his tent", of the children of Hamor, at Shechem (Sychem in Acts 7: 16). Here Stephen

says that it was Abraham who bought this sepulcher, and this is an apparent contradiction

or discrepancy. When dealing with such ancient history, a little modesty on our part is

not out of place, for after all, how much do we know of the every day life and business

transactions of Abraham and Jacob? Let us remember that Stephen was "full of the Holy

Ghost", and that he was speaking to men who thirsted for his blood, and that had he made

the slightest slip, they would have pounced upon it at once. We do know that Abraham

built an altar at Shechem, and he does not appear to be the man to filch ground from the

Canaanite, even though the whole land was his by promise. There is every reason to

believe that both Abraham and Jacob bought pieces of ground at this spot sacred to so

many memories. It is further objected that Stephen was apparently confused, for he

makes Abraham buy the land of Emmor the son of Sychem, whereas it was Jacob who

did so. Here again we travel rather too fast. If we pick out such names as Pharaoh or

Abimelech from their context, can we not introduce confusion. Was it Abraham OR

Isaac that had dealings with Abimelech? the answer is that they both had dealings with

him. Should anyone say that Pharaoh was kind to Israel, yet Pharaoh sought to destroy

Israel, the obvious answer would be "Pharaoh is a title, not of one, but of many kings of

Hamor or Emmor was the name of the Princes of the Shechemites, and the title

persisted for at least 500 years after Jacob's time, see Judges 9: 28, even as does the

title Abimelech.

The emphasis upon Samaria as a chosen spot both by Abraham and the patriarchs was

a strong point in Stephen's speech, for he was the earliest advocate for spreading the truth

beyond the narrow confines of Judaism, and a young man who heard his burning words,

later lived and died to make that advocacy real.

The period of time between Abraham's death and Jacob's purchase was eighty-five

years, and by reason of his long absence, Jacob's title may have become obscure, and he

paid a fourth of the original sum in the way of a forfeit.

In Gen. 48: 22, we learn that Jacob not only paid for a parcel of ground in

Shechem, but that he also had to resort to force of arms to recover possession. Here

again a statement is made without further explanation, and we must therefore suppose

that Moses was speaking of that which was common knowledge in his day.

This leads us to the story of Joseph and the land of Egypt which must form the subject

of future articles.