ST. CATHARINES CONCORDIA - Brock University

John R. Wilch: ABRAM IN EGYPT: SINNER OR SAINT? 17
13
could return to Canaan. This was the plan enacted by Simeon ;uid Levi against
Shechem in order to spare their sister Dinah (Gen. 34: 13-17); and the attempt of Laban
14
on behalf of his sister Kebeltah (2455). In the latter case, the plan backfired when
Kebekah frcclg consentcd to thc proposal of marriage on behalf of Isaac (24:58). In
Abram's case, his plan misfired when Pharaoh himself who. especially in ancient
Egypt, was the one person who could not be denied, bypassed lormal negotiations and
simply took Sarai to bc his wife.'' Thus it may bc prcsumcd that Abram hoped to be
able to prevent Sxai from actually falling into the hands of the Egyptians. That is,
humanly speaking, it was the hest clever scheme he could devise, li)r he lacked the
direct promise of a miracle from God. But as an alien in Egypt, Abram had no legal
rights ~ md so could not prevent Pharaoh's unjust taking of Sarai.
Whethcr Abram should tcll thc wholc truth to the Egyptians or whether he should
try to protect hin~self and Sarai, both alternatives involve some evil. The question is,
which is the lesser one? Our choices in lilt: are rarely black and white.16 Thus, John
Calvin generalizes that no action is so pcrfect as to bc absolutely frcc from all stain. 17
E. Edwxd Hackmaim likewise stated: "We cannot look to ourselves and say that
anything we do is good."'8 lather, too, identifies Abram's action as lying, but,
following Augustine's threefold definition of lies, as a "ministering lic." Such a lie is
defensible because it hinders the devil and preselves life, and therefore is not to be
19
classificd as a malicious lie. Dietrich Bonhoeffer agrees in principle, but objects that
a "ministering lie" should be called a lie at all. For a lie, properly understood, "is a
deliberate deception of another man to his detriment ..." 1f deception of the enemy in
warfare is included in this dcfinition, "the lie thercby acquires moral sanction and
justification ...lt It "is unwise to generalize and extend the use of the term so that it can
bc applied to every statement which is formally untrue. ,,20
Abram's critics accuse him variously that hc uscd a prcvarication, stratagem,
scheme or ruse, that he was guilty of duplicity, trickery, subterfuge or deception, that
A Comnlenta~y on the Book of Genesis: Part 11: From Nooli to Ahmhmr, tr. I. 4hvahains (Iclusalcm: Magncs,
1964) 350; see Bruce Vawter, 4 Poth TIuuugh Grnesis (Yew Yol-l