BIBLE STUDY SERIES #380, 381 and 382

7 March, 1999


By Douglas C. Nesbit, B.A.

Our regular sequence of on-going Bible Studies, starting a number of years ago with The Call by The Almighty God to Abram in Genesis 12 has followed his progeny down the generations of his son, Isaac, his grandson, Jacob, re-named Israel at the Brook Jabbok, and Israel's twelve sons and their tribal descendants as the family, enduring the start of seven years of famine were called down to Egypt by that land's Prime Minister, Joseph, the brother whom they had sold into slavery. We learned of Israel's experiences under the bondage imposed by a pharaoh who "knew not Joseph", and we saw how The Almighty selected Moses to return from the Sinai wilderness to demand of Pharaoh "Let my people go."

We watched in imagination as the sequence of great signs and wonders were imposed upon that land and its people to effect the rescue of Israel by the mighty miracles known to all time as The Exodus, and we followed them into that wilderness to assemble at Sinai, there to meet with the God of all the earth, and to receive an astounding offer of national marriage to this God Whom scripture names Yahweh, (Jehovah). They were granted Laws and a system of worship in the Tabernacle service, and were led towards the Promised Land. But there that generation balked, and were forced, in consequence to endure those years of wandering until that generation had been replaced by their youth, who would complete the journey to the entrance to that Land of Promise. Now we find those Tribes of Israel at Kadesh, on the border of the Promised Land.

We are presently reviewing the situation as pictured in Numbers 21. Moses has appealed to the king of Edom to allow Israel to pass, and now, after being refused passage through Edom he has to face king Arad the Canaanite.

1. And when king Arad the Canaanite, which dwelt in the south, heard tell that Israel came by the way of the spies; then he fought against Israel, and took some of them prisoners.
2. And Israel vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.
3. And the LORD hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.

Under the heading "Victory over Arad (xxi. 1-3)", The New Bible Commentary makes these thoughts available: "Verse 1 probably refers to the attack upon the Israelites which had occurred after the death of the spies nearly thirty-eight years earlier (xiv. 45)." However, Keil and Delitzsch give it as their perception that "On this march..." (that is, the march from Kadesh to Mount Hor) "...they were attacked by the Canaanitish king of Arad; but they gained a complete victory, and laid his cities under the ban (chap. xix. 1-3)." Moving to the words "Which dwelt in the south (1)". The New Bible Commentary continues by mentioning the term "negeb" with a reference to a note on chapter 17:13 which we have already examined. The Commentary then states: "Before the start of the long march around Edom, the defeat was avenged and some of the Canaanite cities destroyed. Hormah (3)." We are then referred to Deuteronomy 1:44 and following passages, which we will be approaching soon.

The words "the way of the spies", in verse 1, draws this note in The Companion Bible " '= the way of the Atharim.' Sept so renders it, as a proper name; probably the name of the caravan route." The same reference mentions "Hormah = utter destruction", but Keil and Delitzsch say of Hormah "i.e. banning, ban-place."

We now approach the institution of a symbolic cure which has been thought to have associations even today.

4. And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.
5. And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for there is no bread, neither is there any water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.
6. And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
7. Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.
8. And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
9. And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

The Companion Bible notes "fiery serpents = burning. Heb. nacheshim saraphim ... because the effect of the bite was a burning sensation. Heb. saraph (see Ap. 43. I. viii). The Seraphim so called in Isa. 6.2, because they were burning ones: hence the name for these serpents. In the same way nachash, shining one, is also used for serpents, because they are shining ones in appearance. See Gen. 3.1 and ep. Ap. 19." (That Appendix 19 comprises nearly two pages and is concerned primarily with the Serpent of Genesis 3.)

The New Bible Commentary, under the heading "The incident of the brazen serpent (xxi. 4-9)" gives these thoughts: "Since Edom had refused to allow Israel passage through its land, the congregation had already begun the long march which would take them south, east, and then north around the land of Edom (xx. 21-22)." Referring to the words "By the way of the Red sea (4)", we are given the reference "See note on xiv. 25", again, a note which we have previously examined. It then continues "In the course of the march, renewed murmuring against God and against Moses (4-5) led to divine punishment in the form of a scourge of serpents. Similar scourges occur in the same general region in modern times. For an account of one, cf. T. E. Lawrence, The Seven Pillars of Wisdom, pp. 269-270. When the people cried for help (7), God provided a means by which they could be healed (8). Moses made a serpent of brass and set it up on a pole (9). If a man who had been bitten looked at the brazen serpent on the pole, he would be healed. Christ used this as a symbol of the fact that He Himself would be lifted up on the cross, in order that the sins of His people might be laid upon Him (Jn. iii. 14). Our Lord's reference to this incident was particularly appropriate since He was stressing not only the objective fact that He would bear the sins of His people (cf. 2 Cor. v. 21), but also the vital point that a personal relationship of placing faith in Him is necessary for salvation (cf. esp. Jn. iii. 15, 16, 18 and 36). The Israelite in the wilderness was not benefited by the serpent on the pole unless he looked toward it (Nu. xxi. 8, 9). Later on the brazen serpent itself became an object of worship, just as any symbol of God's truth can become harmful if it assumes a primary place itself, instead of simply pointing us to God and the various aspects of the truth which He has revealed. It was therefore necessary for the good king Hezekiah to break it in pieces (2 Ki. xviii. 4) since it had become a snare and a cause of injury, instead of a useful symbol which would fulfil its purpose of pointing forward to the Saviour who was to come."

I might just read that reference at this point. It says "He (that is, Hezekiah) removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan." Here several things might be said. One is to remind our listeners that where the AV translates the word as "brass", or "brasen" we might better take this as being either copper or bronze. The second is that the fact that a later king had to destroy this artifact demonstrates independent evidence for the veracity of the Mosaic origin of the first five books of the Bible. Thirdly, the Caduceus, an herald's wand in classical times, was a rod about which were entwined two snakes. In classic mythology, Mercury was a son, and also herald, of Jupiter the supreme ruler of the universe, whom the Greeks called Zeus, a name which signifies the radiant light of heaven. Mercury carried such a Caduceus wand, surmounted by wings, and possessed of magical powers over sleeping, waking, and dreams. The symbol is still seen as a medical symbol. The mythical picture seems too close to the description of that brasen serpent of Moses, servant of The Almighty, to have had an independent origin, and I would not be at all surprised to learn that the myth, along with other similar classical myths, descended from such Biblical origins through the advance guard of the Israelitish diaspora into Greece and similar lands in classic times. With that short digression, we shall return once again to the Scriptural account at verse 10.

We shall continue our theme in this chapter on the next study. May I leave with you the thought that, far from this being an ancient story which bears no relationship to ourselves, it proclaims the enduring existence of the same God, caring for the descendants of these same people, whom we, of the British-Israel-World Federation attest to be found chiefly in the present day Anglo-Celto-Saxon and kindred peoples. Do consider the implications of that statement for our own time.

14 March, 1999


By Douglas C. Nesbit, B.A.

Our regular sequence of on-going Bible Studies, starting a number of years ago with The Call by The Almighty God to Abram in Genesis 12 has followed his progeny Isaac, Jacob, and the tribal constellation emerging therefrom as they experienced Egyptian civilization, and then bondage, from which The Mighty God drew them forth in the miracles of the Exodus. To Sinai they came, then to the verge of The Promised Land, where they balked, and must needs endure the passing of the rebel generation in forty years in the wilderness of Sinai. Now we find those Tribes of Israel at Kadesh, on the border of the Promised Land.

We are presently reviewing the situation as pictured in Numbers 21. Moses has failed to persuade the king of Edom to allow passage, and Israel must, as a result, find a route which detours to south, east, and then north to force entrance at another border point. Let us pick up the Biblical account as we begin reading at Numbers 21:10:

10. And the children of Israel set forward, and pitched in Oboth.
11. And they journeyed from Oboth, and pitched at Ijeabarim, in the wilderness which is before Moab, toward the sunrising.
12. From thence they removed, and pitched in the valley of Zared.
13. From thence they removed, and pitched on the other side of Arnon, which is in the wilderness that cometh out of the coasts of the Amorites: for Arnon is the border of Moab, between Moab and the Amorites.
14. Wherefore it is said in the book of the wars of the LORD, What he did in the Red sea, and in the brooks of Arnon,
15. And at the stream of the brooks that goeth down to the dwelling of Ar, and lieth upon the border of Moab.
16. And from thence they went to Beer: that is the well whereof the LORD spake unto Moses, Gather the people together, and I will give them water.
17. Then Israel sang this song, Spring up, O well; sing ye unto it:
18. The princes digged the well, the nobles of the people digged it, by the direction of the lawgiver, with their staves. And from the wilderness they went to Mattanah:
19. And from Mattanah to Nahaliel: and from Nahaliel to Bamoth:
20. And from Bamoth in the valley, that is in the country of Moab, to the top of Pisgah, which looketh toward Jeshimon.

Under the heading "The march around Moab (xxi. 10-20), The New Bible Commentary says "After going south and east around Edom, the people marched further east and north around Moab (11), which was east of the southern part of the Dead Sea. This was a very dry region, in which the passing of even a small stream or brook was a memorable event (14-15). The book of the wars of the Lord (14). This was probably a poetical book glorifying the acts of God in protecting His people in the wilderness and in bringing them safely toward Canaan. Nothing is known about it apart from the allusion here. Perhaps it was written by Moses himself. Verses 16-18 tell in rather condensed form of an incident which evidently made quite an impression upon the people. It would seem that, as the long trek was approaching its end, a region was entered where water flowed only a short distance below the surface. Here the Lord told Moses to gather the people together in order that He might give them water (16). Under Moses' direction the leaders of the tribes proceeded to dig into the dry earth with their staves and soon the water sprang up from its subterranean channel. This event was long celebrated in the song recorded in verses 17 and 18. By the direction of the Lawgiver (18). The words 'the direction of' are not in the Hebrew text, yet they bring out the meaning of the Hebrew phrase. Lawgiver (Heb. mehoqeq) is sometimes translated 'sceptre' or 'chieftain's staff', but without sufficient philological justification. Even if so translated it hardly means that the sceptre was a tool used for digging, but that the bearer of the sceptre directed the work (so Dillmann). Another interpretation which has been suggested is that a well was found and its mouth covered with sand in order that there might be a formal opening of the well at which the leaders of the people would dig through the sand with their staves. It is said that such a practice is sometimes found among Bedouin of the desert. Verses 18-20 carry the journey to the northern part of Moab itself."

21. And Israel sent messengers unto Sihon king of the Amorites, saying,
22. Let me pass through thy land: we will not turn into the fields, or into the vineyards; we will not drink of the waters of the well: but we will go along by the king's high way, until we be past thy borders.
23. And Sihon would not suffer Israel to pass through his border: but Sihon gathered all his people together, and went out against Israel into the wilderness: and he came to Jahaz, and fought against Israel.
24. And Israel smote him with the edge of the sword, and possessed his land from Arnon unto Jabbok, even unto the children of Ammon: for the border of the children of Ammon was strong.
25. And Israel took all these cities: and Israel dwelt in all the cities of the Amorites, in Heshbon, and in all the villages thereof.
26. For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon.
27. Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared:
28. For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon.
29. Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites.
30. We have shot at them; Heshbon is perished even unto Dibon, and we have laid them waste even unto Nophah, which reacheth unto Medeba.
31. Thus Israel dwelt in the land of the Amorites.
32. And Moses sent to spy out Jaazer, and they took the villages thereof, and drove out the Amorites that were there.

Under the heading "Victory over Sihon (xxi. 21-32)", the New Bible Commentary says "The region north of Moab was occupied by Amorites, under a king named Sihon. The portion of his territory which lay east of the northern part of the Dead Sea had formerly belonged to Moab, but had been conquered by Sihon not long before (26). As in the case of Edom and Moab, he was asked to grant passage through his territory, but refused, and came with an army against Israel (21-23; cf. Dt. ii. 26-32). This time the Israelites attacked, utterly destroyed the forces of Sihon, and took possession of his territory (24-26, 31-32). This was the first part of the Promised Land to be conquered by the Israelites. Verses 27-30 contain a taunting song, directed against Moab, in which the Israelites gloated over their conquest of Heshbon, Sihon's capital city (26, 27, 29-30), and recalled that its people had been victors over Moab (28-29)."

While the phrase "not long before" is a rather indefinite one, there are some words in The New Bible Dictionary, item "Sihon", which we might pursue for a few moments. It states: "An Amorite king (13th century BC), whose capital was Heshbon. According to Nu. xxi 26-30 and Je. xlviii. 45, Sihon conquered the Moabites and took over their territory as far south as the river Arnon. Five Midianite princes were among his vassals (Jos. xiii. 21). His domain included the area from the Arnon on the south to the Jabbok on the north, and from the Jordan on the west to the desert on the east (Nu. xxi. 24; Jdg. xi. 22), and Jos. xii. 3 and xiii. 27 seem to extend his control north of the Jabbok to the sea of Chinnereth. Moses sent an embassy to Sihon asking permission for the Israelites to pass through his kingdom Nu. xxi. 21, 22; Dt. ii. 26-28). When Sihon refused, the Israelites defeated and killed him at Jahaz and occupied his territory (Nu. xxi. 21-32). This area was assigned to the tribes of Reuben and Gad (Nu. xxxii. 33-38; Jos. xiii. 10). The victory over Sihon is often recalled in the subsequent history of Israel. (Dt. xxxi. 4, by Moses; Jos. ii. 10 by Rahab; Jos. ix. 10, by the Gibeonites; Jdg. xi 19-21, by Jephthah; Ne. ix. 22, by Levites in a prayer of confession; and Pss. cxxxv. 11, cxxxvi. 19)... . The Babylonian Talmud (Niddah 61a) records a tradition not found in the Bible that Sihon was the brother of King Og (also an Amorite), and a son of Ahijah, son of the legendary fallen angel Shamhazai." Later we shall have something more to say regarding the Reubenite occupancy in the days of Ruth.

33. And they turned and went up by the way of Bashan: and Og the king of Bashan went out against them, he, and all his people, to the battle at Edrei.
34. And the LORD said unto Moses, Fear him not: for I have delivered him into thy hand, and all his people, and his land; and thou shalt do to him as thou didst unto Sihon king of the Amorites, which dwelt at Heshbon.
35. So they smote him, and his sons, and all his people, until there was none left him alive: and they possessed his land.

Under the heading Victory over Og, king of Bashan (xxi. 33-35), The New Bible Commentary continues: "North of the river Jabbok was a region of fine pasture land with many strongly walled cities (Dt. iii. 5). Bulls of Bashan are famous throughout Old Testament times. Og led his army against the Israelites, but was utterly defeated. This left most of Palestine east of the Jordan and north of the river Arnon in the hands of Israel." Under the heading "Arrival in the plains of Moab (xxii. 1), the Commentary continues: "The wilderness journey was not completed. Camp was established on the plains across from Jericho. It remained to prepare to cross the river and conquer Canaan itself. First, however, we must learn of an attempt on the part of the Moabites to destroy Israel by a new method." As this is another story, we must leave it for our next study. For the week, a thought - Just remember that all victories are granted by the Lord of all the earth

21 March, 1999


By Douglas C. Nesbit, B.A.

Our regular sequence of on-going Bible Studies, starting a number of years ago with The Call by The Almighty God to Abram in Genesis 12 has followed his progeny down to the Tribes of Israel who are presently on the border of the Promised Land.

On our last study, we were observing how Israel had marched past the land presently occupied by Moab, and had attacked and taken the land held by Sihon king of the Amorites, whom Israel has just defeated. This ground, so recently held by the Amorites, had actually been, many years before, a part of ancient Moab. The Amorites had in former times pushed out the Moabitish population and wrested the north half of Moab from them. Numbers 21:26-29 says:

26. For Heshbon was the city of Sihon the king of the Amorites, who had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto Arnon."
27. Wherefore they that speak in proverbs say, Come into Heshbon, let the city of Sihon be built and prepared:
28. For there is a fire gone out of Heshbon, a flame from the city of Sihon: it hath consumed Ar of Moab, and the lords of the high places of Arnon.
29. Woe to thee, Moab! thou art undone, O people of Chemosh: he hath given his sons that escaped, and his daughters, into captivity unto Sihon king of the Amorites.

So the Northern half of Moab, as far south as the river Arnon, thus became totally Amorite territory, although still bearing the name "Moab", as we can see from the usage in Deuteronomy 34:1-6:
1. And Moses went up from the plains of Moab unto the mountain of Nebo, to the top of Pisgah, that is over against Jericho. And the LORD shewed him all the land of Gilead, unto Dan,
2. And all Naphtali, and the land of Ephraim, and Manasseh, and all the land of Judah, unto the utmost sea,
3. And the south, and the plain of the valley of Jericho, the city of palm trees, unto Zoar.
4. And the LORD said unto him, This is the land which I sware unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, saying, I will give it unto thy seed: I have caused thee to see it with thine eyes, but thou shalt not go over thither.
5. So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD.
6. And he buried him in a valley in the land of Moab, over against Bethpeor: but no man knoweth of his sepulchre unto this day.
7. And Moses was an hundred and twenty years old when he died: his eye was not dim, nor his natural force abated.
8. And the children of Israel wept for Moses in the plains of Moab thirty days: so the days of weeping and mourning for Moses were ended.

The plains were, therefore; still called "Land of Moab", and any who occupied that land might then be designated "Moabites", although ethnically they were of another culture and genealogy, in much the same way as people from overseas, whose racial connection has no affinity to the rest of the Canadian populace will accept the new label "Canadian" upon arrival in the country simply because they now live there.

Now Israel had occupied the northern half of Moab which these Amorites had previously wrested from the Moabites, years before. This meant that, as Israel now occupied the northern half of that land, it was possible that even those of Israel who settled in these plains of Moab, displacing the Amorites, might later be called Moabites from the name of the land they had occupied. It must be noted that, while the land had been occupied by Moabites, then Amorites, and lastly, Israelites (of the Tribe of Reuben, as it turned out), it still held the more ancient name of the previous occupants, the Moabites, and was thus still called "Moab", or "plains of Moab." That this was indeed the history of the disputed territory, we find confirmed in the later passage of Scripture found in Judges 11, when the people of Gilead called the warrior Judge, Jephthah to lead them against the Ammonites. Reading from Judges 11:12-18, we find these words:

12. And Jephthah sent messengers unto the king of the children of Ammon, saying, What hast thou to do with me, that thou art come against me to fight in my land?
13. And the king of the children of Ammon answered unto the messengers of Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when they came up out of Egypt, from Arnon even unto Jabbok, and unto Jordan: now therefore restore those lands again peaceably.
14. And Jephthah sent messengers again unto the king of the children of Ammon:
15. And said unto him, Thus saith Jephthah, Israel took not away the land of Moab, nor the land of the children of Ammon:
16. But when Israel came up from Egypt, and walked through the wilderness unto the Red sea, and came to Kadesh;
17. Then Israel sent messengers unto the king of Edom, saying, Let me, I pray thee, pass through thy land: but the king of Edom would not hearken thereto. And in like manner they sent unto the king of Moab: but he would not consent: and Israel abode in Kadesh.
18. Then they went along through the wilderness, and compassed the land of Edom, and the land of Moab, and came by the east side of the land of Moab, and pitched on the other side of Arnon, but came not within the border of Moab: for Arnon was the border of Moab.

So conflicting land claims are not new with more recent history. Here we see that, generations later, the king of South Moab was still unsuccessfully laying claim to the land of Moab, north of the Arnon River. We know how Moses dealt with the disputed land when he was alive. Joshua 13:15-21 says:

15. And Moses gave unto the tribe of the children of Reuben inheritance according to their families.
16. And their coast was from Aroer, that is on the bank of the river Arnon, and the city that is in the midst of the river, and all the plain by Medeba;
17. Heshbon, and all her cities that are in the plain; Dibon, and Bamothbaal, and Bethbaalmeon,
18. And Jahazah, and Kedemoth, and Mephaath,
19. And Kirjathaim, and Sibmah, and Zarethshahar in the mount of the valley,
20. And Bethpeor, and Ashdothpisgah, and Bethjeshimoth,
21. And all the cities of the plain, and all the kingdom of Sihon king of the Amorites, which reigned in Heshbon, whom Moses smote with the princes of Midian, Evi, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, which were dukes of Sihon, dwelling in the country.

So that territory of Moab that we have just detailed, which had passed from control by the Moabites to that of the Amorites, had now indeed become part of the territory of Israel, and, as we see from that last Scripture, it was assigned as the allotment of the Israelite Tribe of Reuben in particular. Doubtless it would be to these Israelitish tribesmen of Reuben, that other Israelites, particularly of Judah across the Jordan River, like Elimelech, his wife, Naomi, and his sons, Mahlon and Chilion, Ephrathites of Bethlehemjudah would come when drought struck their lands west of the Jordan. If we doubt this explanation we must ask why they would double the length of the journey by taking a much longer journey through the Reubenite lands into the enemy territory of Moab to the south? Also, as we shall see, the people of South Moab were designated as foreign enemies with whom intermarriage was forbidden to any devout, law-abiding Israelite, for in Deuteronomy 23:3-4, we read:

3. An Ammonite or Moabite shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to their tenth generation shall they not enter into the congregation of the LORD for ever:
4. Because they met you not with bread and with water in the way, when ye came forth out of Egypt; and because they hired against thee Balaam the son of Beor of Pethor of Mesopotamia, to curse thee.

We must, knowing the devout nature of this family of Elimelech, assume that they would also avoid marriages with racial Moabites, and thus, the wives of Mahlon and Chilion were most probably Reubenites as we have explained. Now concerning that man called Balaam, whose name was mentioned with such disapproval in the Deuteronomy Scripture which was just read, we will need to have a careful look at just what was the nature of the crime which he committed, which Israel deemed worthy of death, for it specifically consisted in giving advice for the arrangements leading to the breaking of this specific social barrier which was commanded in the Law of Yahweh. However, time will not permit this to be added to our study for today. But the facts must be kept firmly in mind when we come later to look at the ancestry of Ruth, for, although she is called a Moabitess, she was doubtless so designated, along with the other Reubenite Israelites who occupied the territory that once belonged to Moab. In other words, the evidence points to Ruth the Reubenite, rather than the "Moabitess", so often cited as a foreign element in David's ancestry.

The implications for inter-racial relationships among Christian communities may not at first seem relevant, but God's Laws are given in merciful love to His Created beings, in order that well-being and fullness of life might be theirs, and His wisdom ought to be seen as superior to our own. Thus it will be most needful that we approach with tact, yet honesty, the matters which will occupy our attentions in the Scripture portions upon which we will venture with the next Studies.

We might just leave with you for this week the thought that an anti-Biblical, scientific, humanist egalitarian doctrine has, through academic theory and governmental imposition, dominated the world's societies for the last hundred years or more, and the fruits of their teaching and legislation have not presented us with peace and well-being, but tensions and wars major and minor without ceasing. Surely, it is time to re-consider the Biblical truths of human nature, and the benefits of a God-inspired, law-abiding approach to inter-personal and inter national, inter-racial and inter-class relationships.