SIXTEENTH DISPUTATION. Whether Thare, the father of Abraham, was at any time a worshipper of false gods — Commentaries and Disputations on Genesis, Volume II

LatineEnglish

SIXTEENTH DISPUTATION. Whether Thare, the father of Abraham, was at any time a worshipper of false gods.¹

DECIMA SEXTA DISPUTATIO. Utrum aliquando Thare pater Abrahae falsorum deorum cultor fuerit.

EX occasione eorum quae proximè disputavimus, offert se nobis alia quaestio, dignissima profecto quae cum cura tractetur & explicetur: Num Thare aut etiam Abraham dediti aliquando fuerint idolatriae; an potius vel ambo, vel certe Abraham, semper verum Deum coluerint. Primò igitur id disquiramus de Thare, tum de Abraham.

From the occasion of what we have just disputed, another question presents itself to us, most worthy indeed to be treated and explained with care: Whether Thare, or even Abraham, were at any time given to idolatry; or rather whether both, or at least Abraham, always worshipped the true God. First, then, let us inquire this concerning Thare, then concerning Abraham.²

AC à Thare quidem non tantùm falsos deos coluisse, sed etiam flagrantissimum cultorem Idolorum & acerrimum fuisse oppugnatorem eorum qui ab idolatria abhorrebant, Hebraei senserunt, ut Traditio eorum, quam superiori disputatione tractavimus, manifestè declarat. Epiphanius quoque in hac videtur fuisse sententia. Nam sub initium eius operis quod scripsit adversus haereses, docet tempore Sarug (qui avus fuit Thare) coeptam esse inter homines idolatriam: Velut, inquit, cognitio quae ad nos devenit habet. Nondum autem id [erat] in statuis aut in sculpturis lapidum aut lignorum, aut ex argento & auro aliave materia factis, sed solùm per colores & imagines; hominis mens in se ipsa malitiam excogitavit, & per liberum arbitrium rationisque ac mentis vim pro bonitate iniquitatem reperit. Nascitur ipsi Sarug filius Nachor, Nachor autem genuit Thare. Hinc fieri coeperunt statuae ex luto & arte figulari per industriam huius Thare. Et tunc primùm ex prioribus hominibus filius ante patrem mortuus est: nam priùs patres ante filios vitam finiebant, & filios successores relinquebant. Nec obiiciat quispiam Abel: neque enim ille propria morte defunctus, sed à fratre interemptus est. Primus igitur Thare aemulum Deo per propriam versutiam Idolum commentus erexit; sed similia his quae fecerat recepit, quia etiam ipse per proprium filium ad aemulationem provocatus est. Unde admiratione ducta divina scriptura hoc annotavit, dicens: Et mortuus est Aran in conspectu Thare patris sui, in terra nativitatis suae. Hactenus ex Epiphanio.

And that Thare not only worshipped false gods, but was a most ardent worshipper of idols and a most bitter assailant of those who abhorred idolatry, the Hebrews held — as their Tradition, which we treated in the previous disputation, manifestly declares. Epiphanius too seems to have been of this opinion. For at the beginning of the work he wrote against heresies, he teaches that in the time of Sarug (who was the grandfather of Thare) idolatry began among men: “As,” he says, “the knowledge which has come down to us has it. But it was not yet in statues, or in carvings of stones or woods, or made of silver and gold or other material, but only through colors and images; the mind of man devised malice in itself, and through free will and the force of reason and mind found iniquity instead of goodness. To Sarug himself is born a son Nachor, and Nachor begot Thare. Hence statues began to be made of clay and by the potter's art through the industry of this Thare. And then for the first time, among the earlier men, a son died before his father: for before, the fathers ended their life before their sons, and left sons as successors. Nor let anyone object Abel: for he did not die his own death, but was slain by his brother. First, therefore, Thare, by his own craftiness, devising an Idol, set up a rival to God; but he received the like of what he had made, because he too was provoked to grief through his own son. Whence the divine scripture, led by wonder, noted this, saying: ‘And Aran died in the sight of Thare his father, in the land of his nativity.’” Thus far from Epiphanius.³

CONSIMILIA horum tradit Suidas, ut mihi quidem ille mutuatus videatur ex Epiphanio. In vocabulo enim Abraham, testimonio Philonis Iudaei confirmat cultum imaginum à Sarug viguisse usque ad Thare patrem Abrahae; qui [Abraham] patrem suum Thare gravissimis verbis de fabricatione & cultu Idolorum coarguit, eiusque…

Similar things Suidas hands down — so that to me indeed he seems to have borrowed from Epiphanius. For in the entry ‘Abraham,’ by the testimony of Philo the Jew, he confirms that the worship of images flourished from Sarug down to Thare the father of Abraham; and that Abraham reproached his father Thare with very grave words concerning the fabrication and worship of Idols, and his…⁴

…simulacra partim confregit, partim exussit. Idem Suidas in vocabulo Saruch ad hunc modum scribit: Saruch defunctos praestantes viros quotannis adorari iussit, tanquam adhuc viventes, & memoriam eorum celebrari, & in sacros commentarios referri, & deos eos iudicari tanquam benefactores.

…[Abraham] partly broke, partly burned the images [his father's idols]. The same Suidas, in the entry ‘Saruch,’ writes thus: “Saruch ordered eminent dead men to be worshipped yearly, as though still living, and their memory to be celebrated, and to be entered into sacred records, and that they be judged gods as benefactors.”⁵

HINC orta est Idolatria, & usque ad Thare patrem Abrahae duravit. Is enim statuarius fuit, qui ex diversa materia imagines faceret, easque ut deos adorandas diceret tanquam benefactorum auctores. Inde orta opinio haec plerasque nationes pervasit, maximè verò Graeciam. Hi enim errorem cùm iam accepissent, & Hellenem venerabantur gigantem è filiis Iaphet oriundum, & condendae turris socium, ob quam linguae hominum sunt divisae, ipsique ex eo dicti sunt μέροπες, id est, divisi. Haec prodit Suidas. Quae quidem etiam firmari possunt testimonio Iosue, cuius scriptum est in libro eius capite vigesimo quarto, in oratione novissima quam habuit ad populum Hebraeum, his verbis exorsus: Haec dicit Dominus Deus Israel, trans flumen habitaverunt patres vestri ab initio, Thare pater Abraham & Nachor, servieruntque diis alienis. Hinc liquidò apparet Thare deditum fuisse Idolatriae, & alienos ac falsos deos coluisse.

Hence arose Idolatry, and it lasted down to Thare the father of Abraham. For he was a statue-maker, who made images out of various material, and said they were to be worshipped as gods, as authors of benefits. Thence this opinion, having arisen, pervaded most nations, but especially Greece. For these, when they had now received the error, also venerated Hellen, a giant sprung from the sons of Iaphet and an associate in building the tower (on account of which the tongues of men were divided, and from which they themselves were called μέροπες, that is, ‘divided’). These things Suidas reports. Which indeed can also be confirmed by the testimony of Joshua, whose [words] are written in his book, chapter twenty-four, in the last oration which he made to the Hebrew people, beginning with these words: “Thus says the Lord God of Israel: Beyond the river your fathers dwelt from the beginning, Thare the father of Abraham and Nachor, and they served strange gods.” Hence it clearly appears that Thare was given to Idolatry, and worshipped strange and false gods.⁶

VERUM huic opinioni contraria est Beati Augustini sententia. Is enim libro decimo sexto de Civitate Dei capite decimo tertio quaerit cur, cùm Thare discessit è Chaldaea & venit in Mesopotamiam ducens secum filium suum Abraham & Lot filium filii sui Aran & Saram nurum suam uxorem Abrahae, cur (inquam) non etiam tulerit secum Nachor filium suum? Respondet Augustinus Thare cum aliis fugisse Idolatriam, & propter eam insectationem Chaldaeorum; at verò Nachor idolatriae deditum ibi remanere voluisse: sed postea tamen etiam ipsum, derelicta Chaldaea, venisse in Mesopotamiam, & habitavisse in urbe Charran ubi Thare & frater Abraham habitaverant, perspicuè docet liber Geneseos capite vigesimo secundo. Sed audiat lector Augustini verba: Cur, inquit, Scriptura non dixit etiam Nachor una cum Thare patre suo & Abraham fratre suo discessisse ex Chaldaea & venisse in Mesopotamiam? Cur putamus, nisi forte quod à paterna & fraterna religione descivisset & superstitioni adhaesisset Chaldaeorum? Et postea inde, sive poenitendo sive persecutionem passus, & ipse migraret.

But contrary to this opinion is the opinion of blessed Augustine. For he, in the sixteenth book of the City of God, chapter thirteen, asks why, when Thare departed from Chaldea and came into Mesopotamia leading with him his son Abraham, and Lot the son of his son Aran, and Sara his daughter-in-law the wife of Abraham — why, I say, did he not also take with him Nachor his son? Augustine answers that Thare with the others fled Idolatry, and on its account the persecution of the Chaldees; but that Nachor, given to idolatry, wished to remain there; yet that afterward he too, Chaldea being abandoned, came into Mesopotamia and dwelt in the city of Charran, where Thare and his brother Abraham had dwelt, the book of Genesis chapter twenty-two plainly teaches. But let the reader hear Augustine's words: “Why,” he says, “did Scripture not say that Nachor too, together with Thare his father and Abraham his brother, departed from Chaldea and came into Mesopotamia? Why do we think, unless perhaps because he had defected from the paternal and fraternal religion and adhered to the superstition of the Chaldees? And afterward thence — whether by repenting or having suffered persecution — he too migrated.”⁷

DEINDE Augustinus hanc suam coniecturam probat iis verbis quae dixit Holoferni Achior dux Ammonitarum, ut habet liber Iudith capite quinto: exponens enim ille originem Hebraeorum, Populus, inquit, iste ex progenie Chaldaeorum est: hic primùm in Mesopotamia habitavit, quoniam noluerunt sequi deos patrum suorum qui erant in terra Chaldaeorum; deserentes itaque ceremonias patrum suorum quae in multitudine deorum erant, unum Deum coeli coluerunt, qui & praecepit eis ut exirent inde & habitarent in Chanaan. Ex his illud concludit Augustinus: unde, inquit, manifestum est domum Thare persecutionem passam fuisse à Chaldaeis pro vera pietate qua unus & verus ab eis colebatur Deus.

Then Augustine proves this conjecture of his by those words which Achior, leader of the Ammonites, said to Holofernes, as the book of Judith chapter five has: for he, expounding the origin of the Hebrews, says: “This people is of the progeny of the Chaldees: it first dwelt in Mesopotamia, because they would not follow the gods of their fathers who were in the land of the Chaldees; deserting therefore the ceremonies of their fathers, which were in a multitude of gods, they worshipped one God of heaven, who also commanded them to go out thence and dwell in Chanaan.” From these Augustine concludes: “whence it is manifest that the house of Thare suffered persecution from the Chaldees for the true piety by which the one and true God was worshipped by them.”⁸

…colebatur Deus. Hactenus ex Augustino. IDEM significare videtur Philo in libro de Somniis, ubi facit virum quidem bonum & amatorem virtutis, sed eius tamen nondum possessorem; at verò Iacob virum omnino perfectum, quique virtutem numeris omnibus absolutam comprehenderet. Sed quo facilius verba Philonis, quae commemoraturi sumus, lector intelligat, praedicendum oportet significationes trium vocabulorum quibus eo loco utitur Philo; ea verò sunt Charra, Thare, & Iacob. Est, inquit Philo, quantum equidem video, Charra metropolis quaedam sensuum: interpretatur enim nunc fossa, nunc specus, unam rem significantibus duobus nominibus. Nam corpora nostra ad sensuum instrumenta quodammodo perfossa sunt, & visus quisque sensus pro instrumento habet suam quasi foveam & specum. Thare nomen, si evolvas notionem vocis, significare reperies odoris speculationem. Iacob autem significat athletam, luctatorem & supplantatorem. His cognitis, planior erit sententiae Philonis intelligentia. Vult enim Philo Thare imaginem gessisse hominis cupidi potius virtutis quàm eam possidentis; Iacob autem praetulisse typum hominis qui virtutem possidet perfectèque comprehendit.

…the true God was worshipped. Thus far from Augustine. The same Philo seems to signify in the book On Dreams, where he makes [Thare] a man indeed good and a lover of virtue, but not yet its possessor; but Jacob a man wholly perfect, who comprehended virtue absolute in all its numbers. But that the reader may more easily understand the words of Philo which we are about to recount, the significations of three words which Philo uses in that place must be premised; these are Charra, Thare, and Jacob. “Charra (says Philo), as far as I see, is a certain metropolis of the senses; for it is interpreted now ‘ditch,’ now ‘cave,’ one thing being signified by two names. For our bodies are in a manner dug through for the instruments of the senses, and each sense has, as its instrument, its own pit and cave, as it were.” The name Thare, if you unfold the notion of the word, you will find signifies ‘the contemplation of smell.’ Jacob signifies an ‘athlete, wrestler, and supplanter.’ These being known, the understanding of Philo's opinion will be plainer. For Philo means that Thare bore the image of a man desirous of virtue rather than possessing it, but that Jacob presented the type of a man who possesses virtue and perfectly comprehends it.⁹

SED audiat lector Philonem, cuius allegorica haec tractatio perelegans est. Legitur in libro Mosis, ait Philo, Abraham discessisse Charra, patrem autem eius Thare inibi mansisse ad mortem. Siquidem speculator virtutis, non possessor, odoribus non alimentis fruebatur, nondum idoneus ut saturaretur prudentia, nec degustare quidem sed tantùm olfacere: quemadmodum enim canes venaticos aiunt, quòd eximio sensu odorandi sint praediti, è longinquo feras insequi & comprehendere, odorem earum sectantes; eodem modo amator scientiae, suaves auras quas iustitia ceteraeque virtutes exhalant consectans, cupiensque originem tantae voluptatis assequi, hinc illuc cursitat, vel ipso honestatis odore tanquam sacro nidore se se recreans. Ita ergo quibus datum est bibere de amatorio sapientiae poculo, fusique contemplatione eius & documentorum epulis, cùmque inebriati fuerint, sitire denuo propter inexplebile scientiae desiderium. His proximi censendi sunt qui, tametsi ad sacram mensam non accedant, nidore tamen ipso mentes suas pascunt: nam vel ipsa virtutis aura resumitur, sicut aegrotis deficientibus propter inediam & fastidium cibi odores remedium salutare procurant, ut vires recipiant.

But let the reader hear Philo, whose allegorical treatment of this is most elegant. “It is read in the book of Moses (says Philo) that Abraham departed from Charra, but his father Thare remained there until death. For the contemplator of virtue, not its possessor, enjoyed odors, not foods, not yet fit to be filled with prudence, nor even to taste but only to smell: for just as they say hunting-dogs, because they are endowed with an exceptional sense of smell, pursue and catch beasts from afar, following their scent; in the same way the lover of knowledge, pursuing the sweet breezes which justice and the other virtues exhale, and desiring to attain the origin of so great a pleasure, runs hither and thither, refreshing himself with the very odor of virtue as with a sacred fragrance. So therefore those to whom it is given to drink from the loving cup of wisdom, and to be poured out in its contemplation and the feasts of its teachings, and, when they are inebriated, to thirst again because of the unfillable desire of knowledge. Next to these are to be reckoned those who, though they do not approach the sacred table, yet feed their minds with the very fragrance: for the very breeze of virtue is taken in, just as, for the sick failing from lack of food and loathing of food, odors procure a saving remedy, that they may recover strength.”¹⁰

ATTAMEN, Chaldaea relicta, Charra migrasse Thare dicitur, ducens secum Abraham & ceteros consentientes domesticos: non ut putemus eos fuisse desertores patriae, cui sedes earum praetulerint, sed ut penitius intelligi discamus quiddam utilissimum vitae humanae. Sed hoc quidnam est? Chaldaei vacant observandis siderum cursibus; Charrenses circa sensus occupantur. Divina igitur scriptura scrutantem sese interpellat: Quid de Sole quaeris, sit ne pedali magnitudine, an rota terra maior sit; de Luna, suo ne lumine an mutuato luceat? cur in terra incedens super nubes exsilis, & res aethereas attingere conaris cùm terra affixus haereas? cur audes coniectari…

But nevertheless, Chaldea being left, Thare is said to have migrated to Charra, leading with him Abraham and the rest of his consenting household: not that we should think they were deserters of their fatherland, to which they preferred those seats, but that we may learn to understand more deeply something most useful for human life. But what is this? The Chaldees are occupied in observing the courses of the stars; the Charrenses are occupied about the senses. The divine scripture therefore interrupts the inquirer: “Why do you ask about the Sun, whether it is of a foot's size, or whether the earth is greater than [its] wheel; about the Moon, whether it shines by its own or by borrowed light? Why, walking on earth, do you leap above the clouds, and try to touch ethereal things while you cleave fixed to the earth? Why do you dare to conjecture…”¹¹

…de rebus omni coniectura superioribus? O bone, propinqua tibi potius considera, immo te ipsum absque adulatione scrutare. I mente Charras, id est, civitatem cavernosam & perfossam corporis; considera singulos sensus eorumque munia & visus: prius enim quàm propriam domum bene lustres & noveris, universalem domum quae mundus est curiosè perscrutari & pernosse velle, non extrema est insania?

“…about things higher than all conjecture? O good [man], rather consider the things near you, nay, scrutinize yourself without flattery. Go with your mind to Charra, that is, to the cavernous and perforated city of the body; consider the single senses and their functions and aspects: for to wish, before you well survey and know your own house, to scrutinize curiously and thoroughly know the universal house which is the world — is that not the height of madness?”¹²

HUIUSMODI homines Hebraei Thare vocant, Socratem Graeci nominant: nam & hunc ferunt usque ad senectutem in hoc praeceptum, Nosce teipsum, incubuisse, omissa reliqua philosophia. Thare autem significat virum cupidum & amatorem virtutis fructum carpendi, & iucundissimo ac saluberrimo eius pabulo animum satiandi. At enim athletarum & luctatorum (hoc autem significat nomen Iacob) natura est perfectior: nam hi, postquam perdidicerunt & enixi sunt rationem sensuum, dignos se iudicant maioribus contemplationibus, relinquentes sensus quasi cavernas quae Charra vocabulo signabantur. Ex hoc numero fuit ille Abraham, qui ad multiplices profectus ad summam scientiam progressus est. Cùm enim se maximè cognovit, tunc despexit maximè se ipsum, ut eum qui verè est perfectè cognosceret. Sic enim evenire solet: nam qui seipsum valde cognoscit, etiam valde contemnit, reputans quàm nihil sit quicquid creatum sit; qui autem seipsum contemnit, ad praeclaram eius [Dei] cognitionem pervenit. Hactenus oratio fuit Philonis. His autem verbis significat Philo Thare fuisse hominem non quidem perfectum, sed bonum tamen & curiosum pervestigandae virtutis. At si fuisset cultor Idolorum, non aptè gessisset typum & imaginem hominis cupidi percipiendae virtutis, eamque sibi comparare obnixe contendentis.

Men of this kind the Hebrews call Thare, the Greeks name Socrates: for they say that he too, down to old age, applied himself to this precept, ‘Know thyself,’ the rest of philosophy set aside. Thare signifies a man desirous and a lover of plucking the fruit of virtue, and of satisfying the mind with its most pleasant and healthful food. But the nature of athletes and wrestlers (this is what the name Jacob signifies) is more perfect: for these, after they have thoroughly learned and striven beyond the reckoning of the senses, judge themselves worthy of greater contemplations, leaving the senses like the caverns signified by the word Charra. Of this number was that Abraham, who by manifold advances progressed to the highest knowledge. For when he knew himself most, then he most despised himself, that he might perfectly know Him who truly is. For so it is wont to happen: he who greatly knows himself also greatly despises himself, reckoning how nothing is whatever is created; but he who despises himself attains to the illustrious knowledge of Him. Thus far was Philo's discourse. By these words Philo signifies that Thare was a man not indeed perfect, but yet good and eager in thoroughly investigating virtue. But if he had been a worshipper of idols, he would not aptly have borne the type and image of a man desirous of perceiving virtue and earnestly striving to acquire it for himself.¹³

HUIC ego sententiae libentissimè adhaereo, non tam propter Philonis quàm propter Beati Augustini auctoritatem. Sed ab ea, me quasi manu prehendens, videtur avellere locus ille Iosue capite vigesimo quarto quem supra posuimus, in quo non obscurè significatur Thare diis alienis servisse: sic enim ibi legitur: Trans fluvium habitaverunt patres vestri ab initio, Thare pater Abraham & Nachor, servientes diis alienis. Inter patres igitur Hebraeorum qui trans fluvium (id est, in Chaldaea, quae trans flumen Euphratem est comparatione terrae promissionis ubi haec locutus est Iosue) habitaverunt & servierunt diis alienis, nominatim memoratur Thare. Ad hoc fortasse quispiam responderet duo illic dici: unum est, maiores Hebraeorum habitasse trans fluvium ab initio, id est, in Chaldaea (illud autem ab initio significat statim post factam linguarum divisionem dispersionemque hominum, disturbata turris Babel aedificatione); alterum est, illos servisse diis alienis. Illud igitur prius pertinet ad omnes maiores Hebraeorum, etiam ad ipsum Thare; hoc autem posterius, de cultu deorum alienorum, non ad ipsum Thare sed ad alios eo priores referri debet. Sed profecto & contextus ipse verborum (ut patet ea consideranti) indicat Thare fuisse in iis qui servierunt diis alienis; & ita sentiunt omnes…

To this opinion I most gladly adhere, not so much on account of Philo's authority as of blessed Augustine's. But from it, as if taking me by the hand, that passage of Joshua chapter twenty-four which we set down above seems to pull me away, in which it is not obscurely signified that Thare served strange gods; for thus it is read there: “Beyond the river your fathers dwelt from the beginning, Thare the father of Abraham and Nachor, serving strange gods.” Among the fathers of the Hebrews, therefore, who dwelt beyond the river (that is, in Chaldea, which is beyond the river Euphrates in comparison with the land of promise where Joshua spoke this) and served strange gods, Thare is named expressly. To this perhaps someone might respond that two things are said there: one is, that the ancestors of the Hebrews dwelt beyond the river from the beginning, that is, in Chaldea (‘from the beginning’ signifying immediately after the division of tongues and dispersion of men, the building of the tower of Babel being disturbed); the other is, that they served strange gods. The former, then, pertains to all the ancestors of the Hebrews, even to Thare himself; but the latter, about the worship of strange gods, ought to be referred not to Thare himself but to others earlier than he. But surely the very context of the words (as is clear to one considering them) indicates that Thare was among those who served strange gods; and so think all…¹⁴

…omnes interpretes eius libri, cùm eum locum explanant; & inter hos apertissimis verbis id docet Theodoretus quaestione decima octava in Iosue.

…all the interpreters of that book, when they explain that passage; and among these Theodoret teaches it in the plainest words, in question eighteen on Joshua.¹⁵

NOS igitur dicamus utrumque verum esse, & quod Beatus Augustinus tradidit, & quod isti prodiderunt. Nam, ut rectè monet Tostatus quaestione vigesima super caput undecimum Geneseos, dum Thare mansit in Chaldaea, cultor fuit veri Dei purusque ab Idolatria: quin etiam propter eam causam, concitato adversus se odio & insectatione Chaldaeorum, inde fugit & profectus est in Mesopotamiam; & hoc sensit Augustinus, & in libro Iudith capite quinto significatur (nos supra & verba Augustini & quae sunt in eo loco libri Iudith exposuimus). At verò postquam Thare venit Haran seu Charras, extremam Mesopotamiae urbem, paulatim ibi corruptus, vel consuetudine eius gentis, vel adventu Nachor filii ex Chaldaea, vel discessu & absentia ipsius Abraham, lapsus est in Idolatriam: atque hoc significavit Iosue supra dicto loco, & plerique interpretes senserunt. Quemadmodum igitur Thare dici verè possit servisse & non servisse diis alienis, videlicet diversis temporibus diversisque locis, hinc manifestum est. Non me fugit Beatum Chrysostomum in Homilia trigesima prima in Genesim scriptum reliquisse, etiam priusquam Thare venisset Haran, fuisse eum infidelem: sed mihi quod ex sententia Beati Augustini dixi, multò probabilius videtur.

Let us therefore say that both are true — both what blessed Augustine handed down, and what these [others] reported. For, as Tostatus rightly advises (question twenty on chapter eleven of Genesis), while Thare remained in Chaldea, he was a worshipper of the true God and pure from Idolatry: indeed, for that very cause, the hatred and persecution of the Chaldees being stirred up against him, he fled thence and set out into Mesopotamia; and this Augustine held, and it is signified in the book of Judith chapter five (we above set out both Augustine's words and what is in that place of the book of Judith). But after Thare came to Haran or Charra, the farthest city of Mesopotamia, being gradually corrupted there — whether by the custom of that nation, or by the coming of his son Nachor from Chaldea, or by the departure and absence of Abraham himself — he lapsed into Idolatry: and this Joshua signified in the aforesaid place, and most interpreters held. How therefore Thare can truly be said both to have served and not to have served strange gods — namely at different times and in different places — is hence manifest. It does not escape me that blessed Chrysostom, in the thirty-first homily on Genesis, left in writing that even before Thare came to Haran he was an unbeliever: but what I have said from the opinion of blessed Augustine seems to me much more probable.¹⁶

Translator’s notes

Disp. 16 title (the fourth question of the Praefatio). Whether Thare was ever an idolater. ↩
§243. The question framed: were Thare or even Abraham ever idolaters, or did both (or at least Abraham) always worship the true God? Thare first, then Abraham. ↩
§244. The case that Thare WAS an idolater: the Hebrew Tradition (of Disp. 15) made him a fierce idol-worshipper and persecutor of the faithful. Epiphanius (opening of the Panarion) likewise: idolatry began in Sarug's time (only painted images at first); Thare, son of Nachor, first made clay idols by the potter's art — and as a fit retribution his son Aran was the first son to die naturally before his father (Abel excepted, being murdered), which Scripture marked with ‘Aran died in the sight of Thare.’ Margin: 'That Thare was an idolater, the opinion of some; the Hebrews; Epiphanius; Genesis 4; the first son after creation to die before his father was Aran son of Thare, and why, per Epiphanius.' ↩
§245 (begins). Suidas (apparently borrowing from Epiphanius), in the ‘Abraham’ entry and citing Philo, confirms image-worship flourished from Sarug to Thare; and that Abraham sharply reproached his father Thare for making and worshipping idols (continues next page). Margin: 'Suidas; Philo; Thare; Abraham.' ↩
§245 (concl.). Completing Suidas/Philo: Abraham broke and burned his father's idols; and Suidas (entry ‘Saruch’/Sarug) gives the euhemerist origin of idolatry — Sarug ordered eminent dead benefactors worshipped yearly as gods. Margin: 'Thare; Abraham.' [§-numbering: Liber XVI is numbered continuously across all three Parts; the Third Part runs from §205 (Disp. 14) onward — this is §245.] ↩
§246. Idolatry spread from Sarug down to Thare, who made and promoted idols; it pervaded Greece (deifying Hellen). The strongest scriptural proof that Thare was an idolater: Joshua 24:2, ‘Thare the father of Abraham and Nachor… served strange gods.’ Margin: 'Genesis 11; that Thare was an idolater.' ↩
§247. The contrary view (Thare NOT an idolater): Augustine (City of God 16.13) asks why Thare did not take Nachor when he left Chaldea — answering that Thare's family fled idolatry and its persecution, while the idolater Nachor stayed (only later coming to Charran, Gen 22). So for Augustine, Thare worshipped the true God and Nachor was the idolater. Margin: 'St. Augustine.' ↩
§248. Augustine grounds his view in Judith 5: Achior the Ammonite tells Holofernes the Hebrews left Chaldea because they refused their fathers' many gods and worshipped the one God of heaven, who bade them go to Canaan — proof (for Augustine) that Thare's house was persecuted for true piety, not idolatrous. ↩
§248 (concl.) + §249. Closing Augustine, Pererius turns to Philo (On Dreams), who allegorizes Thare as a lover of virtue not yet its possessor, vs. Jacob the perfect possessor — with etymologies: Charra = ‘metropolis of the senses’ (ditch/cave), Thare = ‘contemplation of smell,’ Jacob = ‘athlete/wrestler/supplanter.’ Margin: 'Philo; mystical interpretation of Charra, Thare, and Jacob.' ↩
§250. Philo's elegant allegory: Abraham left Charra but Thare stayed till death, because Thare was a ‘smeller’ (contemplator) of virtue, not its ‘eater’ (possessor) — like hunting-dogs tracking by scent, the lover of wisdom is drawn by virtue's fragrance; the perfect drink from wisdom's cup, while lesser souls are fed by its very aroma. ↩
§251 (begins). Philo continues: Thare's move from Chaldea to Charra (with his household) is a moral lesson — the Chaldees study the stars, the ‘Charrenses’ the senses; Scripture rebukes the would-be astronomer, telling him to scrutinize himself rather than leap to the heavens (continues next page). ↩
§251 (concl.). Philo's rebuke completed: before presuming to know the cosmos, ‘go to Charra’ (the body, the seat of the senses) and know yourself — astronomy without self-knowledge is madness. ↩
§252. Philo's allegory: Thare = the Hebrews' ‘Socrates’ (devoted to ‘know thyself’), a sincere virtue-seeker; Jacob/Abraham the more perfect possessors (self-knowledge → self-contempt → knowledge of God). Pererius's point: if Thare had been an idolater, Philo would not have made him the very type of a virtue-seeker — so Philo's allegory tells against Thare's idolatry. Margin: 'A notable saying.' ↩
§253 (begins). Pererius adheres to the view that Thare was no idolater (chiefly on Augustine's authority) — but Joshua 24:2 (‘Thare… serving strange gods’) pulls him the other way. An attempted dodge (the ‘serving strange gods’ refers to earlier ancestors, not Thare) is rejected: the context names Thare among the idol-servers (continues next page). Margin: 'The author's opinion, whether Thare was an idolater; a passage of Joshua ch. 24; Genesis 11.' ↩
§253 (concl.). All commentators on Joshua, especially Theodoret (Questions on Joshua, q. 18), read Joshua 24:2 as making Thare one who served strange gods. Margin: 'Theodoret.' ↩
§254 (closing Disp. 16). Pererius's reconciliation: BOTH are true at different times/places (so Tostatus, q. 20 on Gen 11). In Chaldea Thare worshipped the true God and fled the Chaldees' persecution (Augustine; Judith 5); but at Haran he gradually lapsed into idolatry (Joshua 24:2). Thus he both ‘served’ and ‘did not serve’ strange gods. Against Chrysostom (Homily 31), who made Thare an unbeliever even before Haran. Margin: 'Tostatus.' ↩