every law, as Austin\nsays, must go a penalty.  But as society grows more and more humane\nthe sense of obligation of each individual for the welfare of his\nfellows grows, until in the best society laws are made and obeyed\nby most citizens, not from a sense of fear of punishment, but\nmainly out of goodwill to others.  A sense of justice prevails and\nthe sanction of law becomes not so much fear of the penalty\nimposed, as the moral and religious sense of the individual and of\nsociety.  Why, for example, do you obey the law against stealing?\n\nIV.\n\nMOSES' RELATION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT LAWS.\n\nThe Hebrew laws given in the Old Testament are generally known as\nthe laws of Moses, and the assumption of many readers in earlier\nyears has been that the different codes were practically formulated\nby Moses himself.  The subsequent study of the Old Testament long\nago suggested to many that this view may be mistaken.  The oldest\nrecords of his work and the fact that, as creator of the Hebrew\nnation after the Exodus and as leader and prophet be rendered\nimportant judicial decisions, have well justified the belief that\nhe was the real founder of what is called the Mosaic Law.  As\nstated in Exodus 18, he did actually formulate the principles by\nwhich decisions were made by the rulers whom he appointed over\nthousands and over hundreds, fifties and tens.  He may have even\nput into form the principles found in the earliest decalogues.\nMoreover, as the Israelites in their later history were led to\nformulate new rules of action, they based these upon the principles\nof justice, religion and civil equality found in the earlier\ndecalogues.  While the specific rules of living must have changed\nmaterially, as the Israelites changed their habits of living from\nthose of wanderers in the wilderness to those adapted to their\nearly settlements in Canaan and afterward to the settled conditions\nunder the monarchy, they would still base their laws upon these\nearlier principles.  Hence it was not unnatural to ascribe the\norigin of these laws to Moses, nor is it to-day inaccurate to speak\nof them as the Mosaic code, even though they may have been put into\ntheir present form at different periods remote from one another,\nand by rulers, prophets and priests whose occupations and attitude\ntoward life were widely different.  Back of practically all these\nlaws are the fundamental beliefs that the Israelites are the people\nchosen of God, that to him they owe allegiance and that from him\nthey derive, in principle at least, the laws under which they live.\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN LAW.\n\nNot merely the Hebrews, but practically all ancient nations ascribe\nthe origin of their laws either to a deity or to some great\nancestral hero.  As already noted, the code of Hammurabi is\nrepresented as having been given to him directly by the god\nShamash.  In the early days of Greek history, the laws of Solon and\nDraco were formulated.  In India we find the laws of Manu, in China\nthe teachings of Confucius, and so on throughout all of the great\nnations.  In some instances, doubtless, many of the laws were\nactually formulated under the direction of the person to whom they\nare ascribed; but in many others, as perhaps in the case of the\nMosaic code, there was some great judge or king under whose\ndirection certain principles were laid down and simple laws or\nprecedents established, and as a result all later developments were\nascribed to him.\n\nIn modern times, when legislative bodies are found in limited\nmonarchies as well as in republics, the methods of legislation are\nnecessarily different.  Although chosen bodies of men come together\nto legislate for the benefit of society, as represented by the\nstate, there is still a normal tendency for the ruling class to\nfeel that it is to a great extent the state, and it does not forget\nits own needs.  This class legislation was doubtless existent to a\ncertain extent even when the laws, supposed to be of divine origin,\nwere formulated by prophets and priests, for the real public\ncharacter of the laws was dependent primarily upon the unselfish\nbeliefs, social and religious, of the writers, whether kings or\npriests.  No one is able to free himself entirely from the\ninfluence of class prejudice.\n\nLike the legislatures the courts even are also the product of their\ntimes, though naturally conservative.  No law can long exactly fit\nchanging conditions.  The judge must adapt a law made by one\ngeneration to the needs of the next.  In so doing he bends it to\nsuit his times, and to further the welfare of his state.\n\nIf aeroplanes carrying goods from Pennsylvania to New York over the\nState of New Jersey let them fall and damage the property of a\nresident of New Jersey, can our courts invoke the Interstate\nCommerce Law made before aeroplanes were invented?\n\nAnd yet there has been throughout the individual history of each\nnation a gradual improvement in the living conditions of the masses\nof people, even in the tribal state.  As it proved more profitable\nto preserve a worker than to kill him, captives in war were not\nslain, but enslaved.  As society became more settled, the custom of\npersonally avenging one's wrong by slaying an enemy was modified.\nCities of refuge were established, where innocent victims might\nescape the avengers.  All down through the ages there has been a\ngrowing tendency to adapt the punishment to the crime, to temper\njustice with mercy, to realize that the aim of all law is not\nvengeance or punishment, but the promotion of the best interests of\nsociety through the wise administration of justice.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE ATTITUDE OP THE CITIZENS TOWARD THE LAW.\n\nAmong savages, as has been said, there is no formulation of law.\nThere is the instinct of the individual to preserve his own life,\nand there are rules that must be followed if the people are to\nsurvive.  As has been truly said: \"The love of justice is simply in\nthe majority of men the fear of suffering injustice.\" The instinct\nof preservation and sheer necessity compel the people almost\nunconsciously to follow the rules of their leader.\n\nIn most patriarchal societies the fear of the god of the tribe, the\noverpowering influence of custom and the unswerving directness of\nthe punishment of the man who violates it tend to prevent the\ndevelopment of individuality and of independent thinking; and the\nnormal attitude of practically every person is to obey the customs\nand the laws, although often those laws leave to the individual a\nrange of action not found in later civilized states.  But as the\nsense of right and justice and the desire to promote the public\nwelfare grow, individualism grows also.  Each individual, thrown\nupon his own resources, learns to think and question and judge.  In\ndemocratic states he learns to take upon himself the responsibility\nfor his acts, and at length the view becomes prevalent that law\nexists for the benefit of society.  The individual, in judging\nhimself and his attitude toward society, feels that the law must be\nobeyed because obedience promotes the public welfare.  Even when he\nbelieves that a law is unwise, or even unjust, he hesitates to\nviolate it, not only because he might be punished therefor, but\nprimarily because it has become wrong, according to his conscience,\nto violate a law that has been adopted by the representatives of\nhis fellow citizens as just and beneficial.  Thus the individual,\nin later even more than in earlier times, obeys the laws not merely\nfrom selfish, but from social and religious motives.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nCan you name any modern laws that you think have been framed in the\ninterests of a special social class?\n\nDo you think that the people of to-day are recreant in their\nrespect for or adherence to law?\n\nWhat do you consider to be the value of such institutions as those\nat West Point and Annapolis in their influence on the enforcement\nof law and discipline?\n\nWhen we speak of \"Government of the people, by the people, and for\nthe people,\" whom exactly do we mean by \"people\"?  Does the word\nhave the same meaning in each of these phrases?\n\nIs it ever right to violate a law of the land?  Some people contend\nthat an individual ought to break a human law, provided that it is\ncontrary to divine law.  What is divine law?  Who decides?  Shall\nthe individual decide, or is that the duty of the community?  Or of\nthe clergy? Was it right for the Abolitionists to violate the\nprovisions of the fugitive slave law?  Were this handful of men,\nable and conscientious as they were, as likely to be right\nregarding the welfare of society as the large majority of citizens\nwhose representatives had enacted the fugitive slave law?  If a\nperson believes our tariff laws to be unjust, is it right for him\nto smuggle goods?\n\nUnder what circumstances, if any, is it one's duty to disobey a law\nof the state?  Would the fact that an individual believed it his\nduty to violate the law justify a judge in declining to punish him?\nThoreau declined to pay a tax that he believed unjust and accepted\nhis punishment, declaring that if he paid the penalty he might thus\narouse public sentiment and secure the repeal of the law.  Was John\nBrown justified in attempting illegally to free slaves by force of\narms?\n\nIn Great Britain the House of Lords--one of the law-making\nbodies--is also the highest court of appeal, although the judicial\nbusiness is mostly done by law lords specially appointed for that\npurpose.  Ought the same men to make and interpret the law?  Why?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) Origin and Growth of Hebrew Law.  Hastings, _Dict. of Bible_,\nIII, 64-67; _Ency. Bib_., III, 2714-8; Kent, _Israel's Laws and\nLegal Precedents_, IV, 8-15.\n\n(2) Growth of Primitive Law.  Maine, _Ancient Law_, 109-165;\nWilson, _The State_, 1-29.\n\n(3) Judicial Decisions as a Factor in the Development of Modern\nLaw.  _Prin. of Politics_, Chap. VI, Ransom, _Majority Rule and the\nJudiciary_.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY X\n\nTHE FOUNDATIONS OF GOOD CITIZENSHIP.\n\nTHE TEN COMMANDMENTS.--Ex. 20:1-17.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 194-198.\n  _Prin. of Politics_, Chap. II.\n  Lowell, _Essay on \"Democracy.\"\n\n  Thou shalt have no other gods before me.\n  Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image.\n  Thou shalt not take the name of Jehovah thy God in vain.\n  Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.\n  Honor thy father and thy mother.\n  Thou shalt not kill.\n  Thou shalt not commit adultery.\n  Thou shalt not steal.\n  Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.\n  Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house.--_Ex. 20:3-17_.\n\nIf ye know my commandments, happy are ye if ye do them.--Jesus.\n\nWherewithal shall I come before Jehovah, and bow myself before the\nHigh God? . . .  He hath showed thee, Oh man, what is good; and\nwhat doth Jehovah require of thee but to do justly, and to love\nkindness, and to walk humbly with thy God?--Micah 6:6, 8.\n\nMost religions are meant to be straight lines connecting two\npoints--God and man.   But Christianity has three points--God, man,\nand his brother--with two lines to make a right angle.--_Maltbie D.\nBabcock_.\n\n  So many prayers, so many creeds,\n  So many paths that wind and wind,\n  When just the art of being kind\n  Is all the sad world needs.\n    --Eva Wheeler Wilcox.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE HISTORY OF THE PROPHETIC DECALOGUE.\n\nThe decalogues of Exodus 20-23 clearly represent the earliest canon\nof the Old Testament.  These are intended to define clearly the\nobligations of the nation to Jehovah, and to place these\nobligations before the people so definitely that they would be\nunderstood and met.  As the term \"decalogue,\" that is \"ten words,\"\nindicates, the Biblical decalogue originally contained ten brief\nsententious commands, easily memorized even by children.  Each of\nthe decalogues is divided into two groups of five laws or pentads.\nThis division of five and ten was without reasonable doubt intended\nto aid the memory by associating each law with a finger or thumb of\nthe two hands.  Exodus 20-23 and its parallels in Deuteronomy\ncontain ten decalogues, that is a decalogue of decalogues,\nsuggesting that originally a decalogue was associated with each of\nthe fingers and thumbs of the two hands even as were the individual\nwords or commands.  This system of mnemonics was useful in teaching\na child nation.  It is still useful to-day.  It is important to\nimpress upon the child in this concrete way certain of the\nfundamental obligations to God and man.  The form of the ten\ncommandments in part explains the commanding place which they still\nhold in religious education throughout Christendom.\n\nThe Biblical accounts of the two decalogues in Exodus 20 and 34\nvary in details.  The early Judean prophetic narrative in Exodus 34\nstates that these commands were inscribed by Moses himself on two\nstone tablets.  In the later versions of the story Jehovah\ninscribes them with his own fingers on the two tablets which he\ngave to Moses.  That the older decalogue was written on two tablets\nand set up in the temple of Solomon is exceedingly probable, for by\nthe days of the United Kingdom the Hebrews were beginning to become\nacquainted with the art of writing and therefore could read the\nlaws in written form.  The recently discovered code of Hammurabi,\nwhich comes from the twentieth century B.C., was inscribed in\nparallel columns on a stone monument.  In the epilogue to this\nwonderful code the king states: \"By the order of Shamash, the judge\nsupreme of heaven and earth, that judgment may shine in the land, I\nset up a bas-relief to preserve my likeness in the great temple\nthat I love, to commemorate my name forever in gratitude.  The\noppressed who has a suit to prosecute may come before my image,\nthat of a righteous king, and read my inscription and understand my\nprecious words and let my stele elucidate his case.  Let him see\nthe law he seeks, and may he draw in his breath and say: 'This\nHammurabi was to his people like the father that begot them!'\"\nThus this devout king of ancient Babylonia graphically defines the\nmotive which, at a later period, led Israel's spiritual leaders to\nset before the people those principles which made for the welfare\nboth of the nation and of the individual.  Each was keenly\nconscious that the laws which brought social and spiritual health\nto mankind emanated from the divine power that was guiding the\ndestinies of men.\n\nHebrew tradition has described in a great variety of narratives the\nway in which God made known his will to the people.  The scene in\neach case was Mount Sinai, which the ancient Hebrews as well as the\nKenites regarded as Jehovah's abode.  In the early Judean version,\nas some writers classify the accounts, Moses alone ascends the\nmountain, while the people are forbidden to approach.  In the\nNorthern Israelite version, the people approach, but being\nterrified by the thunder and lightnings they request Moses to\nreceive for them the divine message.  This later version implies\nthat a raging thunder storm shrouded the sacred mountain, while the\nearly Judean and late priestly narratives apparently suggest an\nactive volcano.\n\nThe element common to all these accounts is that under the\ndirection of their prophetic leader, Moses, a solemn covenant was\nestablished between the nation and Jehovah, and that the\nobligations of the people were defined in the decalogue with its\nten short commands.  The problem is, however, complicated by the\npresence of two decalogues, one now preserved in Exodus 34 and the\nother, the familiar ten commandments of Exodus 20.  Both agree in\nemphasizing as primary the nation's obligation to be loyal to\nJehovah.  The decalogue in Exodus 34, however, goes on to describe\nin succeeding laws the ways in which the nation may show its\nloyalty.  This was through the observation of certain ceremonial\ncustoms and especially the great annual feasts.  Did most ancient\npeoples show their loyalty to the gods by their lives and deeds or\nby the ceremonies of the ritual and the offerings which they\nbrought to the altars?  The first great prophet Amos declared that\nJehovah hated and despised feasts and ceremonies unless accompanied\nby deeds of justice and mercy.\n\nThe decalogue in Exodus 34 may well represent the original commands\nwhich Moses laid upon the nation, but the higher moral sense of\nlater editors has truly recognized the superiority of the ethical\ncommands of the familiar decalogue in Exodus 20 and given it the\ncommanding place which it richly deserves.  (For a probable\nliterary history of this decalogue see _Hist.  Bible_ I, 194-5.)\nThe two decalogues of Exodus 20 and 34 are not duplicates the one\nof the other, but rather supplement each other.  The one defines\nthe obligation of the nation, the other of the individual.  The\nHebrews long continued to retain in their homes the family images\ninherited from their Semitic ancestors.  Not until the days of Amos\nand Isaiah did the prophets begin to protest against the calves or\nbulls and the cherubim in the sanctuaries of Northern Israel, and\neven in the temple at Jerusalem.  Hence the second command, \"Thou\nshalt not make for thyself any graven image,\" some believe comes\nfrom a period centuries later than Moses.  Possibly, as in Exodus\n34:17, it originally read \"molten image\" and referred to foreign\nidols.  If so, it may come in this older form from Moses.  The\ntenth command which places the emphasis on the motive rather than\nthe act also suggests a maturer age; but with these possible\nexceptions there is good reason for believing that the spirit and\nteaching of Moses are embodied in this noble decalogue.\n\nIn what respects does the version in Deuteronomy 5 differ from that\nin Exodus 20?  (_Hist. Bible_ I, 195.)  Which is probably the older\nversion?  What later explanations and exhortations have been added\nto the original ten words in Exodus 20?  In Deuteronomy 5?  What\nwas the object of these additions?  Are they of real value?  Is it\nprofitable to teach them to children to-day?\n\n\nII.\n\nOBLIGATIONS OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO GOD.\n\nInto what two groups do the ten words in Exodus 20 fall?  And what\nis the theme of each?  Is there a real difference between the\ncommand of Exodus 34, \"Thou shalt worship no other gods\" and that\nof Exodus 20, \"Thou shall have no other gods before me\"?  Did the\nHebrews as a matter of fact tolerate the worship of other gods in\ntheir midst centuries after the days of Moses?  May the Hebrews\nhave originally interpreted the command of Exodus 20 as a demand\nthat Jehovah be given the first place in the worship and faith of\nIsrael?  How did later prophets like Elijah and Isaiah interpret\nit?  (See I Kings 18:21 and Is. 6:1-8; 8:13.)  The older command in\nExodus 34, \"Thou shall make thee no molten gods,\" was probably\nintended to guard the Israelites from imitating the religious\ncustoms of their heathen neighbors, such as the Egyptians and the\nMoabites.  The command to make no graven image was, it seems,\ndirected not against the public idols but against the private\nimages.  These were usually made of wood and were cherished in many\na Hebrew family, as for example, that of Jacob (cf. the story of\nhis flight from Laban, Gen. 31) or of David (I Sam. 19).  The\nspirit of the law is truly interpreted by the later priestly\ncommentator who places completely under the ban all attempts\nvisibly to represent the Deity.  Is the spirit of this command\ndisregarded by the modern Greek church?  In certain parts of the\nRoman Catholic world?  In any phases of Protestant worship?\n\nHow is the third command interpreted to-day?  The exact meaning of\nthe original Hebrew is not entirely clear.  It may be interpreted\nliterally: \"Thou shall not invoke the name of Jehovah, thy God, in\nvain.\"  The interpretation turns on the meaning of the phrase, in\nvain.  This admits of four different translations: (1)\nPurposelessly, and therefore needlessly or irreverently; (2) for\ndestruction, as when a man calls down a curse upon another; (3) for\nnothing, that is in swearing to what is not true; and (4) in the\npractice of sorcery or witchcraft, for this word was frequently\nused by the Hebrews as a scornful designation of heathen\nabominations.  Is it possible that the original command was\nintended to guard against each of these evils?  If so, it broadens\nand deepens its modern application.  Its fundamental idea is\nevidently reverence and sincerity.\n\nWhy did the Hebrew law-givers place these three laws, which\nemphasize absolute loyalty to Jehovah, at the beginning of the\ndecalogue?  What do we mean to-day by loyalty to God?  Loyalty to\nJehovah was not only the corner stone of Israel's religion but also\nof the Hebrew state.  During the wilderness period and far down\ninto later periods it was the chief and at times practically the\nonly bond that bound together the individual members of the tribe\nand nation.  Disloyalty to Jehovah was treason, and even the mild\ncode found in the book of Deuteronomy directs that apostasy be\npunished by public stoning.  Loyalty to God or at least to the\nindividual sense of right to-day as in the past is the first\nessential of effective citizenship.  Which is the more essential\nfor the welfare of the state, the manual, the mental or the\nreligious training of its citizens?  Where is the chief emphasis\nplaced to-day?  Is this right?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE SOCIAL AND ETHICAL BASIS OF THE SABBATH LAW.\n\nThe institution of the Sabbath in different countries apparently\nhas a long and complex history.  Many explanations have been given\nof its origin, aside from the direct divine command.  The simplest\nand most satisfactory is probably that it was originally connected\nwith the worship of the moon.  There are many indications in Hebrew\nhistory that the early ancestors of the Israelites were moon\nworshippers.  To-day as in the distant past the inhabitants of the\ndeserts from whence came the forefathers of the Hebrews make their\njourneys under the clear, cool light of the moon, avoiding the hot,\npiercing rays of the mid-day sun.  The moon with its marvelous\ntransformations is unquestionably the most striking and\nawe-inspiring object in the heavens.  It is not strange, therefore,\nthat many primitive peoples and especially the nomadic desert\ndwellers worshipped it as the supreme embodiment of beauty and\npower.\n\nIn China feast days once a month were doubtless connected with the\nphases of the moon.  Among the American Indians time was reckoned\nby numbers of moons.  The custom of observing as sacred the four\ndays, which marked the transition from one quarter of the moon to\nanother, was also widespread.  In the Hebrew religion the feast of\nthe New Moon was closely identified with that of the Sabbath.  The\nHebrew month was also the lunar month of approximately twenty-eight\ndays.  The new moon, therefore, marked the beginning of the month\nand each succeeding Sabbath a new phase of the moon.  The fourth\ncommandment seems, therefore, like the others to have a basis in\nnature, and also, as we shall note, a social reason.  Would a\ncommandment be truly divine if it did not have a natural and\nreasonable basis?  By the ancients rest from labor was regarded as\none of the essential elements in the sacred day.  The prophet Amos\ndenounced the merchants of Northern Israel because they were\nconstantly saying,\n\n  When shall the new moon pass that we may sell grain,\n  And the Sabbath that we may open the corn?\n\nIn its earlier ceremonial interpretation, to abstain from all labor\non the Sabbath was clearly regarded as a primary obligation.  Like\nfasting, it is probably regarded as an offering due to Jehovah.\nThe word \"holy\" in the Hebrew means set apart, distinct.  The\nSabbath, therefore, was to differ from the other days of the week.\nThe great ethical prophets of the Assyrian period were the first\ncompletely to divest this ancient institution of its heathen\nsignificance and give it a deeper religious, and therefore social\nand humanitarian interpretation.  They gave it its true and eternal\ncontent, declaring that God decreed that all who labor should have\ntheir needed rest.  The prophet who added the noble interpretation\nin Deuteronomy 5:14, 15, declares that it was not only that old and\nyoung, master and slave, might rest, but also that even the toiling\nox and ass and the resident alien might have the relaxation which\ntheir tired bodies required.  Thus these inspired prophets traced\nthe ultimate basis of the institution of the Sabbath to God's\nprovidence for the innate needs of man.  They recognized that it\nwas essential for the physical, mental and spiritual well-being of\nthe individual and, therefore, for the welfare of the State.  That\nthe Hebrews might not forget this obligation, the prophets appealed\nto the memory of the days when the Israelites themselves were\nslaves in the land of Egypt and the thought of how Jehovah\ndelivered them from their slavery.\n\nTuan Fang, the great Manchu viceroy who only recently met martyrdom\nat the hands of his warring countrymen, said when visiting America\na few years ago, \"I think that when I return to China I will\nintroduce Sunday in my province.\"  When asked whether he would make\nit the seventh day, he replied, \"Yes, for I think that the seventh\nday is far better than the tenth.  Furthermore, for the convenience\nand economy of all, I will make it correspond to the Christian\nSunday.  From my study of the conditions in America and of the\nneeds in China I am convinced that the Sabbath is a most valuable\nand essential institution.\"\n\nLater Judaism revived the earlier heathen content of the Sabbath,\nand lost sight of its deeper political, social and humanitarian\nsignificance.  Unfortunately the Christian church and above all our\nPuritan fathers followed the guidance of the later priests rather\nthan of the early prophets.  Jesus with his clear insight into\nhuman hearts and needs, and with his glowing love for men,\nrepudiated the harsh, mechanical interpretation of the Sabbath\ncurrent in his day and reasserted the teachings of the great\nprophets that preceded him; \"The Sabbath was made for man, not man\nfor the Sabbath.\"\n\nDoes the social and humanitarian interpretation of the Sabbath\nobscure or deepen its religious significance?  Does the great body\nof the Christian church to-day accept the interpretation of the\nprophets and of Jesus, or that of early heathenism and later\nJudaism?  Does the interpretation of the prophets and of Jesus\nfurnish a basis on which all classes in the state can unite in\nappreciating and in jealously guarding the Sabbath?  Does the\nacceptance of one or the other of these interpretations\nfundamentally affect our actual observance of the Sabbath?  Our\nmotives and our spirit?  Our attitude toward our fellow men?\n\n\nIV.\n\nIMPORTANCE OF CHILDREN'S LOYALTY TO PARENTS\n\nIt is generally recognized by scientists that the place of animals\nin the scale of being is dependent upon the length of their period\nof infancy.  The lower forms of animal life are mature almost as\nsoon as they are born.  Minnows never come under the care of their\ngenitors, but are independent as soon as they are hatched.  The\nyoung of the less developed quadrupeds are soon weaned and\nforgotten by their parents.  The longer the young remain in the\ncare of their parents the higher the form of the animal.  The great\ndifference between men and most of the higher animals is thought by\nmany to be dependent upon the length of childhood, and the\nconsequent care and attention given by the parents.  Even among\nhuman beings it is scarcely too much to say that the longer the\ntime of education and training under proper supervision lasts, the\nmore successful finally at the end of life the man will be.  When\none considers that Aristotle, who is perhaps generally accepted as\nthe world's greatest thinker, associated with his great teacher,\nPlato, twenty years, until he was thirty-eight years of age and\nproduced nearly all his important works only after that time, we\nmay see one example of the profound importance of training.  The\ncare of parents for their children throughout all of their early\nyears would naturally imply loyalty of children to the parents as a\nmark of gratitude for the time and affection expended upon them.\n\nIn one of his characteristic poems, filled with wise suggestion,\nLowell speaks of obedience as that \"great tap root\" of the state\nand civilization.  The habit of obedience is one of the finest\ncharacteristics in family life, and obedience to parents normally\nbecomes obedience to law in the citizen, one of the surest bonds of\nsociety and one of the most necessary conditions of social progress.\n\nThis fact was so fully recognized in the patriarchal stage of\nsociety that the head of the family within the tribe had the power\neven of life and death over the members of his household.  In\npractically all early societies we find this authority of the\nparent and the obedience of the child insisted upon as fundamental.\nIn the Orient, even to the present day, this respect of children\nfor their parents is closely bound up with their religion and their\ncivilization.  The first wish of every man is that be may have a\nson to sacrifice to his memory after he has gone.  And not only in\nChina, but in many other states we find ancestral worship springing\nfrom this relation of father and son.\n\nThe primitive Hebrew laws (Ex. 21:15, 17) made death the penalty\nfor a child who struck or cursed his parents.  In many countries\nparricide is considered the worse type of murder.  The very old\nSumerian law of ancient Babylon punished with slavery the son who\nrepudiated his father.  In the fifth commandment no penalty is\nnamed for disrespect toward one's parents.  The religious sanction\nonly is implied, though the penalty of death was inflicted by the\nlaw of the tribe.\n\nIn society to-day our aim in education is to develop individuality\nand for a country with a democratic form of government this type of\neducation should be encouraged.  Disobedience or disrespect ho\nparents has no longer a legal penalty, although the children may be\ncompelled by law to support their parents.  But gratitude toward\nparents and a normal affectionate family life are practically\nessential to social welfare.  Aside from its civic aspect, there is\nnothing in society more beautiful than the right relationship\nbetween parents and children.  Jesus, who represented the kingdom\nof God as a household, found that the best analogy for the\nrelationship of men to God and the best descriptions of the divine\nnature are based upon this relationship.\n\n\nV.\n\nPRIMARY OBLIGATIONS OF MAN TO MAN.\n\nThe second five commandments of the decalogue deal with the\nobligations of man to man.  These commands still find a central\nplace in modern society as the best guarantees of social stability,\nsecurity and peace.  All of the crimes with which they deal, except\nthat of covetousness, were punished, in Hebrew custom and law, by\ndefinite penalties.  In many instances these penalties were still\nmore severe among other early peoples.\n\nAs soon as society emerges from the savage state, the crime of\nadultery is always forbidden.  Nothing else stirs the worst of\nhuman passions as does sexual jealousy.  Even to-day probably no\nother cause is more productive of murder and suicide.  In early\nsocieties, like that of the Israelites, to this normal human\nfeeling of personal wrong was added that of the loss of property,\nfor wives or concubines were considered as property.  Hence the\npenalty for adultery among the Hebrews, as with many ancient and\nmany modern peoples, was death.\n\nAs soon as society develops from the savage into the pastoral\nstage, private property is recognized in the flocks and herds.  In\nthe development of society additional types of property rights\nappear under various forms of ownership, until it is not too much\nto say that modern society is based largely upon property rights.\nThe evils associated with property are many, but as yet, at any\nrate, the rights of property are a benefit to the state, provided\nthose rights are exercised under proper legal supervision.  It\nshould be recognized, however, that the command, \"Thou shall not\nsteal,\" may well have various meanings, dependent upon the laws of\nproperty.  Our law restricts the right of legacy, the sale or even\nthe possession of poisons and often of dangerous weapons.\nSimilarly the degree of ownership of other goods is often limited.\n\nThe ninth command, not to bear false witness against one's\nneighbor, is often interpreted as simply a violation of one's oath\nin court, or when appended to formal legal papers.  But in most\nmodern countries the command is also interpreted so as to include\nlying.  If this crime is defined in its broadest sense, as lack of\ntruth and trustworthiness, it is in many ways the greatest sin man\ncan commit against society.  Practically all modern economic and\nsocial relations are based upon the security of contracts and upon\nthe readiness of business men and citizens to keep their word.  It\nmay be well questioned whether the crime of murder is as dangerous\nto society as the habit of deception, for the temptation of murder\nis rare as compared with that of deception; while the evil is often\nless far-reaching in its consequence and less despicable.\n\nIn the last command, that directed against covetousness, the\nlaw-giver goes beyond the external act to the motive and spirit in\nthe mind of the individual.  If this command is kept in spirit, the\nothers are practically unnecessary.  This command is like in kind\nto that of Jesus in the New Testament, where all the commandments\nare summed up into one: \"Love one another.\"\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE PRESENT-DAY AUTHORITY OF THE TEN COMMANDMENTS.\n\nThe various books that make up our Bible were each written to meet\nthe needs of the people of its day; but inasmuch as the prophets\nand law-givers from the days of Moses to those of Jesus touched\nupon the most vital questions of human life and society, these\nprinciples are most of them universal and applicable to all tribes\nand nations and races and peoples.\n\nNecessarily there are many variations in the specific methods by\nwhich these commands are to be carried out.  The honor and\nreverence due everywhere to mother and father may well have\ndifferent applications, depending upon the type of civilization,\nthe customs of living and the type of home life that exist in the\ndifferent countries.  The injunction to keep the Sabbath may well\nbe carried out with the same spirit in various ways.  What\nconstitutes theft depends upon the law of the separate state and\nupon the rights of property granted by that law, but everywhere the\nprimary obligations of the individual to God, to society and to his\nfellow men remain substantially the same.  As he develops a more\ntender conscience, a more just and kindly attitude toward his\nfellows, a greater reverence toward his Creator, the spirit with\nwhich be keeps these commandments is becoming continually more\nurgent, whatever may be the specific way in which they may be\ncarried out for the benefit of his fellow men and of society.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nDoes idol worship exist in any part of the civilized world to-day?\nIf so, where and in what forms?\n\nAre those addicted to profanity necessarily and intentionally\nirreverent?  What is the origin of this habit?  How may it be\neradicated?  What are some of the best methods by which children\nmay be guarded against it?\n\nDo you think it is right for the state to become responsible for\nthe religious education of its citizens?\n\nWhat is the fundamental difference between the so-called\n\"Continental Sabbath\" and that observed by Jesus?\n\nIn what way may Sunday be made a day of greater profit and\nsignificance to the working man?\n\nWhat attitude should one take regarding so-called \"white\" or\n\"society lies\"?  Under what circumstances, if any, is it right to\nlie?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Decalogues in Exodus 20-23.  _Hist. Bible_ II, 209-24.\n\n(2) Jesus' Version of the Ancient Prophetic Decalogue.  See Matt.\n5:17, 18; 6:19-21; 12:1-12, 31, 32; 15:3-5; 22: 36-39.\n\n(3) Compare the Moral Ideals of the Decalogue with those of the\nPresent-Day Socialists.  Cross, _The Essentials of Socialism_;\nWalling, _Socialism as It Is_; Spargo, _Elements of Socialism_.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY XI\n\nTHE EARLY TRAINING OF A RACE.\n\nISRAEL'S EXPERIENCE IN THE WILDERNESS AND EAST OF THE JORDAN--Num.\n11-14; 21:21-31; 32:39-42.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ I, 204-29.\n  Edward Jenks, _Hist. of Politics_, Chap, III.\n\nThen as they journeyed from the mountain of Jehovah the ark of\nJehovah went before them, to seek out a halting place for them.\nAnd whenever the ark started, Moses would say,\n\n  Arise, O Jehovah,\n  And let thine enemies be scattered,\n  And let those who hate thee flee before thee.\n\nAnd when it rested, he would say,\n\nReturn, O Jehovah, to the ten thousand of thousands of\nIsrael.--_Num. 10:33, 35, 36_.\n\nAs an eagle stirreth up her nest, hovereth over her young, taketh\nthem, beareth them upon her wings, so the Lord his God did lead him\nand there was no strange God with him.--_Deut. 32: 11_.\n\nBefore man made us citizens, great Nature made us men--_Lowell_.\n\n  Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain\n    shall meet\n  Till earth and sky stand presently at God's great\n    judgment seat;\n  But there is neither East, nor West, border nor breed\n    nor birth\n  When two strong men stand face to face, tho' they come\n    from the ends of the earth.\n      --_Rudyard Kipling_.\n\nThe measure of the success of our lives can only lie in the stature\nof our manhood, in the growth in unworldliness and in the moral\nelevation of our inner self.--_Henry Drummond_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE WILDERNESS ENVIRONMENT.\n\nThe accounts regarding the experiences of the Israelites in the\nwilderness lack the unity which characterizes the records of the\nearlier and later periods.  They simply give occasional pictures of\nthe life of the Hebrew fugitives.  They must be interpreted in the\nlight of the peculiar background of the wilderness and of the\nnomadic life which flourishes there to-day as it did in the past.\nThe Hebrews on escaping from Egypt entered the South Country, which\nextends seventy miles from the rocky hills of Judah southward until\nit merges into the barren desert.  During the later Roman period\nthe northern and northwestern portions of this territory were\npartially reclaimed by agriculturalists; but in early periods, as\nto-day, it was pre-eminently the home of wandering, nomadic tribes.\nThis wild, treeless region is divided by rocky ranges running from\neast to west.  Parallel to these are deep, hot and for the most\npart waterless valleys.  In the springtime these valleys are\ncovered by a sparse vegetation; from a few perennial springs flow\nwaters that irrigate the immediately surrounding land; but they\nsoon lose themselves in the thirsty desert.  During the summer the\nvegetation disappears almost entirely, and the struggle for\nsubsistence becomes intense.  The nature of the country makes it\nnecessary for its inhabitants constantly to journey from one\npasture land and spring to another.\n\nThe home of the Hebrews at this time, like that of the modern\nArabs, was the tent.  The stories that have come down from this\nperiod suggest the experiences through which they passed.  The\nconstant insistent problem in this region was and is how to secure\nadequate supplies of food and water.  During the greater part of\nthe year the chief food of the people is the milk and curds\nsupplied by their herds.  At times, however, these fail to meet the\nneeds even of the modern Bedouin inhabitants of this South Country.\nThey then gather the gum that exudes from the tamarisk tree or the\nlichens from the rocks.  From these they make a coarse flour and\nbread which keeps them alive until the winter rains again bring\ntheir supply of water and pasturage.  Some scholars hold that this\ncoarse food was the manna of the Biblical accounts.  They argue\nthat later generations, familiar with the barrenness of the\nwilderness and believing that the Hebrews at this time numbered\nmany thousands, naturally concluded and reported that their\nancestors were miraculously fed.  At certain periods, also, the\nmeagre fare of the desert dweller is supplemented by the quails\nwhich he is able to capture and these are a welcome relief to his\nmonotonous diet.  About the perennial springs, which gush forth\nfrom the barren rock, there also grew up stories of a miraculous\nprovision for the needs of Jehovah's people; for all springs and\nespecially those in the desert were regarded by the ancients as\nmiracles.  Even in more fertile lands the Greeks reared beside such\nsprings temples to the god, whom they thought of as thus signally\nrevealing himself.  In the deeper sense each of these early Hebrew\nstories is historical, for they all record the fundamental thought\nand belief that through this strenuous, painful period, even as in\nlater crises in their history, Jehovah was guiding his people and\ngiving them not only food and water, but also that training in the\nschool of danger and privation which was essential for their\nhighest development.\n\nEven more insistent than the constant struggle for food and water\nwere the dangers that came from the hostile tribes which already\noccupied this much-contested territory.  For the possession of the\nsprings and pasture lands they fought with the energy and craft\nthat characterize the Bedouin tribes to-day.  Hence, to the\nHebrews, fresh from the fertile fields of Egypt, their life in the\nwilderness represented constant hardship, privation, suffering and\ndanger.\n\n\nII.\n\nINFLUENCE OV THE NOMADIC LIFE UPON ISRAEL'S CHARACTER AND IDEALS.\n\nThe wilderness left a stamp upon Hebrew character and life that may\nbe traced even to-day in the later descendants of that race.  It\ntightened their muscles and gave them that physical virility which\nhas enabled them to survive even amidst the most unfavorable\nconditions.  It taught them how to subsist on the most meagre food\nsupply and to thrive where the citizen of a more prosperous land\nwould inevitably starve.\n\nIt is probable that in their early nomadic experiences the Hebrews\nacquired those migratory habits which, intensified by unwonted\nvicissitudes, have carried them to almost every civilized land.  In\nthe wilderness they also learned the art of nomadic warfare which,\nto win victories, depended not so much upon open attack as upon\nstrategy.  The common dangers of the wilderness life tightened the\nracial and religious bonds that held them together.  Only by the\nclosest union could they resist the perils that beset them.  Upon\nthe complete devotion of each man to the interest of the tribe hung\nhis fate, as well as that of the community as a whole.  Hence arose\nthat devotion to race, that readiness to avenge every wrong and to\nprotect each individual, even if it cost the life-blood of the\ntribe, which is illustrated in many of the stories that come from\nthis early period.  How far has this racial characteristic survived?\n\nIn a community thus closely bound together the morality of each\nindividual was guarded with a jealousy unknown in more settled\nprosperous communities.  Thus, for example, adultery from the first\nappears to have been punished by public stoning.  How far has this\ncharacteristic survived to the glory of the Jewish race?\n\nThe tribal organization also cherished the freedom of each\nindividual.  His voice was heard in its council and his rights were\ncarefully protected.  The free atmosphere of the desert tolerated\nno despotism, and the sheik was the servant of all.  These\nfundamental conceptions of government persisted even when, under\nthe influence of a new agricultural environment, the Hebrews\nestablished the kingship and monarchy.  It was the struggle between\nthese inherited democratic ideals and those of the neighbors who\nwere ruled by despots, that ultimately disrupted the Hebrew kingdom\nand called forth those great champions of liberty and social\njustice, the prophets of the Assyrian period.  It was this same\ndemocratic atmosphere that made possible the work of those\nprophets, who openly denounced the crimes of king and people.  How\nfar have the Jews throughout all their history allied themselves\nwith democratic movements?\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE INFLUENCE OF THE WILDERNESS LIFE UPON ISRAEL'S FAITH.\n\nThe pressure of constant danger intensified the sense of dependence\nupon a power outside and above themselves.  It led them to look\nconstantly to Jehovah as their sole guide and deliverer.  A\ncontinued attitude crystallized into a habit.  Hence, throughout\ntheir troubled career the Hebrews have been conscious of the\npresence of God and have found in him their defender and personal\nfriend as has no other people in human history.\n\nAs later generations meditated on the perils of the wilderness\nthrough which their ancestors passed, they naturally felt that only\nunder the immediate guidance of a divine power could they have\nescaped.  They were familiar with the way in which the caravans\ntravel through the desert: in front of the leader is borne aloft a\nbrazier filled with coals.  From this smouldering fire there arises\nby day a column of smoke that, in the clear air of the desert, can\nbe easily seen afar by any who may straggle behind.  At night these\nglowing coals seem like a pillar of fire, telling of the presence\nof their leader and protector.  With the same vivid imagery,\naccording to some interpreters, the later Hebrews pictured the\nmarch of their ancestors through the wilderness, and thereby\nsymbolized the belief that Jehovah was then present and that\nthrough his prophet Moses he was personally guiding his people.\nHow far have these Old Testament narratives been thus interpreted\nby modern western readers?  Does it change their spiritual\nsignificance to seek to learn their origin and real literary\ncharacter?  Are there still to be found, often in humble walks of\nlife, earnest Christians who have similar deep spiritual\nexperiences and describe them with the same vivid imagery and\nconcreteness?  Is the value of our conception of God's presence and\nactivity in human history deepened and strengthened or lessened by\nthe thought that in the past, even as to-day, he accomplished his\nends by natural rather than contra-natural methods?  Are the faith\nand institutions of nations and individuals developed most through\nspecial revelations or through ordinary, constant, daily training\nand experience?  Is it not true that to us all there come at times\nexperiences akin to those that underlie these wonderful narratives?\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE EAST-JORDAN CONQUESTS.\n\nDesert dwellers take little account of the lapse of time.  It is\nnot strange that the data regarding the duration of the sojourn in\nthe wilderness are late and exceedingly vague.  The number forty in\nthe Bible is the concrete Hebrew equivalent of many.  Ordinarily\nthe forty years represent a generation.  A period of about forty\nyears accords well with the facts of contemporary Egyptian\nchronology.  If the Hebrews fled from Egypt about 1200, during the\nperiod of anarchy following the breakdown of the nineteenth\nEgyptian dynasty, they could not have entered Palestine much before\nthe middle of the twelfth century, for Ramses III of the Twentieth\nDynasty succeeded in re-establishing and maintaining his authority\nin Southern Palestine until his death about 1167 B.C.\n\nThe account of the spies, preserved according to some writers in\nvariant versions by each of the great groups of Hebrew narratives,\nindicates that the Hebrews attempted but failed to enter Canaan\nfrom the south.  For tribesmen like the Israelites, chafing under\ntheir harsh environment and recalling the prosperity of the land of\nEgypt, Palestine with its green hills and fertile fields was an\nirresistible lodestone luring them on to the conquest.  The reasons\nwhy they failed to enter Canaan from the south are suggested in the\nnarrative of the spies and confirmed by a study of the historical\ngeographical situation.  The Canaanite cities of Southern Palestine\nwere built largely with the view to protecting their inhabitants\nfrom the ever-lurking nomad invaders.  On the other hand the\nHebrews had none of the equipment needed to conquer walled cities.\nMore than that the barren hills of the South Country did not\nfurnish the base of supplies necessary to maintain a protracted\nsiege.  The early Hebrew narratives imply that certain nomadic\ntribes, as, for example, the Calebites, the Kenizzites and the\nJerahmeelites, independently gained a foothold on the southern\nborders of Canaan and ultimately assimilated with the Hebrew tribe\nof Judah when the latter entered Palestine.  The earliest Hebrew\naccounts, however, as well as the logic of the situation indicate\nthat the great body of the Israelites, whose ancestors had been in\nthe land of Egypt, entered Palestine from the east.  Throughout all\nits history the east-Jordan land has witnessed the constant\ntransition of Arab tribes from the nomadic life of the desert to\nthe more settled civilization, of agricultural Palestine.  Here on\nthe eastern heights that overlook the Jordan valley and the land of\nCanaan the traveller still finds the Arab tents and flocks of the\nnomads beside the plowed fields of the village-dwellers.  On the\nrolling plains of northern Moab and southern Gilead there are few\ncommanding heights or natural fortresses.  The important towns,\nlike Dibon and Heshbon, lay on slightly rising hills.  The\ncharacter of the ruins to-day does not indicate that they were ever\nsurrounded by formidable walls.  Whether the Hebrews conquered them\nby open attack or by strategy, as in the case of the town of Ai, is\nnot stated.  It is certain, however, that here they first gained a\npermanent foothold in agricultural Palestine.  From the conquered\nthey here learned their initial lessons in the arts of agriculture\nand became acquainted with that more advanced Canaanite\ncivilization which they later absorbed.  Coming fresh from the\ndesert, where only the fittest survived, their numbers rapidly\nincreased in this quieter and more favorable environment.  Soon to\nthe constant pressure of the desert population on the east was\nadded that of over-population, so that necessity, as well as\nambition, impelled them to cross the Jordan to seek homes among the\nhills to the west.\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE SIGNIFICANCE OF MOSES' WORK.\n\nThe study of the beginnings of Israel's history in the light of its\nphysical, social and economic environment reveals clearly the many\npowerful forces then at work.   At the same time these do not alone\nexplain Israel's later history and the uniqueness of its character\nand faith.  These later facts plainly point back to a strong,\ncommanding personality, who shaped the ideals and institutions of\nthis early people and left upon them the imperishable imprint of\nhis own unique individuality.  Although the traditions regarding\nhim have been transmitted for centuries from mouth to mouth, they\nportray the character and work of Moses with remarkable clarity and\nimpressiveness.  Moses was primarily a patriot.  He was also a\nprophet-statesman, able to grasp and interpret the significance of\nthe great crises in the life of his people and to suggest practical\nsolutions.  Moreover, he was able to inspire confidence, and to\nlead as well as direct.  In the harsh environment of the wilderness\nhe was able to adjust himself to most difficult conditions.  In\nleading the Hebrew serfs from the land of Egypt, he became indeed\nthe creator of the future Hebrew nation.  In the wilderness be\ntrained that child nation.  As judge and counsellor, he taught\nconcretely the broad principles which became the foundation of\nlater Hebrew law.\n\nAs guardian of the oracle and priest of the desert sanctuary,\nMoses, like the later prophet of Islam, but with far greater\nspiritual power and deeper insight, taught his people not only the\nart of worship, but certain of the great essentials of religion.\nHe it was who formulated in a positive faith the wholesome\nreaction, which he and his kinsmen felt against the gross\npolytheism of Egypt.  The inspiration of all of Moses' work was his\nown personal faith.  The first great vision of Jehovah's character\nand purpose that he had received in the land of Midian was\ndoubtless often renewed amidst the same wild, impressive scenes.\nThe exact nature of the deeper, more personal side of his character\nand faith must be inferred from the close analogies that may be\ndrawn from the memoirs of Isaiah or Jeremiah.  At the same time it\nis a mistake to infer that Moses' beliefs were as lofty as those of\nthe later prophets who stood in the light of a larger experience.\nOn the other hand, it is not just to disregard the fact that Moses,\nbeing a prophet, was far in advance of the primitive age in which\nhe lived.  Not only did Moses create the Hebrew nation and teach it\nits first lessons in practical politics and religion, but he it was\nwho first instilled into his race commanding loyalty to the one\nGod, Jehovah, and taught that religion was more than form: that it\nmeant right thinking and doing.  Thus Moses was the forerunner of\nIsrael's later prophets, who broke away from the narrow heathen\ninterpretation of religion and defined it in terms of life and\nservice.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE EARLY STAGES IN THE TRAINING OF THE HUMAN RACE.\n\nIt is interesting and important to note that Israel's history was\nin most respects like that of other growing nations.  In the\nbeginning pastoral society and tribal government develop among\nsavages primarily through the domestication of animals.  The young\nof the animals slain in the hunt are kept first as pets: then, when\nas a result of the thriftless nature of the savages supplies at\ntimes become scarce, the pets are slain for food.  As pets become\nmore common and population increases, the advantage of breeding for\nuse is apparent, and private property, in distinction from\ncommunity possessions, appears.  The growing herds naturally\ndevelop the need of regular service.  To meet this need the\ninstitutions of permanent marriage and bondage arise and the wife\nor wives and the slaves perform the added work.  With the custom of\nfixed marriage and the possibility of tracing ancestry through the\nfather, comes in time ancestral government.  The Hebrews seem to\nhave had this type of government, even in the days of Abraham; and\nit lasted until the tribes broke up into clans and families, when\nthey acquired permanent homes and became agriculturists in the land\nof Canaan.\n\nMany of the characteristics of the tribe disappear almost entirely,\nas wandering nomads settle in a fixed abode, and the patriarchal\nrule changes to that of a royal or democratic government.  Customs\nbecome fixed in formal statutes.  Property in land becomes more\nimportant than that in herds.  War becomes the business of a\nspecial army, instead of the frequent duty of all.\n\nBut in the tribe there is little competition.  All work for the\ncommunity, or for the family, rather than for individual interests.\nEach man is primarily responsible, not to the state, but to the\nhead of his family or clan, who in turn answers for his family to\nthe tribal chief.\n\nCertain of these tribal institutions and ideals have left their\nindelible impress on modern society.   The tribe was exclusive.\nAll those not born into the tribe had no right, no welcome there,\nfor their coming would tend to restrict the common pasturage.  They\nwould be a burden.  Though the tent-dweller might be hospitable to\na guest, an alien had no rights except on sufferance.  If he were\nneedy and were received, he usually became a serf or slave.  And\nyet this exclusiveness is the germ of our patriotism, a noble trait\nthat may ultimately, but not soon, be replaced by a cosmopolitan\nlove for humanity.\n\nAllied to this is the personal bond, that obtains in the tribe,\ninstead of the territorial unity of the modern state.  A Frenchman\nis such because he is born in France; an Israelite is such because\nhe is the son of Abraham and knows his people as his blood kinsmen.\n\nThis personal tie makes for peace and democracy.  Building on this\nJewish tribal trait, Jesus calls all men brethren because sons of a\ncommon Father.  His Kingdom of God, likewise, is not territorial.\nIts citizens are bound together by the tribal bond of a common\nbrotherhood and fatherhood.  Thus the lessons, so deeply impressed\nin the childhood of the race, have a large and growing significance\nfor the present and future.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nWhat reasons may be given to prove that love for humanity is a\nvirtue more useful to modern civilization than patriotism?\n\nDoes the movement for universal peace find any encouragement in the\nteachings ascribed to Moses?\n\nOn what grounds can the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites be\ndefended? How did it differ from the taking of Tripoli by Italy?\nOr of Porto Rico by the United States?\n\nIn the light of the oldest records, was Moses' work in your\njudgment accomplished by natural or supernatural methods?\n\nWhat were the chief characteristics of Moses?  What place does he\nhold in history?\n\nIs modern socialism in any way a revival of the principles\nunderlying the old tribal organization?  How far did Jesus in his\nidea of the Kingdom of God build on the old tribal idea?\n\n\n_Subjects/or Further Study_.\n\n(1) Characteristics of the Wilderness South of Palestine.\nHastings, _Dict. Bib_. III, 505-6.  Kent, _Bib. Geog. and Hist_.,\n42, 43.\n\n(2) The Religion of Moses.  Hastings, _Dict. Bib_., Extra Vol.\n631-634; Marti, _Old Testament Religion_, 36-71.\n\n(3) Compare the tribal organization and customs of the Israelites\nwith those of the American Indian tribes of to-day.  Publications\nof the _Indian Association_; publications of the _Mohonk\nConferences_.\n\n\n\n\nSTUDY XII\n\nA NATION'S STRUGGLE FOR A HOME AND FREEDOM.\n\nISRAEL'S VICTORIES OVER THE CANAANITES.--Josh. 2-9; Judg. 1, 4, 5.\n\n_Parallel Readings_.\n\n  _Hist. Bible_ II,1-4.1.\n  _Prin. of Politics_ X.\n\n  That the leaders took the lead in Israel,\n  That the people volunteered readily,\n  Bless Jehovah!\n\n  Zebulun was a people who exposed themselves to deadly peril,\n  And Naphtali on the heights of the open field.\n  Kings came, they fought;\n  They fought, the kings of Canaan,\n  At Taanach by the Waters of Megiddo,\n  They took no booty of silver.\n  Prom heaven fought the stars,\n  From their courses fought against Sisera,\n  The river Kishon swept them away,\n  That ancient river, the river Kishon.\n  O my soul, march on with strength!\n  When did the horse-hoofs resound\n  With the galloping, galloping of their steeds?\n    --Judg. 5, 9, 18-22 (Hist. Bible).\n\nThis was King Arthur's dreame.  Him thought that there was comen\ninto his lande many gryffons and serpents, and him thought that\nthey brent and slew all the people in the land.  And then him\nthought that he fought with them, and they did him passing great\ndamage and wounded him full sore, but at the last he slewe them\nall.--Malory, _Hist. of King Arthur_; _Mort d' Arthur_.\n\nYoung gentlemen, have a resolute life purpose.  Don't get mad and\ndon't get scared.--_Burleson_.\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE CROSSING OF THE JORDAN.\n\nIn the light of the preceding studies, the motives that led the\nHebrews to cross the Jordan become evident.  As the Pilgrim\nFathers, to secure a home where they might enjoy and develop their\nown type of belief and methods of civilization, braved the dimly\nknown dangers of the sea and the wilderness, the Hebrews braved the\ncontests that unquestionably lay before them.  Between the Sea of\nGalilee and the Dead Sea the Jordan is fordable at thirty points\nduring certain parts of the year.  The first of the two main fords\nin the lower Jordan is just below the point where the Wady Kelt\nenters the Jordan from the west and deposits its mass of mud and\nsilt.  The other ford is six miles further north below the point\nwhere the Wady Nimrin comes down from the highlands of Gilead.\nHere to-day the main highway connecting the east and the\nwest-Jordan country crosses the river.  This spot was probably the\nscene of the historic crossing at the beginning of Hebrew history.\n\nCertain writers hold that variant accounts of the most important\nfacts in early Hebrew history have here been preserved.  Traces of\nthree different versions of the crossing of the Jordan may still,\nin their judgment, be found in the third and fourth chapters of the\nbook of Joshua.  The latest and most familiar narrative represents\nthe crossing as a superlative miracle and the waters of the rushing\nriver as piled up like a wall on either side.  The Northern\nIsraelite version appears to have stated that the waters of the\nJordan were dried up, implying that the Hebrews crossed during the\nlate summer when the river was easily fordable.  The earliest\nnarrative, the Judean prophetic, states that \"the waters rose up in\na heap, a great way off at Adam, the city that is beside Zarathan,\nand those that went down toward the Sea of the Arabah, the Salt\nSea, were wholly cut off\" (Josh.  3:16b).  From other references in\nthe Old Testament it would appear that the city of Adam, which\nmeans red earth, is to-day represented by the ruins of Ed-Damieh,\nwhich stands near the famous Damieh ford at the point where the\nriver Jabbok enters the Jordan.\n\nIt is interesting to note in this connection that a reliable Moslem\nhistorian states that in the year 1257 A.D. the retreating Moslems\nfound it neccessary to repair the foundations of an important\nbridge which stood at this point.  When the workmen arrived on the\nscene they were amazed to find the riverbed empty and were able by\nworking rapidly to complete the repairs before the waters came\nrushing down.  This remarkable phenomenon seemed to them to be due\nto the direct intervention of Allah; but the historian fortunately\nrecords the cause: it was a huge landslide a little further up the\nriver which temporarily dammed its waters.  The oldest Biblical\naccount of the crossing of the Jordan may point to a like natural\ncause.  If this be true, does it imply that Jehovah had no part in\npreparing the way for the future conquests of his people?  Would a\nmiracle, such as that recorded in the late-priestly tradition, be\nany stronger proof of God's presence and activity in human history\nthan are the provisions which we to-day call natural?\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE CANAANITE CIVILIZATION.\n\nContemporary inscriptions and recent excavations make it possible\nto form a very definite conception of conditions in Canaan when the\nHebrews crossed the Jordan.  The dominant civilization was that of\nthe Canaanites, the descendants of the Semitic invaders from the\ndesert who entered Palestine centuries before the ancestors of the\nHebrews.  Naturally they settled first along the fertile coast\nplains that skirt the western Mediterranean.  In later times these\nwere known as the Phoenicians.  As the population increased, the\nCanaanites pushed their outposts along the broad valleys that\npenetrated the uplands of Palestine.  These valleys were especially\nfertile and attractive in the territory later known as Galilee and\nSamaria.  The wide Plain of Esdraelon and its eastward extension,\nthe Valley of Jezreel, cut straight across the central plateau of\nPalestine.  The Plain of Esdraelon was the strongest centre of the\nCanaanite civilization.  A few outposts were established in the\nJordan valley, as for example, Laish, later known as Dan, at the\nfoot of Mount Hermon, and Jericho, at the southern end of the\nJordan valley.  Only a few Canaanite villages were found along the\nmore barren hills of Southern Canaan.  There the peoples and\ncivilization still retained the imprint of their desert origin.\n\nAlong the coast plains and across the great Plain of Esdraelon ran\nthe main highways that connected the three earliest and most\nnourishing centres of the world's civilization: the Egyptian on the\nsouthwest, the Amorite on the north, probably between the southern\nLebanons, and the Babylonian to the east and northeast.  For\ncenturies the Canaanites had absorbed the ideas, institutions, and\nculture of these stronger peoples.  So fundamentally had the\nBabylonians impressed the Canaanites that practically all of the\ninscriptions coming from this early period are written in the\nBabylonian script.  Even in writing to their Egyptian conqueror\nduring the fourteenth century, the Canaanite kings of Palestine\nused this same Babylonian system of writing.  The Amorite\ncivilization had so strongly influenced the Canaanites that to-day\nit is difficult for the archaeologist to distinguish between the\ntwo.  By certain of the Biblical writers the terms Canaanite and\nAmorite are used interchangeably.  As early as 1600 B.C. Egypt,\nunder the ambitious conquering kings of the Eighteenth Dynasty, had\noverrun Palestine and for the next three or four centuries ruled it\nas a tributary province.  The nearness of Egypt made its influence\nstill more powerful, so that in nearly every mound and Canaanite\nruin the excavator finds hundreds of reminders of the presence of\nthe Egyptian civilization.\n\nThe Canaanites had long since left behind them the nomadic state\nand had developed a strong agricultural and commercial\ncivilization.  Their life centered about certain important cities\nlike Megiddo on the southwestern side and Bethshean on the eastern\nside of the Plain of Esdraelon.  Their cities were usually built on\na low-lying hill in the midst of rich encircling plains.  They were\nprovided with thick mud walls, behind which the inhabitants felt\nsecure from attack.  Over each city ruled a petty king, whose\nauthority, however, did not extend far beyond the surrounding\nfields that belonged to the inhabitants of the town.  Generally\nthese city states were independent.  In many cases they were\nhostile to each other; and the long rule of Egypt had tended to\nintensify this hostility, for Egypt had depended upon this local\njealousy to maintain its control.  The diversified physical contour\nof Palestine likewise strengthened this tendency toward separation\nrather than unity.\n\nThis type of political organization favored the growth of\npolytheism rather than the worship of one god.  Each city had its\nlocal god or baal, which was worshipped at a high place either\nwithin the city or on some adjacent height, while in the larger\ncities elaborate altars and temples were reared to them.  These\nlocal deities were regarded as the gods of fertility which gave to\ntheir worshippers ample harvests and numerous offspring both of the\nfamily and of the nock.  The principle of generation occupied such\na prominent place in the Canaanite cults that in time they became\nexceedingly immoral and debasing.  To secure the favor of their\ngods the Canaanites brought rich sacrifices to their altars and\nobserved certain great annual festivals with ceremonies very\nsimilar to those later adopted by the Hebrews.\n\nWhile the Canaanites were on a much higher plane of material\ncivilization than the Hebrews, they ultimately fell a prey to those\nhardy invaders of the desert: (1) Because they were incapable of\nstrong united action, and (2) because their civilization was\ncorrupt and enervating.  Courage and real patriotism were almost\nunknown to them even as early as the seventeenth century B.C., when\nthe Egyptian king Thutmose III invaded the land of Palestine.\nTheir strong walls and their superior military equipment, however,\nmade their immediate conquest by the Hebrews impossible.  This\nexplains why the earliest account of the initial conquest, now\nfound in Judges 1, is chiefly devoted to recounting the strong\nCanaanite cities which the Hebrews failed to conquer.\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE CAPTURE OF THE OUTPOSTS OF PALESTINE.\n\nIn the light of our present knowledge of the Canaanite civilization\nit becomes evident why most of the early Hebrew conquests were in\nthe south.  The only large Canaanite city which they could conquer\nin the early days was Jericho.  Recent excavations have also shown\nwhy later generations regarded its capture by the Hebrews as a\nmiracle, although many modern interpreters hold that the early\naccount does not imply that it was by supernatural means.  Like\nmost of the Canaanite cities, it was situated on a slightly rising\neminence, close to the foothills that on the west rose abruptly to\nthe central plateau of Canaan.  Northward, eastward, and southward,\nextended for miles the level plain of the Jordan river, which\nplowed its way through its alluvial bed, six miles east of Jericho.\nClose by the site of the ancient city came the perennial waters of\nthe Wady Kelt with which it was possible to irrigate its fields.\nPast the town ran the main highway from across the Jordan, along\nthe northern side of the Wady Kelt, to join the great central\nhighway that extended through the centre of Palestine.  Jericho\nwas, therefore, the key to the land of Canaan, and its capture was\nnecessary if the Hebrews were to maintain their connection with\ntheir kinsmen east of the Jordan.\n\nThe ruins of the ancient Canaanite town rise between forty and\nfifty feet above the plain.  It is an oblong mound containing\naltogether about twelve acres.  The excavations have disclosed a\nlarge part of the encircling wall.  It was a construction of\nexcellent workmanship which still stands practically intact,\ntestifying to the accuracy of the early Hebrew tradition.  Its\nfoundation is a wall of rubble sixteen feet high and six to eight\nfeet thick, sloping inward.  On the top of this foundation, which\nrested on the native rock, was built a supplemental wall of burnt\nbrick six or seven feet in thickness and rising even now in its\nruined condition on an average eight feet above the lower wall.\nThus the original wall must have towered between twenty and thirty\nfeet above the plain.  At the northern end of the city stood the\ncitadel, made of unburnt brick, three stories high.  Even the stone\nstaircase which led to the top is still intact.\n\nAccording to these investigators the late tradition that these\nwalls fell flat to the earth as the result of a miracle finds no\nconfirmation in the ruins themselves.  The older Hebrew account,\nhowever, in their judgment agrees perfectly with the evidence\nrevealed by the spade of the excavator.  In imagination it is easy\nto follow the perilous journey of the Hebrew spies and to\nappreciate the importance of the negotiations by which they secured\nthe co-operation of Rahab and of the clan within Jericho which she\nrepresented.  Later come the Hebrew hordes from across the Jordan\nbearing with them the ark which symbolized to them the presence of\nJehovah, who had led them on to victory in many an early battle.\nBehind their impregnable walls the inhabitants of Jericho must have\nlaughed scornfully at the desert host, that seemed utterly\nincapable of an effective attack or of a protracted siege.\nAccording to many modern interpreters the earliest Hebrew host\nmarched silently about the Canaanite stronghold.  At first the\ninhabitants of Jericho, accustomed to Arab strategy, undoubtedly\nheld themselves ready for defence.  When no attack came, their\nvigilance was gradually relaxed.  At last on the seventh day, when\nconditions were favorable, at the preconcerted signal, a trumpet\nblast, the Hebrews rushed toward the walls, the gates were probably\nopened by their allies within the city, and Jericho was quickly\ncaptured.  The method of attack recorded in the prophetic narrative\nwas very similar to the strategy used a little later by the Hebrews\nin the capture of the smaller towns of Ai and Bethel.  They are the\nmethods still employed by the Bedouins in their attacks upon the\noutposts of Palestine.\n\nThe fierce nomadic instincts of these early Hebrew warriors are\nrevealed by the fate which they visited upon Jericho and its\ninhabitants.  The recent excavations confirm the Biblical testimony\nthat for several centuries after its initial capture the ancient\ntown was left a heap of ruins.\n\nIts inhabitants were slain as a great sacrificial offering to\nJehovah, whose true character as one who loves all mankind was\nfirst appreciated by the inspired prophets of a much later From the\nplain of Jericho two or three roads led up to the central plateau\nof Canaan.  The main road along the Wady Kelt ran past the villages\nof Ai and Bethel.  At most they were small towns and easily\ncaptured.  Along this highway went the Hebrew tribes later known as\nthe Ephraimites and Manassites.  The other roads led through the\nwilderness southwestward to the heart of Judah.  The frontier town\nof Bezek, mentioned in the ancient narrative of Judges, has not yet\nbeen identified.  The name is perhaps but a scribal corruption of\nBethlehem or of Bethzur further to the south.  The other towns\nultimately captured by the southern tribes were Hebron, with its\ncopious water supply, Debir to the southwest, and Arad and Hormah\nwhich lay on the borders of the South Country.  The capture of\nthese six or seven outposts represents the first stage in the\nconquest and settlement of Palestine.  It was significant because\nit meant that the people from the wilderness had gained a foothold\nin the land where they ultimately found their home.  It inaugurated\nIsrael's pioneer period.  The Hebrews were no longer homeless\nwanderers in the desert, nor sojourners in a foreign land.  At this\npoint Israel's history as a nation properly begins, although the\ncomplete union of the tribes was not consummated until nearly a\ncentury later.\n\n\nIV.\n\nWAYS BY WHICH THE ISRAELITES WON THEIR HOMES.\n\nThe impression conveyed by the later passages in the book of Joshua\nthat the Hebrews within a period of seven years became complete\nmasters of the land of Canaan is different from that made by the\nolder records in Judges.  These indicate that the process was\ngradual, extending through several generations.  Except at two or\nthree great crises, this conquest appears to have been peaceful\nrather than by the sword, a process of settlement and colonization\nrather than of capture.  Today throughout many parts of Palestine\none may still see, close to the cities, the black tents and the\nflocks of the Bedouin immigrants.  In the days of the Hebrew\nsettlement the Canaanites were largely confined to the fertile\nvalleys.  The uplands were still open to the men from the desert.\nHere the Hebrews pitched their tents and finally built their rude\nhomes.  In this more favorable environment their families and their\nflocks gradually increased until they began to encroach upon the\nterritory already occupied by the older inhabitants.  The resulting\nquarrels and differences were sometimes settled by the appeal to\nthe sword; more frequently by alliances sealed by intermarriages.\nThe early narrative in the ninth and tenth chapters of the book of\nJudges gives a vivid picture of the resulting condition: in the\nstrong Canaanite city of Shechem, Hebrews and Canaanites had so far\nintermarried that Abimelech, a product of this intermarriage,\nsucceeded his father Gideon as king of the first little Hebrew\nkingdom.  At Shechem Hebrews and Canaanites also worshipped side by\nside in the common sanctuary, which was known as \"the temple of\nBaal of the Covenant.\"\n\nUnder the pressure of the increased population certain of the\nHebrew tribes migrated and seized new territory.  Such a migration\nis vividly recorded in Judges 17 and 18.  The little tribe of the\nDanites, finding the pressure of their kinsmen on the north and\neast and that of the Philistines on the west too strong, captured\nthe Canaanite city of Laish at the foot of Mount Hermon and thus\nfound a permanent home in the upper Jordan valley.\n\nIt was a cruel, barbarous age in which might was regarded as right.\nThus, Ehud the Benjamite, who treacherously gained admittance to\nthe presence of Eglon, secretly slew this Moabite oppressor of the\nHebrews.  This act instead of being condemned was regarded then and\neven by later generations as an example of courageous patriotism.\nWas his act justifiable?  How would it be regarded in America\nto-day?\n\n\nV.\n\nDEBORAH'S RALLY OF THE HEBREWS.\n\nThe growing numbers and strength of the Israelites at last alarmed\nthe Canaanites.  A certain leader by the name of Sisera formed a\ncoalition of the strong Canaanite cities encircling the Plain of\nEsdraelon.  The centre of this coalition was the powerful city of\nMegiddo, the ruins of which on the south-western side of the plain\nstill remain to testify to the natural strength of this ancient\nstronghold.  The policy of the Canaanites was to keep the different\nHebrew clans apart and thus prevent united action.  In the words of\nthe ancient song:\n\n  In the days of Jael the highways were unused,\n  And travellers walked by round-about paths.\n  The rulers ceased in Israel;\n  A shield was not seen in five cities\n  Nor a spear among forty thousand.\n\nThe one who alone appears to have understood the crisis and to have\nbeen able to stir the Israelites to action was Deborah, the\nprophetess of the central tribe of Issachar.  Israel's struggle for\nindependence is graphically recorded in the ancient poem found in\nJudges 5.  The later prose version of the incident, found in Judges\n4, supplements the earlier poem.  To a chief of a northern tribe of\nNapthali, a certain Barak, she turned as the natural leader in the\nstruggle for independence.  Together they sent out the summons to\nthe different northern tribes.  The southern tribes of Judah and\nSimeon were apparently ignored.  The distant tribes of Asher, Dan\nand Reuben were engrossed in their local interests and failed to\nrespond.  The tribesmen who rallied forty thousand strong on the\nnorthern side of the Plain of Esdraelon represented the great\ncentral Hebrew clans.  The ancient song, sung by the women as they\nmet the returning warriors, makes it possible to reconstruct the\nbattle scene.  Through the broad valleys that lead into the Plain\nof Esdraelon from the north came the sinewy, unkempt, roughly clad\nand poorly equipped Hebrew tribesmen, each clan led by its local\nchief.  They had \"come up to the help of Jehovah against the\nmighty.\"  Tribal patriotism, the memory of past grievances, the\ndesire for plunder, and zeal for Jehovah the God who had led their\nforefathers through the wilderness into the land of Canaan, stirred\ntheir courage and fired them to deeds of valor.  Well they chose\ntheir battlefield, out on the plain on the northern side of the\nmuddy, sluggish river Kishon.  On the slightly rising ground they\nfaced the Canaanite warriors who came out across the plain from the\ncity of Megiddo, six miles away.  The Canaanites were armed with\nchariots and the best weapons that the early Semitic civilization\ncould produce, but one thing they lacked,--courage, fired by\nreligious zeal.\n\nAgain a striking natural phenomenon appears suddenly to have turned\nthe tide of Israel's fortune.  On the eve of battle a drenching\nthunderstorm seems to have swept across the alluvial plain\ntransforming it into a morass and the sluggish Kishon into a\nrushing, unfordable river.  In the words of the ancient triumphal\node:\n\n  From heaven fought the stars,\n  From their courses fought against Sisera.\n  The river Kishon swept them away,\n  The ancient river, the river Kishon.\n  O my soul, march on with strength!\n  Then did the horse-hoofs resound\n  With the galloping, galloping of their steeds.\n\nThe Hebrew even brings out the sound of the sucking of the horses'\nhoofs in the soft mud.  The storm not only gave to the Hebrews, who\nwere on foot, a vast advantage, but it meant to them that Jehovah,\nwhose chariot was the clouds, his weapons, the lightning, and who\nspoke through the thunders, was fighting in their behalf.\n\nThe victory was overwhelming.  Sisera, the Canaanite leader, fled,\nbut only to fall later, ignominiously slain by a woman.  Henceforth\nthe Canaanite cities of central Palestine were occupied by the\nHebrews.  The vanquished were either enslaved or absorbed in\nintermarriage.  From them, however, the Hebrews learned skill in\nagriculture and received a heritage of art, ideas and customs that\nhad been developed by the Canaanites for many centuries.  How far\nwas this heritage beneficial to the Hebrews?  What temptations did\nit bring to them?  Did it mark a step forward in their development?\nWere the early Hebrews a pure or a mixed race?\n\nMore important than the spoils and lands which fell to the Hebrews\nwas the new demonstration of Jehovah's ability and willingness to\ndeliver his people which they received in the battle beside Kishon.\nThroughout all of Israel's colonial period the chief force binding\nthe scattered Hebrew tribes together was their faith in Jehovah.\nThe victory greatly strengthened that faith and prepared the way\nfor the closer union which was necessary before Israel could become\na permanent force among the nations of the earth.  The vision of\nwhat they had been able to achieve through united action never\ncompletely faded from the memory of the Hebrews.  Their subsequent\nexperiences also tended to revive this memory.  Amidst the warring\nelements in Palestine a powerful nation was gradually taking form;\nin the school of hard experience it was learning the lessons that\nwere fitting it for a large life.\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE FINAL STAGE IN THE MAKING OP THE HEBREW NATION.\n\nThe final stage in the evolution of Israel is recorded in the\nopening chapters of I Samuel and is best studied in detail in\nconnection with the history of the nation at its zenith.  We have\nstudied the forces which made the nation.  A brief summary will\nindicate the transition to the next period, that of the kingdom.\nThe victory over the Canaanites gave the Hebrews possession of the\nland and left them free to coalesce into a united nation; but the\ncentrifugal tribe spirit for a time proved the stronger.  Under\nGideon a beginning was made in kingdom making, but owing to the\ncruelty and inefficiency of his son Abimelech, the first Hebrew\nstate lasted little more than a generation.\n\nThe compelling power that finally brought all the rival Hebrew\ntribes together under a common leader was the conquest of their\nterritory by the warlike, ambitious Philistines.  In inspiring the\nBenjamite chieftain Saul to deliver his countrymen in their hour of\nshame and peril, Samuel the prophet proved the true father of the\nHebrew kingdom.  Under the compulsion of common danger the\nIsraelites not only followed Saul to victory, but also made him\ntheir king.  From this time on Israel took its place among the\nnations of the earth.\n\nDuring their formative period the Hebrews acquired many\ncharacteristics that they have retained throughout their history.\nFrom their early nomadic life they inherited physical strength,\nhardihood, adaptability even to the most unfavorable environment,\ncourage, perseverance and that individual initiative and\nself-reliance which come from protracted struggles against\nseemingly insuperable odds.  It was a harsh but thorough school in\nwhich the infant nation Israel was trained.  Their life in the\nwilderness and in the period of settlement also developed an\nintense love for freedom and that democratic spirit that was the\nglory of Israel and the foundation of its political institutions.\n\nPeople passing their time chiefly out of doors and enjoying the\nuplifting stimulus of an unfettered life in the open naturally\nacquire a feeling of awe and reverence for the God of nature that\nis often lacking in the city dweller.  Especially is this true if,\nlike the early Hebrews, the dwellers in the open feel that need of\ndivine protection which is begotten by constant exposure to danger,\nhunger, hardship and hostile foes.  The many crises and the signal\ndeliverances that came to the Hebrews not only intensified their\nfaith, but also gave them the consciousness that the God in whom\nthey put their trust was both able and eager to deliver them.\nProphets like Moses strengthened the popular sense of Jehovah's\nimmediate presence and interpreted the significance of each event.\n\nIsrael's early faith was simple, like that of a little child.\nWhile its beliefs were crude, its trust was strong.  It was this\ntrust and loyalty that carried the child nation through its early\ncrises and ultimately bound together the separate tribes into a\nunited commonwealth.  Thus Israel's early history illustrates the\nfundamental truth, that the most essential, the most powerful force\nin the making of a nation is a simple, practical, every-day\nreligion.\n\n\n_Questions for Further Consideration_.\n\nShould the successful and easy crossing of the Jordan by the\nIsraelites be ascribed to miracle or to their own promptness in\nseizing an opportunity unexpectedly offered?\n\nIn what ways did the religious zeal of the ancient Hebrews in\nbattle differ from the fanatical zeal of the modern Moslem in\nfighting the Christians?  Or the zeal of the Japanese before Port\nArthur?\n\nWhen, if ever, is assassination justifiable as a political\nexpedient?  Give your reasons.\n\nWere the Hebrews justified in the methods employed in securing\ncontrol of Palestine?\n\nIs it right for a progressive nation to compel a backward nation to\nsubmit?  Were the Americans on this ground justified in seizing the\nlands of the Indians?\n\nWhat were the chief tenets in the early faith of the Hebrews?\n\nHow did Israel's faith affect its political development?\n\nIn what important ways was religion effective in making the English\nstate?  The American commonwealth?\n\n\n_Subjects for Further Study_.\n\n(1) The Structure and Literary History of the Book of Judges,\nMcFadyen, _Introd. to O. T_. 76-83; Kent, _Student's O. T_. I, 26,\n27.\n\n(2) Conditions in Canaan at the Time of the Hebrew Settlement.\nPaton, _Early Hist. of Syria and Pal_., 157-60; Maspero, _Struggle\nof the Nations_, 111-208; _Encyc. Bib_. II, 2223-5.\n\n(3) The Motives that Inspired the Leaders of the American\nRevolution.  Fiske, Lodge, Bancroft or other writers on this period.","title":"Twelve Studies on the Making of a Nation: The Beginnings of Israel's History","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":42767}