Introduction
The account of Abraham welcoming the three angels, if indeed that is what they are, and preparing and serving a sumptuous meal for them, has throughout the centuries been considered as a model of hospitality. The Biblical term for hospitality can be translated as an “ingathering of travelers.” Abraham and Sarah welcome three strangers into their tent. They bring the strangers into their home, into a circle of compassion and concern, where they nourish them by both food and kindness. Hospitality is timely, gracious, and abundant. It is undiscriminating and welcomes all who come. Hospitality in the scriptural sense incorporates all the acts of kindness that are prescribed or recommended in the Scriptures. It takes precedence even over prayer and spiritual exercises. Hospitality is closely associated with the covenant that God made with Abraham. In fact, it is a covenantal responsibility. Consequently hospitality must be understood in the context of social justice and right relationships.

First, let me tell you a story about another Abraham—Abraham Joshua Heschel—that I think provides a wonderful illustration of this Scriptural notion of hospitality. It was told by a professor who had been Heschel’s research assistant and close disciple for a number of years.

As was the custom, the members of Heschel’s seminar would escort him home after the late evening class he conducted in his smoke-filled room. Though the distance from the Seminary to Heschel’s home was only eight blocks, the trip usually took an hour. We would walk a few steps and he would turn and discuss a point with us for a few minutes, and we would repeat this process until we arrived at his apartment house.

One evening as we walked, a tall, young haggard-looking blond woman with two teeth missing, and with black welts under her eyes, approached us. She told us that she was unemployed and earned money as a prostitute, that her child was taken from her, that her husband used to beat her, and that she had recently been confined to a hospital which we all recognized as a hospital for the criminally insane. One of us offered her money, perhaps because that was what she wanted, or perhaps to get rid of her. Suddenly, Heschel took her arm, continued talking to her, and we all walked on. A block later we met a writer and her husband, both of whom knew Heschel. Heschel introduced us and the woman to his friend and to her husband, both of whom looked strangely at the woman and at Heschel. Heschel was undaunted. Holding her arm he said, simply, “She’s a friend. He began talking to the writer and to her husband. Then the woman put out her hand to him. With a tear in her eye, she said, “Thank you,” and continued walking down Broadway. (Sherwin 11).

Hospitality turns strangers into friends, and transforms our lives in the process.

Methodology
I want to discuss Abraham and in particular, the account of Abraham and the angels, which is found in Genesis 18:1-8, in some detail. First, I need to say something about my methodology. In dealing with the Scripture, I am going to rely heavily on midrash. A midrash may be defined as an independent literary creation that is based upon one or more biblical texts. It is not exegesis; rather, midrash presupposes exegesis (Gruber 72). The great Jewish philosopher, Maimonides, defined the midrash as an interpretation of a biblical text by means of a “poetical expression,” a “beautiful poetical phrase that teaches a moral lesson (Guide for the Perplexed Part III Chapter XLIII 354). Midrash is the “back story” of the Bible. It provides information about biblical stories that we have not been given. Midrash fills in the gaps. It considers the surface irregularities of the biblical text: something that does not quite make sense, that which is unusual, that which requires explanation (Carasik 34-35). Midrash may explain repetitions or omissions. Midrashic method requires close attention to the biblical text—to a single phrase, a single word, or even a single letter, even the size of the letter.

The authors and compilers of midrashim—which is the plural form of midrash— tried to understand the meaning of words, idioms, and metaphors. Modern scholars often find such interpretations helpful. They even cite the classical commentators on points of grammar and textual analysis. In applying a biblical text or texts to contemporary situations, and in seeking to find in these texts sources of illumination and inspiration, the midrashic method may be compared to lectio divina. From modern scholars we often learn interesting but relatively useless information that does not significantly impact our lives. Modern scholars, for instance, tell us that the account of Abraham and the angels is the work of the Yahwist, while the account of the covenant of circumcision is from the priestly source (Speiser 130). In contrast, midrash teaches us the meaning of hospitality and what it means to walk in the ways of God. For this, we look to the patriarch Abraham.

I want also to mention that I am using the midrash as found in the Talmud and in the large compilation known as Genesis Rabbah, as well as the works of classical commentators. These writers and compilers were all men, mostly medieval, who wrote in non-inclusive language. In addition, to understand their interpretations of the text requires a careful reading of the Hebrew Bible in the language in which is was written—including masculine pronouns where these occur. In what follows, I will be providing my own literal translation of the text.

Abraham
What kind of man was Abraham? The Mishnah describes him, and his disciples, as being of “a good eye, and a humble spirit, and a lowly soul.” (Pirkei Avot 5:19 Kehati 179; Hirsch 5:22 93). “A good eye” is the opposite of “the evil eye,” with which those of Mediterranean background would be familiar. One who has an “evil eye” is lustful, greedy, and envious, but one who has a “good eye” is content and satisfied with whatever God provides (Kehati 180). Such a one is not envious, but rejoices in the good fortune of others. One who has a “good eye” sees what is good and positive in others. Abraham is described as humble, modest, and undemanding (Hirsch 92).

We usually think of Abraham as a man of faith. A story that will sound very familiar to you is found in the Talmud:

Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan came also among them. And the Lord said unto Satan, “From where do you come?” And Satan addressed the Holy One, Blessed be He, “Sovereign of the Universe, I have traversed the whole world and found none as faithful as your servant Abraham. For you said to him, “Arise, walk through the land to the length and the breadth of it for to you I will give it,”—and even when he was unable to find any place in which to bury Sarah until he bought one for four hundred shekels of silver, he did not complain against your ways. Then the Lord said to Satan, “Have you considered my servant Job?—for there is none like him in the earth.” (B. Talmud Baba Bathra 15b).

Here Abraham is described by a Hebrew adjective that means reliable, faithful, trustworthy (BDB 53). The term implies faith in Providence, trust in God (Jastrow78). In this sense, we read in B. Talmud Sotah 48B: “R. Eliezer the Great declares: Whoever has a piece of bread in his basket and says, ‘What shall I eat tomorrow?’ belongs only to them who are little in faith.” The Hebrew noun emunah means firmness, faith, honesty, and surety, thus one conducts all business and personal transactions in good faith (Jastrow 76, 78). Amen, the word with which we end our prayers, is derived from it.

However, Abraham is not only faithful. The Talmud associates the quality of chesed with Abraham. Those who hold fast to the covenant of Abraham are to be “bestowers of lovingkindness” (B. Talmud Kethubot 8b). Chesed may be translated as grace, kindness, love, charity (Jastrow 486). Chesed refers especially to acts of kindness extended to the lowly and needy (BDB 338). [The Hebrew term for such actions is gamilut chasidim.] Such acts are a covenantal requirement. A Talmudic passage that is recited during the daily morning prayer says—and I use here the language that is given:

There are six things the fruit of which a man eats in this world, while the principal remains for him: hospitality to wayfarers, visiting the sick, meditation in prayer, early attendance at the Beit Hamidrash, the House of Study, rearing one’s sons to the study of the Torah, and judging one’s neighbor in the scale of merit. But is that not so? For we learnt: These are the things which man performs and enjoys their fruits in this world, while the principal remains for him in the world to come: Honoring one’s parents, the practice of loving deeds, and making peace between man and his fellow, while the study of Torah surpasses them all. (B. Talmud 127a).

The purpose of Torah study is, of course, not merely to know, but above all to practice.

Abraham is also termed a tzadik, a righteous man (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86b). The term refers to one who is virtuous, just, pious (Jastrow 1263). In the Sifra, Abraham is described as a tzadik because he resigned himself to God’s will, as when he said in Genesis18:27, “I am dust and ashes” (qtd Jastrow 1263; cf. also Genesis Rabbah 49:11 431). As a noun, tzadik can also meanpurity, equity, liberality, and hence almsgiving. In the midrash, this same noun refers to Abraham’s undiscriminating hospitality. Here the midrash cites Genesis 18:19, which reads, “For I have singled him out, that he may instruct his children and his posterity to keep the way of the Lord in doing justice and right, in order that the Lord may bring about for Abraham what he has promised him.”

In reference to this verse, the midrash comments that righteousness comes before justice. These terms are often considered antithetical. Justice, may be understood as a strict interpretation of the law, while righteousness implies patience and leniency (Genesis Rabbah 423 n 3). It is in this sense that the rabbis interpreted Habakkuk 2:4, “The righteous shall live by faith”—that is, they shall live by the law, not die by it. In B. Talmud Makkot 23b there is a discussion in which all six hundred thirteen commandments are reduced to this single verse. In the course of the discussion, a phrase from Psalm 15 “One who walks in righteousness” is counted as one of eleven commandments. This phrase is applied to “Abraham our father.”

Let us now consider some verses of the passage more closely.

“And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre.”
First, a bit about the location of this narrative. Abraham experiences his vision by the oaks of Mamre. The Hebrew word used here means either oaks or terebinths (BDB 47). The Jewish historian Josephus makes a reference to a famous oak near Hebron (Wars 4:533). He wrote, “There is also there shown, at the distance of six furlongs from the city, a very large turpentine tree; and the report goes that this tree has continued ever since the creation of the world; others call it an oak—very famous in all the past ages” (689; cf. in Ant. 1:186 (41).

Mamre may be the name of a place. It is identified with Hebron. We read in Genesis 13:18 (cf, also Genesis 35:27): “And Abram moved his tents and came to settle near the terebinth of Mamre, which is at Hebron. There he built an altar to the Lord.”

Mamre is a place near the cave in which Abraham is buried. We find in Genesis 49:30: “the cave in the field of Machpelah, facing Mamre in the land of Canaan, in the field that Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite for a burial ground.” (See also Genesis 50:13.)

But, having said all this, Mamre may not be the name of a place at all, but rather the name of a person. Elsewhere in Genesis (14:13, 24), Mamre is the name of an ally of Abraham: “And the Lord appeared to him”

This is the only example of the formula “the Lord appeared” being used where God does not make some verbal declaration immediately following. This is also the only theophany in the Hebrew Scriptures that is not accompanied by an act of worship or the building of an altar.

Why did the Lord appear to Abraham? The Talmud tells us that the Lord appeared in order to visit the sick person. It comes to this conclusion because this narrative follows immediately upon the account of the circumcision of Abraham, his son Ishmael, and all males of Abraham’s house. We read, “the Holy One Blessed be he, visited the sick, for it is written: And the Lord appeared to him at the oaks of Mamre: so do thou also visit the sick (B. Talmud Sotah 14a).” Also in the Talmud, “R. Hama bar Hanina said, ‘It was the third day since his circumcision, and the Holy One, Blessed be He, inquired about Abraham’s welfare’” (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86a). Here we see that the midrash speaks of God’s visiting the sick, and of other divine acts of mercy, in order to give us a model to imitate. The Talmud continues:

R. Hama son of R. Hanina further said: What means the text: You shall walk after the Lord your God? Is it then possible for a human being to walk after the Shechinah, for has it not been said: For the Lord your God is a devouring fire? But the meaning is to walk after the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed be He. As He clothes the naked, for it is written: And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skins, and clothed then, so you also clothe the naked. The Holy One, Blessed be He, visited the sick, for it is written: And the Lord appeared to him by the oaks of Mamre, so you also visit the sick. The Holy One, Blessed be He, comforted mourners, for it is written, And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that the Lord blessed Isaac his son, so you also comfort mourners. The Holy One, Blessed be He, buried the dead, for it is written, And he buried him—Moses—in the valley, so you also bury the dead. (B. Talmud Sotah 14a)

The Talmud refers here to Deuteronomy 13:4: “You shall walk after the Lord your God, and him shall you fear; his commandment you shall keep, and his voice you shall obey, you shall serve him and cleave to him.” The Talmud tells us, “Torah begins with an act of benevolence, for it is written: and the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife coats of skin, and clothed them; and it ends with an act of benevolence, for it is written, “And He buried him in the valley.”

The word translated in this passage as “attributes” is middot, which meansmanner, ways, character, nature, or condition. It is used of human as well as divine attributes, and in particular of the thirteen divine attributes listed in Exodus 34:6 ff. The term shekinah as used here means simply Divine Presence, holy inspiration (Jastrow 1573). It does not refer to the later Kabbalistic notions of the Shekinah, and much less does it refer to its contemporary distortions.

“as he sat by the opening of his tent in the heat of the day.”
Abraham was sitting by the entrance of his tent. The midrash tells us that Abraham’s tent was open at both sides so that he could see visitors coming from any direction (Genesis Rabbah 48:9 411). “The heat of the day” refers to noon, when the sun and the shade are equally hot (Genesis Rabbah 48:8 410). Why did not Abraham remain within the relative coolness of his tent? The Talmud explains (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86a):

The Holy One, Blessed be He, came to enquire after Abraham’s health; moreover, he drew the sun out of its sheath so that the righteous man (who is Abraham) should not be troubled with wayfarers. Abraham sent [his servant] Eliezer out to seek travelers, but Eliezer found none. Abraham said, “I do not believe you.” So Abraham himself went out, and saw the Holy One, blessed be He, standing at the door, thus it is written, “Pass not away, I pray you, from your servant.” But on seeing Abraham tying and untying the bandages of his circumcision, the Lord said, “It is not well that I stand here;” Hence it is written, And he lifted up his eyes and looked, and lo, three men stood by him, and when he saw them, he ran to meet them.

This heat is not normal noonday heat. The phrase that is usually translated “in the heat of the day” is more literally translated “as the heat of the day.” On this seemingly slim grammatical basis the medieval commentator Rashi explains that, to keep travelers away, the Lord made it an unusually hot day. But because Abraham was upset that there were no visitors, God brought the three angels to him in the form of men.

“And he lifted up his eyes and saw three men standing near him.”
The next verse poses a serious problem. First we are told that the Lord appeared to Abraham. Then we are told that Abraham saw three men: “And he lifted up his eyes and saw three men standing near him.” So then, who or what did Abraham see—the Lord or three men? There are at least two possible readings of this verse. In one reading, the angels and the Divine Presence are synonymous, and there is only one visitation. In another reading, there are two visitations, one divine and the other angelic. The difference is significant, as we will see.

The medieval commentator Rashbam interprets the narrative as a generalization and a specification. “Generalization and specification” is a principle of rabbinic exegesis. The opening verse, “And the Lord appeared to him” is considered a general statement, and the particulars of that statement are elaborated in the narrative that follows. Rashbam comments:

And the Lord appeared to him. How? By the coming to him of three men, who were angels. In many places where an angel appears, they read the word Shekhinah, as it is written, “My name is within him” (Ex. 23:21). And “an angel of the Lord appeared to him in the fire that came from the bush” (Ex. 3:2) “and the Lord saw that he turned aside to see” (Ex. 3:4).

Thus, for Rashbam the three messengers and the Deity are synonymous, and there is only one divine visitation. However, Rashbam is not consistent in his interpretation. In verse 13, we read, “But the Lord said to Abraham: ‘Why did Sarah laugh and say, “Shall I really bear a child, and I am old?”’” Rashbam interprets this verse to mean that Abraham addressed the most important of the three angels. Also, with regard to Genesis 18: 22, “The men turned their faces from there and walked toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord.” Rashbam comments that Abraham stood before the angel of the Lord to intercede.

Similarly, Maimonides, known as the Rambam, writes: “The general statement that the Lord appeared to Abraham is followed by the description in what manner that appearance of the Lord took place; namely, Abraham first saw three men; that he ran and spoke to them.” Thus for Rambam, too, there is only one visitation.

If there is one visitation, then the text teaches us that we meet God by doing acts of kindness, by fulfilling the commandments. This interpretation is indicated by the language of “lifting up the eyes.” This phrase is sometimes used to indicate an encounter with God. We find it in Psalm 121:1, “I lift up my eyes to the mountains; from where shall come my help?” We read also in Ps. 123:2, “Now as the eyes of servants on the hand of their masters, as the eyes of a maidservant on the eyes of her mistress, so are our eyes are on the Lord our God until he have mercy upon us.”

Both Rashbam and Rambam see this story as continuing from the previous chapter, and so relating to circumcision. Rambam, unlike other commentators, interprets the Lord’s appearance as a prophetic vision. (Guide of the Perplexed Part II, Chapter XLII p. 237).

Nachmanides, who is known as the Ramban, differs from Rambam in this regard. Ramban denies Abraham received a prophetic revelation in this account. In his interpretation, the Lord appears to Abraham only as a reward for his obedience in circumcising himself. Ramban comments:

The Torah narrates that the Lord appeared to Abraham while he was still recovering from his circumcision in order to inform us that no prophetic revelation was here involved. Abraham did not fall on his face nor pray. Nevertheless, this vision was given him purely as a mark of honor to him. A parallel to this may be found in Leviticus 9:23 where it is stated that “they went forth and blessed the people and the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people.” The people were rewarded by revelation of the Divine Presence (Shekhinah). In both cases this revelation was accompanied by no message nor command but constituted the reward for favorably accepted obedience to let them know that God had favorably accepted their deeds. (cf. Leibowitz 180).

Ramban refers to Leviticus 9:23, which reads in full, “Moses and Aaron went into the Tent of Meeting. When they left they blessed the people. Then the glory of the Lord appeared to all the people.” Ramban also cites Exodus 20:21, “An altar of earth you shall make for me, and upon it you shall sacrifice your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen. In any place that I choose for the remembrance of my name I will come to you and bless you.”

The same citation is found in the midrash (Genesis Rabbah 86:4): “Said R. Isaac: if I reveal myself to Moses who built an altar in My name, how much more to Abraham, who circumcised himself for My sake! Consequently, ‘And the Lord appeared to him,’ and so forth.”

Ramban agrees with both Rashbam and Rambam in that he sees this narrative as a continuation of the account of the circumcision. But he differs with both Rashbam and Rambam in that he does not see it as generalization and specification. Rather, Ramban regards it as two separate visits, the first being the honor of the Divine Presence and the second that of the three messengers. In his view the welcoming of the Divine Presence symbolizes the mystic enjoyment of direct communion with the Almighty. In the narrative, practical good deeds take precedence over spiritual enjoyment.

To explain this point further: we are told that Abraham rushed to fulfill the duty of hospitality to the three strangers. In doing so, Abraham acts in accord with the statement found in the Talmud:

Hospitality to wayfarers is greater than the welcoming of the presence of the Shekhinah, for it is written, “And he said, My lord, if now I have found favor in your sight, pass not away,” and so forth. R. Eleazar said: Come and observe how the conduct of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not like that of mortals. The conduct of mortals [is such that] an inferior person can not say to a great man, Wait for me until I come to you; whereas in the case of the Holy One, Blessed be He, it is written, and Abraham said, My Lord, if now I have found, and so forth. (B. Talmud Shabbath 127a; B. Talmud Shevuoth 33:a-b)

In this interpretation, Abraham left God in order to attend to the three travelers. Abraham apparently withdrew from an intimate divine encounter for the sake of his guests. The Talmud views this as a correct prioritization of values.

Textually, this interpretation is based on an alternate reading of the word usually translated “my lords.” In verse 3, “And he said, My Lord[s], if I have found favor in your eyes do not pass by your servant.” Depending on vowelization, this word can also refer to God. Rashi, following the discussion in the Talmud (B. Talmud Shevuot 35b), comments, “Alternatively, the term is sacred and he was telling the Holy One, Blessed be He, to wait for him while he would run and usher in the visitors.”

The contrasting interpretations of the biblical narrative show a tension between the fulfillment of ethical commandments and communion with God. If two visitations took place, then Abraham told the Lord to wait for him while he attended to his three guests. In this case the question inevitably arises: how do we understand the perhaps conflicting demands of prayer and hospitality? Which takes precedence? Is one more important than the other? Or is God encountered through the actual performance of good deeds?

The Genesis account also tells us about the quality of Abraham’s hospitality. As already mentioned, Abraham rushed to fulfill the needs of his guests. There is a motif of Abraham’s haste and eagerness in Genesis 18: 2, 6, and 7. Forms of the words “hurry” and “run” appear five times in the text. “And he lifted up his eyes, and three men were standing near him, and when he saw them he ran to meet them from the door of the tent and he bowed down to ground.” “And Abraham hastened to the tent to Sarah and said Hurry three seah of fine flour, knead it, and make cakes.” “And Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf tender and good and he gave it to the young man, and he hurried to prepare it.”

Abraham has Sarah prepare bread for the three men. He says, “I will fetch a morsel of bread that you may strengthen your heart” (Genesis 18:5). (Rashi follows the midrash in his interpretation.) The midrash says of this verse: “R. Isaac said: In the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings we find that bread strengthens the heart. In the Torah, ‘I will fetch a morsel of bread that you may nourish your heart.’ In the Prophets: ‘Stay your heart with a morsel of bread’ (Judges 19:5). In the Writings, ‘And bread strengthens a human heart’ (Psalm 104:15)” (Genesis Rabbah 48:11 312).

Moreover, the Biblical text specifies that Sarah made the bread of choice flour, the type of which meal offerings were later brought to the sanctuary. Of this we read in Leviticus 2:1, “When anyone brings a meal offering to the Lord, his offering must consist of fine flour.”

“And Abraham ran to the herd, and took a calf tender and good, and he gave it to the young man, and he hurried to prepare it.”
The phrase “a calf, tender and good” is understood in more than one way. The midrash comments on the phrase “took a calf”: “You might think that it was full-grown; therefore tender is stated. If ‘tender’ you might think that it was lacking [in flavor]; therefore ‘and good’ is stated. ‘And gave it to the lad’: this was Ishmael, Abraham’s purpose being to train him in good deeds” (Genesis Rabbah 48:13 414). Based on the grammatical construction of the phrase, the Talmud interprets the phrase “a calf, tender and good” to mean that Abraham took three calves. Why? “In order to serve them three tongues with mustard”—a great delicacy at the time (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86b). (Rashi follows the Talmud here.)

The meal is completed by curds and milk, which corresponds to modern yogurt. Milk was regarded as a source of vitality, and was considered to possess curative powers (Sarna 129). Now, the curds and milk served with veal poses a problem with regard to Jewish dietary laws, which require the separation of meat from milk. Therefore the Talmud explains the verse “And he took butter and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them.” According to the Talmud this verse means “Each, as soon as it was ready, was brought before them” (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86b). Thus the meal was served in stages. The curds and milk were served before the meat, to quench the thirst of the travelers.

The Talmud regards the meals of Abraham as superior to those of Solomon. Solomon’s provisions were distributed to his one thousand wives, each of which prepared meals in her own house (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 86b).

To further understand Abraham’s extraordinary hospitality toward his angelic guests, we may ask whether or not Abraham knew that his guests were actually angels. If Abraham was aware that they were angels, or if, as the Renaissance commentator Sforno thought, they were the messengers of some king, then Abraham’s rush to perform kindness might be expected. The classical commentators disagree on this point. There is, of course, a midrash on this, concerning three great rabbis eating a meal with one even greater, Rabban Gamaliel. This Gamaliel may be Gamaliel II, who was the grandson of the Gamaliel we read of in Acts. He was head of the assembly at Yavneh that took the place of the Sanhedrin after the destruction of the Temple (Neusner 153-158).

Three rabbis, Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Tzadok were sitting at a banquet in the house of the son of Rabban Gamaliel. Rabban Gamaliel poured a drink for Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Eliezer did not want to accept it. When he poured a drink for Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Yehoshua accepted it. So Rabbi Eliezer said to Yehoshua, “What is this, Yehoshua, that we are sitting and Rabbi Gamaliel is standing and serving?” Rabbi Yehoshua said to him, “Let him serve. Abraham, the greatest person in the world, served the angels, whom he perceived to be idol worshippers. Is it not a kal v’homer (an a fortiori argument, from the greater to the lesser)? Abraham, who was the greatest in the world, served the angels whom he perceived to be idol worshippers—then shouldn’t Rabbi Gamaliel serve us? (Sifri Ekev 11:10 Lebowitz 4)

Only after Abraham exercised hospitality did he discover the identity of his guests.

What the Narrative Teaches
There are a number of lessons to learn from this narrative. First, one should seek out the opportunity to welcome guests, not merely wait for them to arrive. This lesson is derived from the specific mention of the “heat of the day.” Second, one should be sensitive to the feelings and needs of one’s guests. The medieval commentator Ralbag derives this lesson from the language that Abraham uses in inviting the angels to stop by his tent: “And he said, My lords, if I have found favor in your sight, do not pass from your servant” (Genesis 18:4). Abraham makes it appear that his guests are doing him a favor by accepting his hospitality. Third, one’s acts of kindness should not cause discomfort or embarrassment to the guest. Because his guests seemed pressured to be on their way, Abraham rushed to prepare food for them. Perhaps most helpful, the Talmud teaches, “It is written, ‘And I will fetch a morsel of bread’; but it is also written, ‘And Abraham ran to the herd.’ Said R. Eliezer: This teaches that righteous men promise little and perform much; whereas the wicked promise much and do not perform even little” (B. Talmud Baba Metzia 87a).

Outside the Book of Genesis, most references to Abraham identify God as the “God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob,” or speak of the covenant of promise or to the people of Israel. In the New Testament, St. Paul uses him as an example of faith (Romans 4:1-22). We read, for example, in Romans 4:1-3, “What then are we to say was gained by Abraham, our ancestor according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness.’" Here St. Paul understands righteousness in the sense of justified. Paul mentions Abraham in the course of his polemics against the Law of Moses, in his efforts to extend the covenant to the Gentiles. Similarly, we read in Galatians 4:6-9:

Just as Abraham "believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness," so, you see, those who believe are the descendants of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, declared the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, "All the Gentiles shall be blessed in you." For this reason, those who believe are blessed with Abraham who believed.

St. James also uses Abraham in a polemical fashion in his discussion of faith and good works: “Was not our ancestor Abraham justified by works when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was brought to completion by the works. Thus the scripture was fulfilled that says, ‘Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,’ and he was called the friend of God.” St. James cites Isaiah 41:8, “And you Israel my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen, the seed of Abraham, my friend.” The word translated as “friend” actually means “my beloved.”

The author of the letter to the Hebrews uses Abraham as an example of faith and obedience: “By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to set out for a place that he was to receive as an inheritance; and he set out, not knowing where he was going” (Hebrews 11:8). And again, “By faith Abraham, when put to the test, offered up Isaac. He who had received the promises was ready to offer up his only son” (Hebrews 11:17). In the New Testament, only the Letter to the Hebrews refers to Abraham’s hospitality: “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by doing that some have entertained angels without knowing it” (Hebrews 13:2). I find no mention in the New Testament to Abraham’s faithful love and acts of kindness. A case can be made that argument has diminished the perception of Abraham in the New Testament.

To be sure, Abraham should be acknowledgded for his obedient faith. But he should also be recognized for for his mercy and compassion, and for his lavish hospitality toward strangers. He did not perceive the three travelers to be of his tribe or religion. Do we, like him, welcome the homeless wanderers?

WORKS CITED

Babylonian Talmud. CD-ROM edition. London: The Soncino Press Ltd., 2001.

Bereishis Genesis. With Rashi’s commentary translated, annotated, and elucidated by Rabbi

Yisrael Isser Zvi Herczeg. The Artscroll Series. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications, Ltd., 1995.

Brown, F., S. Driver, and C. Briggs. The Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Peabody, MA: 2001.

Carasik, Michael. “midrash: The Story Behind the Story.” The Solomon Goldman Lectures. Vol. VIII. Ed. by Dean Philip Bell and Hal M. Lewis. The Spertus Institute of Jewish Studies Press. Chicago: 2003. pp. 33-50.

Chapters of the Fathers. Translation and Commentary by Samson Raphael Hirsch. Jerusalem: Feldheim Publishers, 1989.

Gruber, Mayer I. “The midrash in Bliblica Research.” The Solomon Goldman Lectures: Perspectives in Jewish Learning. Vol. 2. Ed. by Nathaniel Stampfer. The Spertus College of Judaica Press. Chicago: 1979. pp. 60-80.

Jastrow, Marcus. Dictionary of the Targumim, Talmud Bavli, Yerushalmi, and midrashic Literature. New York: The Judaica Press, Inc., 1996.

Leibowitz, Nehama. New Studies in Bereshit Genesis. Jerusalem: Eliner Library, n.d.

---. “Avraham Welcomes the Angels.” The Loookstein Center. www.lookstein.orgnechama_parasha8.vayera.htm 5 29 2007.

Maimonides, Moses. The Guide for the Perplexed. Trans. M. Friedlander. New York: Dover Publications, 1956.

midrash Rabbah. Genesis I. Trans. With Notes, Glossary, and Indices under the editorship of Rabbi Dr. H. Freedman and Maurice Simon. London: The Soncino Press, 1939.

Mishnah: Avot. A New Translation with a Commentary by Rabbi Pinhas Kehati. Jerusalem: Eliner Library, n.d.

Neusner, Jacob, ed. Dictionary of Ancient Rabbis. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2003.

Sherwin, Byron L. “A Minyan of Years—and Tears.” Conservative Judaism, Vol 36 (2). Winter, 1982. Pp. 9-12.

Speiser, E.A. Genesis. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. The Anchor Bible. Garden City, NY: 1964.

The JPS Torah Commentary: Genesis. Commentary by Nahum M. Sarna. Philadelphia, New York, Jerusalem: The Jewish Publication Society, 1989.

Mikraos Gedolos Sefer Bereishis. Brooklyn, NY: Hamo’or. 1990.