There is a particular act in the bible that amazes me. It clearly states that abraham, (aproaching egypt) told his wife (sara) to say that she was his sister. In doing so the pharoah took her (sara) for his wife and COMPENSATED abraham with sheep servants silver etc.
genesis 12:11-16
So…after he left egypt he was a wealthy man.
He obviously found the venture a profitable one because he repeated the exercise on the king of gerar, with rewards of 1000 silver and lots of live stock as well
If I’m remembering the story correctly Abrahman told the Pharoah that so the Pharoah wouldn’t kill him out of jealously so that’s a pretty damn good reason.
So, yeah I mean I don’t really believe in the OT but from the context of the story he is a holy man. Just because the Pharoah awarded him for the beauty of his wife doesn’t take away from Abraham’s holiness, it’s not like Abraham demanded the giftsor anything like that.
He didnt award him for the beauty of his wife…he awarded him for her services.
And wether he asked to be rewarded or not the fact remains that after heleft Egypt he was a wealthy man…and than he repeated it.
If we assume that in egypt it was something that caught him by surprize …or any other excuse…why did he do it again with a different king?
It is quite possible that the event only happened once and the authors repeat two slightly different versions of it.
It is quite clear that Abraham SINNED by doing as he did, G-d punished the households of the kings.
Sarah WAS Abraham’s sister (half sister).
Abraham’s excuse was that he feared that he would be killed and Sarah taken anyway if they did not pretend to be siblings rather than spouses.
Some biblical scholars have suggested that the slavery of the Hebrews in Egypt was a punishment for Abraham’s sin against the king of Egypt.
One can be a righteous man and still make really bad decisions on occasion.
It was easily within the powers of the kings concerned to have Abraham killed, sarah enslaved and all of his possessions forfeited when the truth was revealed. They didn’t do so, which probably reflects some social mores that we’re unfamiliar with today.
It seems rather churlish of readers 3000 years after the event to make value judgements based on some probably inaccurate stories, when the victims of the crime seem happy to have let the perpetrator go unpunished.
1)It clearly states two different kings of two different kingdoms…and different circumstances
2)doesnt is sound very unfair that God punished the households of the kings for abrahams sin?
3)yes she was his sister which by todays standards we call it incest
4)Why would he fear death if God was his ally? They used to talk with each other regurlaly. Is self presevasion more important than the word of God?
5)If that was the case why did God promise him all the land he could see following these incidents? genesis 15:18
6)there is a difference between making a bad decision and using others for personal gain
I agree that it is unfair to try and disect a document of 3000 years ago with todays thinking…the only difference is that jewdaism, christianity and islam have this man as their father, and these scriptures as the way into heaven.
If these acts are wrong now they were wrong then also because for God good does not change into evil over time…as far as the bible is concerned good is good and bad is bad for always