Page 25 - BV15

25

No secular author, and no account or tradition known to us in any country,
professes to give that origin -- nor does the Bible do so in express terms. Can we, then,
frame any hypothesis that would account for the facts before us?

Most men, presumably, will allow that sacrifice was not a human invention, but a
divine institution appointed by YEHOVAH God. And if YEHOVAH appointed also that
some things were acceptable to Him as "clean" and others not so, is it reasonable to
suppose that He would have omitted directions about the quantity, or proportion in which
such things should be offered?

If, then, we may venture the hypothesis that YEHOVAH from the beginning
taught Adam that it was the duty of man to render a portion of his increase to his Maker,
and that that portion was to be not less than a tenth, then we shall see that thefacts
recorded in Genesis not only do not contradict such a supposition, but corroborate and
strengthen it.

The Septuagint version, then, would show an instance of covetousness in the
person of Cain, as does the Acts of the Apostles in the persons of Ananias and Sapphira,
each pretending to offer more than was really given, each attempting to deceive the
Almighty, and thus, in New Testament language, lying to the holy spirit, (Acts 5:3).

In accord with this theory, also, Abel's fuller sacrifice was accepted; and so
sacrifice and tithe-paying may be presumed to have continued all along the centuries to
the days of Noah. Then, when his descendants built cities in Babylonia and afterwards
became scattered, they would naturally take with them, among otherprimeval customs
and traditions, the offering of sacrifice and tithe-paying. And thus would be accounted
for, only a few centuries later, the existence of these customs as recorded in cuneiform
literature on the tablets we possess, as well as the information given us about tithe-paying
in the literatures of Egypt, Greece, and Rome.

It is not pretended that this hypothesis must be true, or that no other can be
advanced; but I am among those who think that it meets the facts of the case, and who
hold themselves ready to examine another theory if forthcoming. After this article was
written, my attention was called to Professor Cheynes articles on "Cain" and "Abraham"
in the Encyclopaedia Biblica (vol. I. 23, 260), which would make the accounts of these
two persons of later origin by several centuries than is generally received. But this does
not greatly affect the main purpose of my argument. Moreover, if Professor Petrie is right
in telling us that from three to four thousand years or more before Christianity appeared,
the ancient Egyptians repudiated, before the judgment of Osiris, sins such as "cutting
short the rations of the temples," "diminishing the offerings of the gods" and stealing
their property, then the story of Cain, as interpreted from the reading of the Septuagint,
has a striking resemblance thereto, and is thereby rendered more credible.

It may be objected, of course, that we do not read in Genesis of a law for the
payment of a tenth. This is no proof, however, that no such law had been given, seeing
there existed various laws in primeval times of which we have no written evidence now.