The Circumcision Covenant

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

I've just been rereading Genesis for some other purpose and came across something interesting regarding the second Abrahamic Covenant.

Genesis 17 states (NET): Abraham took his son Ishmael and every male in his household (whether born in his house or bought with money) and circumcised them...

Now I've not really noticed this before, but from a few chapters earlier there were at least 318 men.

So there was a lot of circumcision going on.... but these weren't descendants of Abraham... or were they?

Chapter 15:2-3 implies that before the birth of Ishmael, one of these servants was considered Abram's heir.

So what happened to the descendants of these 300? Would they have served Isaac and his descendants also and somehow ended up in Egypt. Or did they stay around in Canaan, along with the descendants of Esau?

Any ideas?

 

[Clare73]

I've just been rereading Genesis for some other purpose and came across something interesting regarding the second Abrahamic Covenant.
Genesis 17 states (NET): Abraham took his son Ishmael and every male in his household (whether born in his house or bought with money) and circumcised them...

Now I've not really noticed this before, but from a few chapters earlier there were at least 318 men.
So there was a lot of circumcision going on.... but these weren't descendants of Abraham... or were they?
Chapter 15:2-3 implies that before the birth of Ishmael, one of these servants was considered Abram's heir.

With no children of his own, nor other family in the land, he probably intended to leave it all to his faithful servant, or head servant.

So what happened to the descendants of these 300?

They would belong to Abrahamm who probably left them to Isaac.

Would they have served Isaac and his descendants also and somehow ended up in Egypt.

Probably.

Or did they stay around in Canaan, along with the descendants of Esau?

They would not have stayed in Canaan in a famine.
The descendants of Esau probably did not either.

When Egypt made slaves of the Hebrews, they probably lost ownership of the servants, which went to Egyptians.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

With no children of his own, nor other family in the land, he probably intended to leave it all to his faithful servant, or head servant.

They would belong to Abrahamm who probably left them to Isaac.
Probably.

They would not have stayed in Canaan in a famine.
The descendants of Esau probably did not either.

Thanks,

I guess what I am really interested in is how they fit into the Abrahamic Covenant and whether they are still with the Israelites in Egypt. If the latter are they part of the Mosaic Covenant also?

 

[ralliann]

I've just been rereading Genesis for some other purpose and came across something interesting regarding the second Abrahamic Covenant.

Genesis 17 states (NET): Abraham took his son Ishmael and every male in his household (whether born in his house or bought with money) and circumcised them...

Now I've not really noticed this before, but from a few chapters earlier there were at least 318 men.

So there was a lot of circumcision going on.... but these weren't descendants of Abraham... or were they?

Chapter 15:2-3 implies that before the birth of Ishmael, one of these servants was considered Abram's heir.

So what happened to the descendants of these 300? Would they have served Isaac and his descendants also and somehow ended up in Egypt. Or did they stay around in Canaan, along with the descendants of Esau?

Any ideas?

I think the servants of his household were inherited.
Of servants...
Ex 21:3 If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. {by himself: Heb. with his body }
Ex 21:4 If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master’s, and he shall go out by himself.
Ex 21:5 And if the servant shall plainly say, I love my master, my wife, and my children; I will not go out free:

 

[Clare73]

Thanks,

I guess what I am really interested in is how they fit into the Abrahamic Covenant and whether they are still with the Israelites in Egypt. If the latter are they part of the Mosaic Covenant also?

They were part of the covenant people, the earthly blessings and benefits of being among them, by right of being in Abraham's household.
If no longer in Abraham's household, I'm not sure how they would benefit from being in the covenant people.

If the latter are they part of the Mosaic Covenant also?

If they were in Sinai with Moses, they would have the same involement as members of a Jewish household did in Egypt or Canaan in the Abrahamic covenant.

Or they could accept the conditions of the covenant of Sinai and become a spiritual Jew.

What say ye?

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

They were part of the covenant people, the earthly blessings and benefits of being among them, by right of being in Abraham's household.
If no longer in Abraham's household, I'm not sure how they would benefit from being in the covenant people.

If they were in Sinai with Moses, they would have the same involement as members of a Jewish household did in Egypt or Canaan in the Abrahamic covenant.

Or they could accept the conditions of the covenant of Sinai and become a spiritual Jew.

What say ye?

If no longer in Abraham's household, I'm not sure how they would benefit from being in the covenant people is precisely what I am asking

Ultimately it doesn't matter as we are all descendants of Abraham in the New Covenant, but I just thought it interesting. I shall read on and see if I can come up with a viable solution.... though I think you are correct that they likely would have been subsumed into Egyptian life as a result of the Famine.

 

[Fervent]

If they were in Sinai with Moses, they would have the same involement as members of a Jewish household did in Egypt or Canaan in the Abrahamic covenant.

Or they could accept the conditions of the covenant of Sinai and become a spiritual Jew.

What's the basis of these statements?