Dee Finney's blog
start date July 20, 2011
today's date August 30, 3013
TOPIC: THE BROTHERS
8-30-13 - THE BROTHERS
THE BROTHERS - THE DREAM
In the beginning, I was going to go into a store to purchase something with a Father and his son who was 4 years old. We couldn't go into the store because the son wasn't wearing shoes. We were told we could bring him in if we carried him.
Back at home, apparently I was moving from one house to another, and I was with two brothers. One of the brothers (the one on the right) opened the bedroom closet door, and I saw a box on the top shelf that had my church bookkeeping files in it. I told the brother that I had to have that box too.
I was then going somewhere with the two brothers, and it would have been inappropriate to hold their hands, but each of the brothers had two sons, (about 4 or 5 yrs old each) so I held the hand of one pair of brothers on the left, and the hand of the other pair of brothers on the right. The other brother held his brothers hand.
The problem with this arrangement was that even though each of the pair of brothers was holding his brother's hand, they were fighting with their own brother because they weren't holding my hand.
So, there was a constant struggle between each pair of brothers because the other brother wasn't holding my hand.
P.S. I keep thinking about the twin brothers on the show "Property Brothers" that I love to watch. They are Drew and Jonathan
|Cain and Abel (Hebrew:
הֶבֶל ,קַיִן Qayin, Hevel) were according to the
Book of Genesis, two sons of
Adam and Eve. Cain is described as a crop farmer and his younger
brother Abel as a shepherd. Cain was the first human born and Abel was
the first human to die. Cain committed the first murder by killing his
brother. Exegeses of Genesis 4 by ancient and modern commentators have
typically assumed that the motives were jealousy and anger. Although the
Cain and Abel story is found in the
the text refers to them simply as the sons of Adam (Arabic: ابني
آدم), and neither of them is mentioned by name.
A millennia-old explanation for Cain being capable of murder is that he may have been the offspring of a fallen angel or Satan himself, rather than being from Adam. Allusions to Cain and Abel as an archetype of fratricide appear in numerous references and retellings, through medieval art and Shakespearean works up to present day fiction.
Hebrew Bible version:
The Septuagint, an early Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, offers an alternate version of the seventh verse:
Later in the narrative, God asks Cain, "Where is Abel thy brother?" Cain replies, "I do not know: Am I my brother's keeper?"
Cain and Abel are traditional English renderings of the Hebrew names Qayin (קין) and Hevel (הבל). The original text did not provide vowels. It has been proposed that the etymology of their names may be a direct pun on the roles they take in the Genesis narrative. Abel is thought to derive from a reconstructed word meaning "herdsman", with the modern Arabic cognate ibil now specifically referring only to "camels". Cain is thought to be cognate to the mid-1st millennium BC South Arabian word qyn, meaning "metalsmith". This theory would make the names descriptive of their roles, where Abel works with livestock, and Cain with agriculture—and would parallel the names Adam ("man," אדם) and Eve ("life-giver," חוה Chavah).
The oldest known copy of the Biblical narrative is from the Dead Sea Scrolls, and dates to the first century CE. Cain and Abel also appear in a number of other texts, and the story is the subject of various interpretations. Abel, the first murder victim, is sometimes seen as the first martyr;[while Cain, the first murderer, is sometimes seen as an ancestor of evil. Some scholars suggest the pericope may have been based on a Sumerian story representing the conflict between nomadic shepherds and settled farmers. Modern scholars typically view the stories of Adam and Eve and Cain and Abel, to be about the development of civilization, during the age of agriculture. Not the beginnings of man, but when people first learned agriculture, replacing the ways of the hunter-gatherer.
The Genesis narrative does not give a specific reason for the murder of Abel. Modern commentators typically assume that the motives were jealousy and anger due to God rejecting his offering, while accepting Abel's. Ancient exegetes, such as the Midrash and the Conflict of Adam and Eve with Satan, suggest something even more sinister behind the killing.
They supplement that the motive involved a desire for the most beautiful woman. According to Midrashic tradition, Cain and Abel each had twin sisters whom they were to marry. The Midrash states that Abel's promised wife, Aclima, was more beautiful. Since Cain would not consent to this arrangement, Adam suggested seeking God's blessing by means of a sacrifice. Whomever God blessed, would marry Aclima. When God openly rejected Cain's sacrifice, Cain slew his brother in a fit of jealousy and anger.Analysts have described Cain's relationship to his sister as being incestuous.
Abel (Hebrew: הֶבֶל, Hevel; Arabic: هابيل, Hābīl) is Eve's second son. His name is composed in Hebrew of the same three consonants as a root speculated by people to have originally meant "breath", because rabbis postulated one of its roots thus, also "waste", but is used in the Hebrew Bible primarily as a metaphor for what is "elusive", especially the "vanity" (another definition by the rabbis of medieval France, Rashi in specific from his translation into Old French) of human beauty and work e.g. Hevel Hayophi (He-vel Ha-yo-fi) vanity is as beauty from the Song of Songs of Solomon.
Julius Wellhausen, and many scholars following him, have proposed that the name is independent of the root. Eberhard Schrader had previously put forward the Akkadian (Old Assyrian dialect) ablu ("son") as a more likely etymology.
In Christianity, comparisons are sometimes made between the death of Abel and that of Jesus, the former thus seen as being the first martyr. In Matthew 23:35 Jesus speaks of Abel as "righteous", and the Epistle to the Hebrews states that "The blood of sprinkling ... [speaks] better things than that of Abel".(Hebrews 12:24) The blood of Jesus is interpreted as bringing mercy; but that of Abel as demanding vengeance (hence the curse and mark).
Abel is invoked in the litany for the dying in Roman Catholic Church, and his sacrifice is mentioned in the Canon of the Mass along with those of Abraham and Melchizedek. The Coptic Church commemorates him with a feast day on December 28.
According to the Coptic Book of Adam and Eve (at 2:1-15), and the Syriac Cave of Treasures, Abel's body, after many days of mourning, was placed in the Cave of Treasures, before which Adam and Eve, and descendants, offered their prayers. In addition, the Sethite line of the Generations of Adam swear by Abel's blood to segregate themselves from the unrighteous.
In the extra-biblical Book of Enoch (22:7), the soul of Abel is described as having been appointed as the chief of martyrs, crying for vengeance, for the destruction of the seed of Cain. This view is later repeated in the Testament of Abraham (A:13 / B:11), where Abel has been raised to the position as the judge of the souls.
According to the biblical narrative in Genesis 4:1-16, Cain treacherously murdered his brother Abel, lied about the murder to God, and as a result was cursed and marked for life. With the earth left cursed to drink Abel's blood, Cain was no longer able to farm the land.Exegesis of the Hebrew narrative has Cain punished as a "fugitive and wanderer".Exegesis of the Septuagint's narrative, "groaning and shaking upon the earth" has Cain suffering from body tremors.
Interpretations extend Cain's curse to his descendants, where they all died in the Great Deluge as retribution for the loss of Abel's potential offspring. Cain's curse involves receiving a mark from God, commonly referred to as the mark of Cain. This mark serves as God's promise to Cain for divine protection from premature death, with the stated purpose to prevent anyone from killing him. It is not known what the mark is, but it is assumed that the mark is visible.
The Targumim, rabbinic sources, and later speculations supplemented background details for the daughters of Adam and Eve. Such exegesis of Genesis 4 introduced Cain's wife as being his sister, a concept that has been accepted for at least 1800 years.This can be seen with Jubilees 4 which narrates that Cain settled down and married his sister Awan, who bore his first son, the first Enoch, approximately 196 years after the creation of Adam. Cain then establishes the first city, naming it after his son, builds a house, and lives there until it collapses on him, killing him in the same year that Adam dies.
Concerning the commandment for Cain to wander the earth, later traditions arose that this punishment was to be forever, as referenced in the legends of the Flying Dutchman or the Wandering Jew. According to some Islamic sources, such as al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir and al-Tha'labi, Cain migrated to Yemen.
In Jewish tradition, Philo, Pirke De-Rabbi Eliezer and the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan asserted that Adam was not the father of Cain. Rather, Eve was subject to adultery having been seduced by either Sammael, the Serpent (nahash, Hebrew: נחש) in the Garden of Eden, or the Devil himself. Christian exegesis of the "evil one" in 1 John 3:10-12 have also led some commentators, like Tertullian, to agree that Cain was the son of the Devil or some fallen angel. Thus, according to some interpreters, Cain was half-human and half-angelic, a Nephilim. Gnostic exegesis in the Apocryphon of John has Eve seduced by Yaldaboth. However, in the Hypostasis of the Archons, Eve is raped by a pair of Archons.
According to the Life of Adam and Eve, Cain fetched his mother a reed (Heb. qaneh) which is how he received his name Qayin (Cain). The symbolism of him fetching a reed may be a nod to his occupation as a farmer, as well as a commentary to his destructive nature. He is also described as "lustrous", which may reflect the Gnostic association of Cain with the sun.
Legacy and symbolism
A medieval legend has Cain arriving at the Moon, where he eternally settled with a bundle of twigs. This was originated by the popular fantasy of interpreting the shadows on the Moon as a face. An example of this belief can be found in Dante Alighieri's Inferno (XX, 126) where the expression "Cain and the twigs" is used as a kenning for "moon".
In medieval Christian art, particularly in 16th century Germany, Cain is depicted as a stereotypical ringleted, bearded Jew, who killed Abel the blonde, European gentile symbolizing Christ. This traditional depiction has continued for centuries in some form, such as James Tissot's 19th century Cain leads Abel to Death.
In the treatise on Christian Hermeticism, Meditations on the Tarot: A journey into Christian Hermeticism, describes the Biblical account of Cain and Abel as a myth, i.e. it expresses, in a form narrated for a particular case, an "eternal" idea. It shows us how brothers can become mortal enemies through the very fact that they worship the same God in the same way. According to the author, the source of religious wars is revealed. It is not the difference in dogma or ritual which is the cause, but the "pretention to equality" or "the negation of hierarchy".
In Latter-day Saint theology, Cain is considered to be the quintessential Son of Perdition, the father of secret combinations (i.e. secret societies and organized crime), as well as the first to hold the title Master Mahan meaning master of [the] great secret, that [he] may murder and get gain.
In Mormon folklore — a second-hand account relates that an early Mormon leader, David W. Patten, encountered a very tall, hairy, dark-skinned man in Tennessee who said that he was Cain. The account states that Cain had earnestly sought death but was denied it, and that his mission was to destroy the souls of men.[ The recollection of Patten's story is quoted in Spencer W. Kimball's The Miracle of Forgiveness, a popular book within The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This widespread Mormon belief is further emphasized by an account from Salt Lake City in 1963 which stated that "One superstition is based on the old Mormon belief that Cain is a black man who wanders the earth begging people to kill him and take his curse upon themselves (M, 24, SLC, 1963)."
Music[edit source | edit]
Television[edit source | edit]
New International Version (NIV)
The Table of Nations
10 This is the account of Shem, Ham and Japheth, Noah’s sons, who themselves had sons after the flood.
2 The sons[a] of Japheth:
Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshek and Tiras.
3 The sons of Gomer:
Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah.
4 The sons of Javan:
and the Rodanites.[b]
5 (From these the maritime peoples
spread out into their territories by their clans within their
nations, each with its own language.)
6 The sons of Ham:
Cush, Egypt, Put and Canaan.
7 The sons of Cush:
Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Raamah and Sabteka.
The sons of Raamah:
Sheba and Dedan.
8 Cush was the father[c] of Nimrod, who became a mighty warrior on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; that is why it is said, “Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before the Lord.” 10 The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad and Kalneh, in[d] Shinar.[e] 11 From that land he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir,[f] Calah 12 and Resen, which is between Nineveh and Calah—which is the great city.
13 Egypt was the father of
the Ludites, Anamites, Lehabites, Naphtuhites, 14 Pathrusites, Kasluhites (from whom the Philistines came) and Caphtorites.
15 Canaan was the father of
Sidon his firstborn,[g] and of the Hittites, 16 Jebusites, Amorites, Girgashites, 17 Hivites, Arkites, Sinites, 18 Arvadites, Zemarites and Hamathites.
Later the Canaanite clans scattered 19 and the borders of Canaan reached from Sidon toward Gerar as far as Gaza, and then toward Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah and Zeboyim, as far as Lasha.
20 These are the sons of Ham by their clans and languages, in their territories and nations.
21 Sons were also born to Shem, whose older brother was[h] Japheth; Shem was the ancestor of all the sons of Eber.
22 The sons of Shem:
Elam, Ashur, Arphaxad, Lud and Aram.
23 The sons of Aram:
Uz, Hul, Gether and Meshek.[i]
24 Arphaxad was the father of[j] Shelah,
and Shelah the father of Eber.
25 Two sons were born to Eber:
One was named Peleg,[k] because in his time the earth was divided; his brother was named Joktan.
26 Joktan was the father of
Almodad, Sheleph, Hazarmaveth, Jerah, 27 Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, 28 Obal, Abimael, Sheba, 29 Ophir, Havilah and Jobab. All these were sons of Joktan.
30 The region where they lived stretched from Mesha toward Sephar, in the eastern hill country.
31 These are the sons of Shem by their clans and languages, in their territories and nations.
32 These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their lines of descent, within their nations. From these the nations spread out over the earth after the flood.
In this comparative study, doctrine is not in
question; but historical fact and clarity are. It deals with the event
that took place during the days of Peleg, a descendant of Shem. The
versions compared are divided into four categories. They are as follows:
Antiquities of the Jews, by Josephus: (I. x. 4)
Smith's Bible Dictionary: (page 496)
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible:
In the first group, it was definitely a geological division which took place. Since Peleg was born just over one hundred years after the flood, why is there no mention of the process of the division of land taking place until this time? The water had long previously receded. Details of this process can be found elsewhere on the Internet. Although there is a possibility that the interpretation made by the translator has truth in it, I feel that other translators have come closer to telling what actually occurred.
In the second group, it was definitely a demographic division that took place. The story of the dispersion from the tower at Babel is described in Genesis 11. The passage which we are examining occurs in the previous chapter. Another genealogical list immediately follows the story of Babel in chapter 11. Although long time spans are often recorded in one chapter, the demographic division is a possibility.
In the third group, either explanation is possible. Thus, the reader of only one version can decide that one is correct, according to the way that the passage is understood.
In the fourth group, there is a difference in translations in the two accounts. This discrepancy may be confusing, but may help the reader to decide one way.
The definition in Strong's Exhaustive Concordance is of little help in clarifying what really was divided. However, the reader may be inclined to accept the geological division from what Strong said.
Smith is clear that it was a demographic division. However, he may have limited the dispersion too much when he refers to Eber's family only.
Josephus is clear that it was people who were divided, implying the time of the time of the confusion of languages at the tower of Babel. He states that Peleg was born at the time of the dispersal, thus, the reason for his so being named. There is a lack of clarity elsewhere as to the timing of his birth.
What was divided -- the whole earth, a nation of people, or the family of Eber? You decide. A simple statement, when transferred from one language and culture to another language and culture, can take on more than one meaning. The differences are not the fault of the original writers, but of copyists and translators.
children of the Bible
Isaac and Ishmael
Far away in the East is a country formerly called Canaan, and near to it is another, still known as Arabia. At the part where these two lands join is a long and wide desert. Only a few trees and shrubs grow in this barren spot. There are no flowing rivers or broad streams of water. In some places a little stream slowly moves along in winter, but it dries up in summer. The heat of the sun burns up nearly all the grass; yet there are a few places where water and pasture are found. To these spots the shepherds of that region bring large flocks of sheep and goats, which quietly feed around the dark looking tents.
Nearly four thousand years ago, a good man named Abram, lived in this part of the world. He was rich, though his riches did not consist in houses and lands, or in gold and jewels, but in sheep and cattle. His house was a tent. This was the best kind of dwelling for him as he often made long journeys with his flocks from place to place. He could easily take down his tent, and put it up again as he went about the country.
Abram, or Abraham as he was afterwards called, was not born in Canaan; God brought him from his own land to live there. Abraham trusted God and the Bible tells us that "he was called the Friend of God." God promised him that from his family or race the Saviour was to come. This was the great promise of God, and through it the greatest of all blessings was to be given to sinful man. It is said in the New Testament that Abraham saw, or foresaw, the day of Jesus, and was glad. He was glad there was a Saviour for his own soul, who would be a Saviour for all those who would believe in Him, in every age.
Abraham had two sons; one named Ishmael, and the other Isaac. Though these brothers had the same father, they did not have the same mother; Ishmael was the son of Hagar, and Isaac the son of Sarah. As Ishmael was much older than his little brother, he ought to have been kind to him, and set a good example. But he did not love him and was so full of spite that he mocked his brother Isaac. Perhaps he called him ill names, because he knew it had been promised to his father that he should be the father of a great nation.
Grieved by the bad conduct of his eldest son, and at the urging of his wife Sarah, Abraham sent the boy and his mother Hagar away. We do not know that he would have done so if God had not told him that He would take care of them, and also make this son the forefather of numerous tribes of people.
It was early in the morning when Ishmael and his mother were sent away from the tent of Abraham. A leathern bottle of water and some bread were given to them. They must have felt very sorry when they left such a good home as they had long enjoyed. The grief of Ishmael must have been the greater, as he knew it was his bad conduct which had led to their being sent away.
The outcast mother and her boy went toward the desert. As she was a native of Egypt she may have thought she could reach that country, and live among her own people. She had not traveled many miles before she came to a wild part of the country. What could she now do? She had lost her way, and went up and down the desert, and could find no one to guide her. In that part of the world there were no roads or paths, and the way was rough and painful, and the heat great.
At last they had drunk all the water from the bottle, and they could see no well or river from which they could again fill it. Ishmael was now weary with walking, and faint from thirst and the heat of the sun. He could not go on any farther. How sad was the state of the poor mother and her boy! In her distress, she cried, "Let me not see the death of the child." So she laid him under a shrub, and "sat down over against him, a good way off." She could not help him, but would not leave him to perish alone. Ishmael must now have known how foolish and wicked his conduct had been. He knew that he had brought himself and his mother into all this affliction, and he must have wished that they were once again in Abraham's tent. Sin will always bring us into trouble.
As the lad lay weeping and moaning, a voice was heard by Hagar. Where could it have come from? Could she be mistaken in the sound? No; in the stillness of the solitude an angel spoke to Hagar. He had been sent by
God to comfort her in her distress.
"Fear not," said he; "for God hath heard the voice of the lad where he is."
And "God opened her eyes," so that she saw a well not far off from where she sat. With new strength she rose from the ground, and with joy took her bottle to the well. Do not we think we see her, as soon as it is filled, hastening to her son, and before she tastes a drop herself, pressing it to his lips? See how she bathes his forehead with some of the cooling water, and, as she finds him revive, how gently she raises him in her arms and kisses him! When they were revived, they again filled their bottle for their journey, and went on their way. From that time "God was with the lad; and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness, and became an archer."
There is no further account of the early days of Isaac and Ishmael in the Bible. But there are lessons to be learned from this account of these two brothers:
When Isaac grew up to be quite a tall, strong youth, a very strange and wonderful thing happened to him. God came and spoke to Abraham, his father, and told him to take Isaac and go on a three day journey to a mountain, and there on the top to offer Isaac as a sacrifice.
You remember how much Abraham loved Isaac. He loved him more than words can tell. But Abraham loved God even more than he did his own son Isaac. Abraham was very sad, and could not make out what God meant by bidding him to do such a dreadful deed. But God had told him to do it, and that was enough for Abraham for his trust was in God. He knew that whatever God told him to do must be right.
The Bible tells us the story of what took place in very lovely and simple words.
"And Abraham rose up early in the morning, and saddled his ass, and took two of his young men with him, and Isaac his son, and clave the wood for the burnt offering, and rose up, and went unto the place God had told him. Then on the third day Abraham lifted up his eyes, and saw the place afar off.
"And Abraham said unto his young men, Abide ye here with the ass; and I and the lad will go yonder and worship, and come again to you. And
Abraham took the wood of the burnt offering, and laid it upon Isaac his son; and he took the fire in his hand, and a knife; and they went both of them together.
"And Isaac spake unto Abraham his father, and said, My father: and he said, Here am I, my son. And he said, Behold the fire and the wood: but where is the lamb for a burnt offering? And Abraham said, My son, God will provide Himself a lamb for a burnt offering: so they went both of them together.
"And they came to the place which God had told him of; and Abraham built an altar there, and laid the wood in order, and bound Isaac his son, and laid him on the altar upon the wood. And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. And the angel of the LORD called unto him of heaven, and said, Abraham, Abraham: and he said, Here am I. And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son from Me. And Abraham lifted up his eyes, and looked, and behold behind him a ram caught in a thicket by his horns: and Abraham went and took the ram, and offered him up for a burnt offering in the stead of his son." Genesis 22:1-14.
In old days, when anything wonderful took place, men named the spot in such a way as to tell what had been done there. So Abraham, glad and joyful as he was, called the name of the place where God had tried him, and found that at His command he was willing to give up even his dear son Isaac, Jehovah-jireh. These Hebrew words mean, the Lord will see, or will provide.
On the spot where Abraham built his altar and was about to kill Isaac, hundreds of years later the great and beautiful temple, was built: first by Solomon, then by Zerubbabel, and last of all rebuilt by wicked King Herod. Not far from that temple, Jesus on Mount Calvary was offered as the one great sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. You remember the hymn—
The Lord Jesus obeyed His Father's will and was "obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." And Isaac, as we just read, was obedient to his father, Abraham. So children today should obey God's Word and be obedient to their parents: "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right." Ephesians 6:1.
Copied and edited by Stephen Ross for WholesomeWords.org from The Children of the Bible. Chicago: Moody Press, [ca. 1900].
THE TWO BROTHERS, JACOB AND ESAU
IT had indeed been a shining road of happiness which Rebekah had trod since she had left her far distant home to become the wife of Isaac, and perhaps the greatest happiness of all had come when her twin babies were born, and they told her that God had sent her two little sons.
Now, although the babies were twins they were not in the least alike, and the older they grew the more different they became. Esau, the elder, was a big strong boy, fond of working in the open air, a keen  hunter, loving all kinds of out-of-door sports. He was rough-looking, too, beside his smooth-faced, gentle brother Jacob, who was a thoughtful, quiet boy, quite content to do indoor work, and caring very little for rough games or the excitement of hunting.
It was Jacob who was his mother's favourite. She had always loved him best. It displeased her to think that Esau with his rough ways and rough looks was to be lord of all, was to have his father's blessing as well as the birthright, and that Jacob, her quiet, beautiful boy, should have nothing. There was always an echo in her heart of God's words, "the elder shall serve the younger."
But if his mother loved Jacob best, it was on Esau that all his father's hopes and love were fixed. Isaac delighted in the wild adventures and strength of his hunter son. He loved the strong hairy hands which were so skilful in the use of weapons, and the rough looks of his son only filled him with pride. When Esau entered he brought with him the wild fragrance of the woods and hills which clung even to his clothes, and it rejoiced his father's heart.
In many ways it was Jacob who was the cleverer of the two boys; but it was this very cleverness which sometimes led him into crooked ways and taught him to take a mean advantage of his brother. So one day, when Esau had been out hunting and came home hungry and faint, Jacob offered him food, a dish of red pottage cooked and ready, if for it he would give up his birthright. Esau was too hungry and too careless to think what that meant. He did not indeed deserve the birthright if he was willing to give it away so easily. But he only thought how hungry he was, and that he might die if he did not have food, and so Jacob's crooked plan was successful.
Now, although Jacob had managed to get the birthright, there was something else he wanted, something which his mother, too, thought of day and night. Whichever of the two sons received their father's bless ing he it was who would be master of all, who would inherit all the good things, and carry on the family name. It was of this blessing that Jacob and his mother thought continually, and at last the time came when it must be decided once for all.
Isaac had grown very old and knew he had not much longer to live, and he called Esau, his beloved elder son, and told him to go out hunting and to prepare some venison for him, the special dish which he loved.
"Make me savoury meat, such as I love," he said, "that my soul may bless thee before I die."
 Rebekah, listening at the tent door, knew what that meant. She watched Esau set out to do his father's bidding, and then she called quickly to Jacob. There was not a moment to be lost. He must go at once to the flock that was feeding in the field close by, and bring her two kids. She would make of them the savoury meat, and he would then take the dish to his father and pretend that he was Esau. The poor old father was almost blind now; he would not be able to tell the difference.
But Jacob hesitated. He did not think it was a safe plan. Suppose that his father should touch him and feel his smooth skin. Why, he would know at once that it was not Esau.
"Go and do as I tell thee," said his mother. He might leave it all to her; she had planned everything. And after cooking the food, she took the hairy skins of the kids and put them on Jacob's hands and on his neck; and she dressed him, too, in some of his brother's clothes. Then she sent him in quickly to his father, with the smoking dish of savoury meat in his hands.
The blind old father could not see who it was, he could only stretch out groping hands to feel if this was really his son Esau. Somehow he had an uneasy idea that the voice did not sound like Esau's voice.
"Come near, I pray thee, that I may feel thee, my son," he said, "whether thou be my very son Esau or not."
Those groping hands felt carefully over Jacob's hairy neck and hands. Yes, it must be Esau, but he would make quite sure.
"Art thou my very son Esau? "he asked.
And Jacob answered, "I am."
The food was eaten, and again Isaac called his son to come near to him, and as Jacob bent down to kiss him the old man smelt the sweet earthy fragrance of Esau's borrowed clothes. That smell was a delight to him, and he blessed his son with a wonderful blessing.
"See, the smell of my son is as the smell of a field which the Lord hath blessed," he began, "therefore God give thee of the dew of heaven and the fatness of the earth."
Jacob was to be lord of all. The blessing was his now, and no one could take it away. He had only been just in time; the blessing was scarcely ended, and he had only just left the tent, when Esau came hurrying in.
Then the trick was discovered.
"Thy brother hath come with subtilty and taken away thy bless-  ing," said Isaac, trembling with grief. And when he heard that, there burst from Esau an exceeding bitter cry.
Surely that cry must have hurt his mother's heart, surely Jacob must have hated his own mean ways when he heard that terrible cry of grief.
Already his crooked ways were bringing their punishment. He dared not stay any longer in his home, but must flee away into a distant land, to his mother's people, where he would be safe from Esau's anger.
Alone in the desert, with only a stone for his pillow, he dreamed that God's angels came down the golden stairs of heaven to bring him a message of comfort; but there was little comfort for one who was banished from home, and who knew that he deserved his punishment. He repented sorely now, and God forgave him and allowed him to enjoy the blessing; but all his life he suffered for his deceit, and paid in sorrow for the evil he had done.
Brothers of Jesus
The brothers of Jesus is a designation based upon the New Testament's description of James, Joseph (Joses), Judas (Jude) and Simon as "brothers" of Jesus Christ. Also mentioned, but not named, are "sisters" of Jesus. Some scholars argue that these brothers, especially James, held positions of special honor in the early Christian church. Antidicomarianites and many critical scholars claim that these "brothers" and "sisters" refer to the biological children of Mary and Joseph. Followers of the Catholic, Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox traditions, as well as some Anglicans and Lutherans, accept the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary and therefore reject the claim that Jesus had blood siblings. They maintain that these "brothers" and "sisters" received this designation on account of their close association with the family of Jesus, but are actually either cousins or children of Joseph from a previous marriage.
In the third century blood relatives of Jesus, without explicit reference to "brothers" or "sisters", were called the desposyni, from the Greek δεσπόσυνοι, plural of δεσπόσυνος, meaning "of or belonging to the master or lord". The term was used by Sextus Julius Africanus, a writer of the early 3rd century.
Jesus' brothers and sisters
The Gospel of Mark (6:3)[ and the Gospel of Matthew (13:55–56)] are cited as evidence that James, Joseph (Joses), Judas, and Simon were the sons of Mary and of Joseph. Another verse in the Epistle to the Galatians, which says that James, "the Lord's brother", was the head of the congregation in Jerusalem, is taken to mean that James was the son of Mary and Joseph. Some scholars go on to claim that Jesus' relatives may have held positions of authority in the surrounding area.
That the children were children of both Mary and Joseph was accepted by some members of the early Christian church, including Tertullian. The orthodox later labelled upholders of this view as "Antidicomarianites" ("Anti-Mary"), when it was represented by Bonosus (bishop), Jovinian, and various Arian teachers such as Photinus. When Helvidius proposed it in the 4th century, Jerome, apparently representing the general opinion of the Church, maintained that Mary remained always a virgin; he held that those who were called the brothers and sisters of Jesus were actually children of her sister, another Mary, whom he considered the wife of Clopas. The terms "brothers" and "sisters" as used in this context are open to different interpretations, and have been argued to refer to children of Joseph by a previous marriage (the view of Epiphanius of Salamis), Mary's sister's children (the view of Jerome), or children of Clopas, who according to Hegesippus was Joseph's brother, and of a woman who was not a sister of Mary, the mother of Jesus (a modern proposal). Certain critical scholars say that the doctrine of perpetual virginity has obscured recognition that Jesus had siblings.
As church leaders
According to Robert Funk, the Gospel of Mark shows that Jesus' mother and brothers were at first sceptical of Jesus' ministry but later became part of the Christian movement. The biblical citation that Saint James ("the Lord's brother") presided over the Jerusalem church after the apostles dispersed is built on to presume that other kinsmen of Jesus' also exercised some leadership among neighbouring Christian communities. Christian communities were expelled from Jerusalem by the Jews with the founding of Aelia Capitolina (c.131).Traditionally it is believed the Jerusalem Christians waited out the Jewish–Roman wars (66–135) in Pella in the Decapolis. The Jerusalem Sanhedrin relocated to Jamnia sometime c.70.
At an earlier stage James is said to have been granted a special appearance by the resurrected Jesus. When Saint Peter, a leader of the church in Jerusalem left, it was James who became the principal authority and was held in high regard by the Jewish Christians. Hegesippus reports that he was executed by the Sanhedrin in 62.
Sextus Julius Africanus's refer
Eusebius has also preserved an extract from a work by Hegesippus (c.110–c.180), who wrote five books (now lost except for some quotations by Eusebius) of Commentaries on the Acts of the Church. The extract refers to the period from the reign of Domitian (81–96) to that of Trajan (98–117), and includes the statement that two Desposyni brought before Domitian later became leaders of the churches:
Degree of consanguinity between Jesus and his brothers
The etymology of the word "brother" (adelphos) originally comes from "of the same womb" ("a-delphys"), though, in New Testament usage, the Christian and Jewish meaning of "brethren" is wider. However, in Christian tradition there is disagreement from an early date over whether the Greek term adelphos referred to by these narratives are full brothers, half brothers, or merely stepbrothers. According to some scholars the most natural inference from the New Testament is that the adelphoi were children of Mary and Joseph born after Jesus. Tertullian, possibly Hegesippus, and Helvidius accepted this view. In reference to this it is occasionally noted that James (Jacob Iakobos) as oldest of the brothers takes the name of Joseph's father (also James, Iakobos in the Solomonic genealogy of Jesus in Matthew), when in Bible times the grandson occasionally gets the name of the grandfather.
The term "brother" (adelphos) is distinct in Greek from "cousin" (anepsios), and the second-century Christian writer Hegesippus distinguishes between those who were "cousins" of Jesus (anepsioi) and his "brothers."
Relationship of Jesus' siblings to Mary
By the 3rd century the doctrine of the perpetual virginity of Mary was well established and defended by Hippolytus, Eusebius and Epiphanius, important early Christian theologians. Much of the church therefore did not accept that Mary could have had any children apart from Jesus. Eusebius and Epiphanius held that these men were Joseph's sons from (an unrecorded) former marriage Jerome, another important early theologian, also followed the perpetual virginity doctrine, but argued that these adelphoi were sons of Mary's sister, whom Jerome identified as Mary of Cleopas. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church mentions that a modern scholar, whom it does not identify, has proposed that these men were the sons of Clopas (Joseph's brother according to Hegesippus) and Mary, the wife of Cleopas (not necessarily referring to Jesus' mother's sister).
The official Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox doctrine is that Mary was a perpetual virgin; this view was also held by many of the early Protestants, including Luther and Zwingli, as well as John Wesley, the 18th century Methodist leader. Indeed, the majority of early Christians seem to have left this doctrine completely unquestioned. The Roman Catholic Church, following Jerome, conclude that the adelphoi were Jesus' cousins, but the Eastern Orthodox, following Eusebius and Epiphanius, argue that they were Joseph's children by his (unrecorded) first wife.
Modern Protestants view the adelphoi as Jesus' half-brothers or do not specify, since the accounts in the Gospels do not speak of Mary's relationship to them but only to Jesus.
In the Book of Genesis, all the other sons of Jacob are repeatedly called brothers of Joseph, although they were children of different mothers. Similarly, in the Second Book of Samuel Tamar is described as a sister both of Amnon and of Absalom, though these were David's sons by different mothers.
A small number of early groups, notably some Ebionites, rejected belief in the virgin birth of Jesus and held that Joseph was the biological father of Jesus, making the brothers of Jesus full brothers.
Scholars of the Jesus Seminar suggest that the doctrine of Mary's perpetual virginity has impeded recognition that Jesus had full brothers and sisters.
Family trees and pedigrees
John J. Rousseau and Rami Arav present the following diagram of relationships in line with their view that the brothers and sisters mentioned were children of Joseph and Mary, whom they believe to have had marital relations in the at least twelve years that Joseph lived after the birth of Jesus, although the Luke 2 account of their journey to the temple when Jesus was twelve makes no mention of other children in the caravan.
__________________________________________ | | | | Mary=Joseph Cleopas=another Mary | | |______________________________________ | | | | | | | | Simeon | | | | | | | d. 106 Jesus James Joses Simon Sister Sister Jude d.62 | | Menahem Jude ____|____ | | | Elzasus James Zoker | ? Nascien | Bishop Judah Kyriakos fl.c.148-149.
James Tabor's theor
The following represents James Tabor's attempted reconstruction. The view has not found wide support among other scholars.
Matthat bar Levi | Eleazar | | Heli/Eliakim | | Matthan ________|____________ | | | | | | Mary + GOD = Joseph (1st) = Clophas (2nd) | | | _______________________|___________ Jesus | | | | | | 5 BCE- CE 28. | | | | | | James Jose Judas Simon Mary Salome d.CE 62 | d.CE 101 ____|____ | | | | Zechariah James alive in the reign of Domitian
Interpersonal relationship with Jesus in the New Testament
According to the Synoptic Gospels, and particularly the Gospel of Mark, Jesus was once teaching a large crowd near the home of his own family, and when this came to their attention, his family went to see him and "they" (not specified) said that Jesus was "... out of his mind."
In the narrative of the Synoptic Gospels, and of the Gospel of Thomas, when Jesus' mother and adelphoi are outside the house that Jesus is teaching in, Jesus tells the crowd that whoever does what God wills would constitute his mother and adelphoi. According to Kilgallen, Jesus' answer was a way of underlining that his life had changed to the degree that his family were far less important than those that he teaches about the Kingdom of God. The Gospel of John states that Jesus' adelphoi did not believe in him, because he would not perform miracles with them at the Feast of Tabernacles.
Some scholars have suggested that the portrayal in the Gospel of Mark of the initial rejection of Jesus by his family may be related to the tension between Paul of Tarsus and Jewish Christians, who held Jesus' family in high regard, for example at the Council of Jerusalem.
In popular culture
The idea of Jesus having relatives features in the following tales:
The Prodigal Son - Story Summary:The story of the Prodigal Son, also known as the Parable of the Lost Son, follows the parables of the Lost Sheep and the Lost Coin. Jesus is responding to the Pharisees' complaint: "This man welcomes sinners and eats with them."
Jesus tells the story of a man who has two sons. The younger son asks his father to give him his portion of the family estate as an early inheritance. Once received, the son promptly sets off on a long journey to a distant land and begins to waste his fortune on wild living. When the money runs out, a severe famine hits the country and the son finds himself in dire circumstances. He takes a job feeding pigs. He is so destitute that he even longs to eat the food assigned to the pigs.
The young man finally comes to his senses, remembering his father. In humility, he recognizes his foolishness, decides to return to his father and ask for forgiveness and mercy. The father who had been watching and waiting, receives his son back with open arms of compassion. He is overjoyed by the return of his lost son! Immediately the father turns to his servants and asks them to prepare a giant feast in celebration.
Meanwhile, the older son is not one bit happy when he comes in from working the fields and discovers a party going on to celebrate his younger brother's return. The father tries to dissuade the older brother from his jealous rage explaining, "You are always with me, and everything I have is yours."
Points of Interest from the Story:
• Typically, a son would receive his inheritance at the time of his father's death. The fact that the younger brother instigated the early division of the family estate showed a rebellious and proud disregard for his father's authority, not to mention a selfish and immature attitude.
• Pigs were unclean animals. Jews were not even allowed to touch pigs. When the son took a job feeding pigs, even longing for their food to fill his belly, it reveals that he had fallen as low as he could possibly go. This son represents a person living in rebellion to God. Sometimes we have to hit rock-bottom before we come to our senses and recognize our sin.
• The father is a picture of the Heavenly Father. God waits patiently, with loving compassion to restore us when we return to him with humble hearts. He offers us everything in his kingdom, restoring full relationship with joyful celebration. He doesn't even dwell on our past waywardness.
• Reading from the beginning of chapter 15, we see that the older son is clearly a picture of the pharisees. In their self-righteousness, they have forgotten to rejoice when a sinner returns to God. Bitterness and resentment keeps the older son from forgiving his younger brother. It blinds him to the treasure he freely enjoys through constant relationship with the father.
Questions for Reflection:
Who are you in this story? Are you a prodigal, a pharisee or a servant? Are you the rebellious son, lost and far from God? Are you the self-righteous pharisee, no longer capable of rejoicing when a sinner returns to God? Maybe you've hit rock-bottom, come to your senses and decided to run to God's open arms of compassion and mercy? Or are you one of the servants in the household, rejoicing with the father when a lost son finds his way home?
|THE MOTHER OF PRINCE WILLIAM AND PRINCE HARRY
The Aftermath Dream and Events
by Dee Finney
From Sean David Morton:
The current British royal family are imposters. The House of Windsor is a fraud. They are Asiatic/Mongols who usurped the true power of the Stewart clan in recent times, and in ancient times conspired with the Roman Catholics to commit Regicide and Theocide by murdering King Dagobert and his son Sigisbert. Sigisbert escaped with his sister to carry on the bloodline Even the flag of the Windsor's and the Prince of Wales is the Red Dragon which shows their descendence from CHINA, whose symbol is the same red dragon.
Windsor Castle is used by Queen Elizabeth II as her official residence and a flag flies above the castle when she is in residence. The State Apartments are the formal rooms which are used for ceremonial, official and state occasions
The "Birthright " of the Queen Mother, the mother of Elizabeth II, has been questioned since her birth, when it was widely known in England, that she was quite possibly the true daughter of one of the King's maids. All British birth certificates must be filed within 9 days of birth. The Queen Mum's was not filed for nearly 3 months, while a debate raged in the palace. The official excuse was that the Royal Family had simply "Forgot".
But the lineage of Lady Diana Spencer goes back to Charles II of the House of Stewart. The Stewarts are *TRUE* royalty, being direct descendents of The House of David of Judah, and Jesus and Mary the Magdalene. So, Diana's sons, William and Harry, have three-quarters true nobility in their blood, and everyone in England knows that Diana was of "Bluer" blood, and closer to the Royal Lineage than Charles or the rest of his Imposter Family.
St. George's cult in England began when the Crusaders returned from the Holy Land with tales of how King Richard "the Lionheart" had fought under his banner at the Siege of Antioch in 1098 and won a great victory. He became the "knight in shining armour" to which every young Englishman aspired. His tales of heroism became legendary and his exploits were gradually transferred from Palestine to England.
His most famous legend tells how he rescued a princess by slaying a dragon on a Berkshire hill. This fire-breathing monster had been terrorising the local townsfolk who had attempted to appease it with the daily sacrifice of a live sheep. When this tact failed, they turned to the local maidens. When the king's beautiful daughter was chosen for this fate, she went to her doom dressed as a bride. At the very last minute, St. George appeared on a white charger and won the day.
Over the centuries, St. George has been associated with six British kings. His cross, red on white, is flown as the flag of England. His emblem, the rose, which comes from Persia, is the symbol of the British Empire. And King George VI, during the Second World War, created the George Cross and George Medal as decorations for gallantry, second only to the Victoria Cross.
The beasts in St. George's Hall, Windsor Castle, were a Golden Wedding present to the Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh from the City of London. In the foreground can be seen a unicorn wearing a royal coronet as a collar, a lion royally crowned is in the background. The use of the lion and unicorn as supporters to the royal arms dates back to the accession of James VI (of Scotland) and I (of England) in 1603. (To the right can be seen part of the equestrian figure of the King's Champion. The Champion used to ride in to the Coronation Banqet in Westminster Hall to throw down his gauntlet and challenge anyone to deny the new sovereign. This ceremony ceased after George IV's coronation in 1821)
What are The Queen's Beasts?
Heraldic beasts have been depicted since medieval times as supporters in coats of arms, and carved stone figures of such creatures were widely used to decorate castles, palaces and public buildings, particularly in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. One example is the series of King's Beasts mounted on the bridge leading to the entrance of Hampton Court Palace - originally placed there to celebrate Henry VIII's marriage to Jane Seymour, the beasts were demolished in William III's reign and subsequently replaced in 1909. The figures on the bridge today date from 1950.
For the coronation of The Queen in 1953, a special series of ten heraldic beasts was devised and created to illustrate her ancestry. The beasts were 6 feet tall, and positioned at Westminster Abbey to mount guard over the place of The Queen's crowning. A set of The Queen's Beasts was carved in stone and these can be seen in the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew.
The ten beasts, and the shields they hold, portray The Queen's royal ancestry. The are: the lion of England supporting the royal arms of the United Kingdom; the griffin of Edward III holding the badge of the Royal House of Windsor; the falcon of the Plantagenets bearing the golden fetterlock badge of the House of York; the black bull of Clarence supporting the royal arms used from 1405 to 1603; the white lion of Mortimer holding a badge with the white rose of York; the Beaufort yale (a heraldic antelope able to swivel its horns to counter an attack from any side), representing the House of Lancaster, bearing a crowned portcullis badge; the greyhound of Richmond supporting a Tudor rose badge; the red dragon of Wales supporting the arms of the princes of North Wales; the unicorn of Scotland holding a shield of the old royal arms of Scotland; and the white horse of Hanover supporting the royal arms used from 1714 until 1800.
Other examples of royal heraldic beasts can be seen at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle, where 76 beasts of 14 different types are represented; known as the Windsor Beasts, they decorate the Chapel roof. Among the fourteen different types, there are six beasts unique to this Windsor series: the white swan of Bohun holds the arms of Bohun (the family of Henry IV's first wife Mary); the white hart of Richard II supports a shild depicting a badge of broom-pods (planta genista - a pun on the name Plantagenet); a silver antelope, wearing a golden circlet and chained, bears the arms of France and England quartered; the black dragon of the Earls of Ulster supports the red cross on gold of the de Burgh family, from whom the Yorkist kings were descended; and the unicorn of Edward III and the hind of Edward V hold vanes (a type of flag) rather than shields.
Prince William's Heraldry - (received on his 18th
Rather than showing off a driver’s license as proof of maturity and almost all-grown-up status, a royal displays a coat of arms.
And when the coat of arms of 18-year-old Prince William was unveiled Sunday, the son of the late Princess Diana made his first mark on the traditions of the royal family.
The Prince asked that a small, red scallop shell be incorporated into the design of his personal coat of arms. The shell has been a motif in the coats of arms of Diana’s ancestors, the Earls Spencer, since the 16th century, and was used by Diana in her own coat of arms.
Every member of the royal family gets to choose a way to personalize the royal arms a little bit. It’s called a “mark of difference.”
But William’s little shell is a big deal. Traditionally, the chosen mark of difference is derived from the symbols of the father’s side of the family, not the mother’s.
“It is a welcome innovation to incorporate maternal symbols into the royal family’s arms and it is something that Prince William and his family wanted to do,” said Peter Gwynne-Jones, who is responsible for royal heraldry. “In the fullness of time, Prince William’s arms will change, as the Prince of Wales’s shall, but a precedent has been set here that others in the royal family may well follow.”
The shell design appears four times in the coat of arms for the future king, wherever the “label” appears: on the shield, on the necks of the lion and the unicorn supporting the shield, and on the neck of the small lion device above the shield.
As heir to the heir of the throne, William’s label has three points. Other grandchildren of the monarch have labels with branches of five points.
Prince William’s arms also incorporate aspects of the royal arms used by his grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, and those of his father, Prince Charles. Both Charles and the Queen have approved William’s coat of arms, and a royal license is being drawn up to officially grant it to the Prince.