Page images
PDF
EPUB

animals. When we are introduced to the manhood occupations of the sons of Adam, we are informed that Abel was "a keeper of sheep." Why were the sheep kept? for what purpose were they used? "Cain was a tiller of the ground." Why? That he might provide the bread of which man was to eat. This answer is not questioned by any one. Why, then, should it be held unwarrantable to conclude, that Abel kept the sheep for purposes of food as well as of clothing? The sacrifices are pointed to as an answer. It is said, that he might express his belief in the promise of a coming deliverer-even of that "Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world." That was no doubt true. But Cain offered also unto the Lord, and that in a way afterwards demanded under positive precept by God himself. His offering was not received, because he himself was not personally accepted by God. His spiritual nature was as yet wholly under sin. He had not accepted righteousness through another, but claimed to be good in himself, and demanded the acceptance of his sacrifice on the score of his own works. God dealt with him on this ground. As if he had said to him, You appeal to your acts, to your offerings, but something more is needed, even that good thing which Abel has chosen. Without this you must fall short of what is required of you. But be it as you wish. "If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at thy door." The principles so clearly enunciated by our Lord in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican (Luke xviii.) were brought out even in the household of Adam.

If we look at the offering of the firstlings and of the first-fruits in the light of the usages of an aftertime in the history of the Church, I do not see how the conclusion can be avoided that the animals kept by Abel were designed for food as well as for clothing. In aftertimes, when the offerings were all regulated by written laws, the meaning of the "first-fruits" was an expression of thankfulness on the part of the worshipper to God for his goodness in blessing his labour, and an acknowledgment of God's sovereignty over the land. But it was more than this. It was the acknowledgment also that the fruitful fields of which that one sheaf was a part, were reserved for the use of the worshipper and his family. The "firstlings of the flock" when presented to the priest told the same tale, but went a step farther. They were the recognition on the part of the offerer, for himself and his household, of the grace of God in the promise of the Messiah "who was to be cut off, but not for his own sins." Then, let us notice how thoroughly this interpretation fits into the largest views of the grace of God in a

Redeemer with which the Old Testament church was familiar. In the sacrificial system of worship arrangements were made for the sinner's acknowledgment of pardon through a substitute, on the one hand, and of his acceptance of that, on the other hand-of Christ as for him, and of Christ as his life. The sacrifice was not only slain and offered, but parts of it were eaten by a representative priesthood, and, in the case of the paschal lamb, the whole congregation of Israel were to eat of it. So we can see the propriety of Abel both offering and eating. There would thus be, even then, by those outward acts the testimony of the worshipper that he believed in the Promised One, and that he took him as the ground of his pardon, as his life, and as his righteousness, in shedding the blood of the lamb, in feeding upon its flesh, and in clothing himself with its skin. The last passed away as the Church found itself in the midst of circumstances in which the fruits of human skill, as put forth in the arts, were seen in providing garments yet more suitable for the clime and for health. The "fine twined linen" took the place of the skins in the clothing of the representative priesthood, and this still continues as a symbol-we have "the linen clean and white, which is the righteousness of the saints.' But the ancient materials of clothing were not wholly put away or dissociated from the religious impressions of the people. Goats' hair, rams' skins, and the like, had a place assigned to them in the furniture of the tabernacle. "And they came every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing, and they brought the Lord's offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments. And they came, both men and women; as many as were willing-hearted .. with whom

was found blue, and purple, and scarlet, and fine linen, and goats' hair, and red skins of rams, and badgers' skins, brought them" (Exod. xxxv. 21-23). Thus, looking at verse 21, and taking the act of God referred to in it as not only pointing out the divine mercy, in providing for the fallen pair garments suited to the circumstances into the midst of which they were about to be sent, but as implying the divine institution of sacrifices as channels of religious worship and life, it seems most likely that the animals slain were used for bodily food also. This conviction is strengthened by the work of Abel, who was "a keeper of sheep."

2. The Name of Adam's Wife.-" Adam called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all living" (iii. 20). In chapter second we are informed that "God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the

flesh thereof; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man. And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman (Isha), because she was taken out of Man (Ish)." In no way could the co-equality and complete identity of interest between man and woman, and the sacredness of the marriage tie, be so simply, and yet so powerfully indicated as by the statement of this etymological connection between the names of the man and woman. There are moral

.

and spiritual ties suggested between the two in the very words Ish and Isha, which distinguish the relation here from that implied in the names Adam (formed from the ground) and Eve (mother of all living). Thus our Lord's reference to the holy relationship, and to the strong tie thereby formed the tie of an absorbing, predominating affection. "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh." Thus, too, the fitness of the tie to illustrate the mysterious oneness between Christ and his church. "Have ye not read," asked Jesus at a time when domestic morality was not what it should have been, and when the sanctity of the marriage tie was set at nought by divorces for most trifling reasons, "that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female" (Matt. xix. 4-9). "Christ," says the Spirit of God by Paul, "loved the church, and gave himself for it. . . . . We are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and his church" (Eph. v. 25, 30-32). "The man called the woman Eve"-the life-giving one, the mother of all living. From this one pair were all the nations of the earth to spring. "God that made the world and all things therein. . . hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth" (Acts xvii. 24, 26). The one blood relationship, which constitutes the one great brotherhood of the human race, was formed in Eden. When sons were born in the likeness and after the image of the first pair, the varieties of disposition soon tended to varieties in tribal or family standing, but still the antediluvian nations were of the one blood. The perpetuation of this, and consequently the utter groundlessness of all assertions as to a plurality of races, or, more properly, a plurality of original sources whence the different races of men are held to have sprung, will be considered when we come to look at the division of the earth among the sons of Noah.

[ocr errors]

3. The Expulsion from Paradise.-The remarks made already on the tree of life make it unnecessary to examine verse 22 minutely. It is clear from the words of God used here, that whatever the tree of life may have been, it retained its virtue after the fall-a virtue which made it the minister of life to the human soul. "And the Lord God said, Behold the man is become as one of us to know good and evil; and now lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever: therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden, to till the ground from whence he was taken. So he drove out the man: and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden cherubims and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life" (ver. 23, 24). In what way this power to communicate eternal life was continued to this tree, we can no more understand than we can the mystery of the formation of the woman from the rib of the man. We know the fact: this should suffice to stop all curiosity as to the matter, when the mode of it is designedly concealed.

The words in verse 23-" to till the ground from whence he was taken "assume, as we have seen, the twofold expression of agricultural and shepherd life in the house of Adam. Cain followed the chief occupation of his father-"he tilled the ground." Abel took to gathering a flock out of the herb-eating animals around him-" he was a keeper of sheep." Skins were to be provided for clothing, victims for sacrifice, and, as is likely, animals were to be reared for food. Thus flocks needed to be kept. The presence of the ravenous beasts might tend to their destruction, or might drive them for safety into positions beyond the reach of man, and thus man's aid must be given them, his protection cast around them. The strong corroborative evidence from other parts of Scripture which has been adduced, warrants the conclusion that the rearing of sheep had these two aspects of use mixed up with it, viz., the religious and the economical. It is, besides, more than likely that the descendants of Cain soon threw off even the outward profession of devotion to God. There came at least to be a well-defined mark between the church and the world-the children of God and the children of men (vi. 12). It is thus improbable that flocks would be reared by the Cainites for the purposes of sacrifice. Yet we soon find an advance made in shepherd life; for not only were sheep cared for, but oxen also. We are told that Jabal (literally Increase) was the father of such as dwell in tents; and of those who have cattle' (iv. 20). This form of expression, it is worth noting, is still prevalent

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

in the East. "We shall return by Bussa," says one familiar with these lands, “and thus take a look into the north-west corner of this great plain. It abounds in antiquities, beyond most parts even of this land of ruins. We shall find the explanation of these old quarries on the hill above us. This daughter of Jabal says those nearest remains are called Shwoizerîyeh-a very hard word, and apparently foreign. Why call this curly-headed Bedawy by that name? The Bible says that Jabal was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle. Now she dwells in one of those goat-hair tents on the mountain side, and she is tending this drove of poverty-smitten cattle. This Biblical form of expression is very common. Any one who should now invent tents, or the custom of living in tents, would be called the father not only of tents, but also of tent-dwelling; indeed, the Arabs call a person distinguished for any peculiarity the father of it. Thus, a man with an uncommon beard is named abu dukn-father of a beard."

Have the sheep which Abel tended representatives of their original stock still in the world? The question is one of a class which may often have to be put, touching the animals referred to in the book of Genesis especially. When we come to the zoology of other books of Scripture, we have helps to the identification of genera, and even species, which could not be looked for here. Generally it may be averred, we have to look to Western Asia for the original types of most of our domestic animals. But it should never be forgotten, that the original types of the various domestic animals may have perished, and yet have left their distinctive features, not in any one variety, but scattered over many. Climatal influences, food, the physical character of the country, and the various appliances which the art of man can bring to bear on different races of animals, have all a tendency to modify not form only, but structure also. The dignity of head of the race has been specially claimed for one of two species. One of them, the Argali, Plate V., Fig. 1 (Ovis Ammon or Thibet sheep-Cuv.; Ovis Argali or Argali sheep-PALL.), inhabits the mountainous districts. of Central Asia. The Asiatic varieties of the Argali which, without good reason, have been characterized by some naturalists as distinct species, are the Kamtschatkan Argali (Ovis niviesla-ESCHOL.), the Caucasian Argali (O. cylindricornis-BLYTH), and the Armenian Argali (0. Gmelini-BLYTH). America supplies a species (variety ?) bearing a very close resemblance to the Asiatic type. It is found in the Rocky Mountains, and is associated on Plate V., Fig. 2, with the Argali for comparison.

« PreviousContinue »