MuddimanJohnBar 2010 4genesis ThePentateuch PDF

53 genesis
Patrick, D. (1986), Old Testament Law (London: SCM). Van Seters, J. (1992), Prologue to History (Louisville, Ky.:
Rad, G. von (1966), ‘The Form-Critical Problem of the Westminster/John Knox).
Hexateuch’ (1938), in his The Problem of the Hexateuch ——(1994), The Life of Moses: The Yahwist as Historian in
All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
and Other Essays (Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd), 1–78. Exodus–Numbers (Louisville, Ky.: Westminster/John
Rendtorff, R. (1990), The Problem of the Process of Trans- Knox).
mission in the Pentateuch, ET (Sheffield: JSOT), from Wellhausen, J. (1885), Prolegomena to the History of
German original, Das überlieferungsgeschichtliche Israel, ET (Edinburgh: A. & C. Black); from German
Problem des Pentateuch, BZAW 147 (1977). original, Geschichte Israels I (1878).
Skinner, J. (1910), A Critical and Exegetical Commentary Westermann, C. (1984), ‘The Formation and Theo-
on Genesis, International Critical Commentary (Ed- logical Meaning of the Primeval Story’, in Genesis
inburgh: T. & T. Clark). 1–11: A Commentary (Minneapolis: Augsburg), 567–
Soggin, J. A. (1989), Introduction to the Old Testament, 606; German original Genesis 1–11 (Neukirchen-
3rd edn. (London: SCM). Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1974–6).
Sonsino, R. (1980), Motive Clauses in Biblical Law, Wolff, H. W. (1975), ‘The Elohistic Fragments in the
SBLDS 45 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press). Pentateuch’, in Brueggemann and Wolff (1975),
Stamm, J. J., and Andrew, M. E. (1967), The Ten Com- 67–82.
mandments in Recent Research, SBT 2/2 (London: Whybray, R. N. (1987), The Making of the Pentateuch
SCM). (Sheffield: JSOT).
4. Genesis
r. n. whybray
INTRODUCTION first four books constituted a complete work
(the Tetrateuch). Deuteronomy, though later
A. Genesis and the Pentateuch. Genesis
joined with these to form the Pentateuch,
forms part of a series of ‘historical’ books that
belonged to a second and distinct work, the
begin with the creation of the world and end
Deuteronomistic History, comprising Deuter-
with the destruction of the tiny kingdom of
onomy, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings.
Judah in the sixth century BCE (the final chs. of
Noth’s theory has been widely accepted.
2 Kings). The events narrated are all arranged in
It may perhaps seem that these questions are
a single chronological sequence into which the
irrelevant to a study of Genesis; but this is not
non-narrative material, mainly poems and laws,
so. Genesis, although it has its own distinctive
has been fitted. But this great history was not
character—it is the only book in the Pentateuch
originally conceived as a single work. It is gen-
that is not dominated by the figure of Moses—is
erally agreed that it consists of two complexes,
intimately linked with the books that follow,
but the point at which the first ends and the
and can only be fully understood as part of a
second begins has long been a disputed ques-
more extended history. It is essentially a book of
tion. According to ancient tradition the first
promise, a preface to all that follows in the
complex comprises the first five books, ending
history of Israel, having specific links to many
with Deuteronomy. This is known to the Jews
events narrated in those books. It establishes the
by the name of Torah (or ‘the law’), and is the
identity of the nation of Israel and of its God.
first and most sacred part of the canon of the
In particular, it is a necessary prelude to the
Hebrew Scriptures. Modern scholars know it as
Copyright @ 2010. OUP Oxford.
great events associated with the Exodus from

the Pentateuch, a Greek word meaning ‘(of) five
Egypt, which is the foundation of Jewish history
books’. However, its integrity was challenged in
and faith. At the same time it presents the
the nineteenth century CE, when many scholars
reader with the God who is creator of the
held that it is incomplete without Joshua: it is
world but also a God who cares for his human
only in Josh that God’s promise, made in Gen-
creatures and reveals his nature especially in his
esis, of possession of the land of Canaan is
protection and guidance of those whom he
fulfilled (hence the term Hexateuch, six books).
chose to be his special people.
This hypothesis has few supporters today. In
1948 Martin Noth (ET 1972) also rejected the B. Literary Genre. It is important for an under-
traditional view but in a contrary sense: the standing of Genesis (and of the Pentateuch as a
EBSCO : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 2/8/2019 11:28 PM via FUNDACION UNIVERSITARIA
SEMINARIO BIBLICO DE COLOMBIA
AN: 335553 ; Muddiman, John, Barton, John.; The Pentateuch
Account: s1495391.Estudiante.ehost
genesis 54
whole) to see it as a literary work and to attempt long been recognized. All this material has
to define its literary genre. This involves been pieced together and provided with a
an appreciation of the nature of ancient, pre- continuous narrative thread and a chrono-
scientific, historiography, of which the most logical sequence by a skilful editor and com-
notable examples are to be found in the work piler, who by his selection and arrangement
of certain early Greek historians of the sixth of material and his own original contribu-
century BCE. The aim of these historians was to tions converted it into an expression of
write accounts of the origins, genealogical des- his own view of history and theology. With
cent, and history of the notable families of their regard to the Sagen used by this compiler,
own day, tracing them back to a remote, heroic Gunkel held that much of this material had
age: see Van Seters (1983: 8–54; 1992: 24–38). In previously been transmitted in oral form over
their accounts of past ages they did not distin- many generations and so may be seen as
guish between myth, legend, and what we now preserving, even though in garbled form,
call ‘historical facts’. It was not their primary genuine reminiscences of the persons and
purpose to establish the exact truth of the events described, but this has recently been
events that they described, but rather to raise questioned: see Whybray (1987: 133–219).
in their readers a consciousness of their own
D. Composition. About the process or pro-
identity and a feeling that they were citizens of a
cesses by which the diverse material was com-
great and noble city or race. These historians
bined to form a single literary work there is at
made full use of extant traditions about the
present no consensus of opinion. The Docu-
past, but they were also creators of tradition:
mentary Hypothesis (see INTROD.PENT B), which
where extant traditions were lacking or scanty,
was the dominant theory for about a century,
they did not hesitate to fill them out with det-
envisaged an interweaving of comprehensive
ails, and even entire stories, supplied from their
‘horizontal’ written sources (in Genesis, J, E,
own imaginations. This kind of imaginative
and P); but this view has met strong opposition
writing has analogies with that of the Israelite
during the last twenty years; and none of the
historians; but the purposes of the latter were
alternative theories that have been proposed has
somewhat different. They were certainly con-
yet found general acceptance. One thorough
cerned to create—or, perhaps, to restore—a
investigation of the composition of the patri-
sense of national identity in their readers; but
archal stories (Blum 1984), which envisages a
their intention was far from triumphalist: the
gradual process of composition in which the
principal human characters were not heroes in
traditions about each of the patriarchs were
the fullest sense. For them it is always God who
gradually and independently built up before
has the principal role; the human characters are
their combination into larger complexes, has
represented as foolish and frequently sinful
considerable plausibility; on the other hand,
creatures who time and time again frustrate
the notion of a fragment hypothesis according
God’s good intentions towards them.
to which there was no lengthy process of growth
but a single act of composition in which a mass
C. Types of Material. The character and inten-
of material was collated by a single author, as in
tion of Genesis as a completed book cannot be
the case of the early Greek historians cited
deduced from the wide miscellany of materials
above, has undergone something of a revival:
which constitute its sources. Gunkel (1901) (see
see Whybray (1987: 221–42). In this commentary
Gunkel 1964 for ET of the Introduction to his
the Documentary Hypothesis is referred to only
commentary) identified many of the sources
occasionally. Obvious differences of point of
and demonstrated their nature. Particularly in
view implied in the material employed have
chs. 12–36 he identified many Sagen—that is,
been noted; but no attempt has been made to

brief, originally independent, folk-tales—
define or to date these. References to the
which had been strung together only at a rela-
‘author’, ‘editor’ etc., are to those responsible
tively late stage, eventually taking shape as
for the final shaping of the book.
accounts of the lives of Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob. The somewhat different characters of E. The Date of Genesis. Nothing in the book
chs. 1–11, which narrate cosmic and universal directly indicates the time when it reached its
events (often classified as ‘myths’—an am- final shape. However, many passages reflect
biguous term) and of the story of Joseph in episodes and situations of post-patriarchal
chs. 37–50, a single, homogeneous narrative times: the tradition of a nation comprising
not formed by the combination of Sagen, has twelve tribes (49:16, 28); the Exodus from
55 genesis
Egypt (15:13–14); the future possession of Can- man and woman were banished from the gar-
aan and the areas occupied by the various tribes den but allowed to live outside it; the first mur-
(15:17–20; 17:8; 28:4); the predominance of the derer also was banished, but his life was
tribe of Judah (49:10) and of the Joseph tribes preserved; the human race, despite its total cor-
(especially Ephraim (48:17–20)); and the Davidic ruption, was given a second chance in the per-
monarchy (49:10). There are also anachronisms sons of Noah and his family; the builders of the
such as the references to the ‘land of the Philis- Tower of Babel were scattered and divided, but
tines’ (21:32, 34), whose arrival in Canaan was survived and peopled the world. The picture of
roughly contemporary with that of the Israel- humanity painted in these chapters is dark but
ites, and to the Chaldeans (11:28, 31; 15:7), a realistic; however, it is lightened by the corre-
people of southern Mesopotamia whose sponding theme of divine forbearance which, in
names do not appear in historical records be- the context of the book as a whole, foreshadows
fore the time of the neo-Assyrian empire (from a more hopeful destiny for a human race that
the 8th cent. BCE) and who were otherwise will be blessed in Abraham.
unknown to the OT before the sixth century 2. The two main themes of chs. 12–36 are
BCE. Other features of the book—for example God’s choice of Abraham and his descendants
the constantly reiterated theme of the promise out of the entire human race and the promises
of possession of the land of Canaan—are per- that he made to them. The particularity of this
haps best understood as particularly relevant to choice is striking: it is seen not only in the initial
a time when the nation had been dispossessed selection of Abraham but also in a series of
from the land—that is, either the Babylonian subsequent choices: not Ishmael but Isaac, not
exile during the sixth century BCE or the ensuing Esau but Jacob are chosen. (The theme is pur-
period when the Jewish community living in sued further in the succeeding Joseph story:
and around Jerusalem were once more, like Joseph, Jacob’s eleventh son, is chosen to be
the patriarchs of Genesis, aliens in the land, the saviour of his family, and even in the next
needing encouragement to hope that God generation Ephraim is preferred before Mana-
would enable them to throw off the yoke of sseh.) The promises in their fullest form com-
Persian domination and would restore to them prise divine blessing, guidance and protection,
the fullness of his blessing as the rightful wealth and political power, and the possession
owners of the land which he had promised of the land of Canaan as a permanent home. But
long ago to them. there is also an important counter-theme: that
of the perils into which the recipients of the
F. Themes. 1. The primeval history (Gen 1–11) promises (and their wives) constantly fall,
heralds some of the main themes of the book. It sometimes through their own fault and some-
defines Israel’s place in the world of nations and times at God’s instigation (Gen 22). It is this
links the human figures of the remote past with counter-theme that gives liveliness and excite-
Abraham and his descendants by a series of ment to the narratives; indeed, without it there
genealogies. It also functions as a universal his- would be no story to tell. The failure of the
tory of beginnings. It afforded the author the promise of the land to materialize within the
opportunity to state his belief that there is only timespan of the book gives these narratives a
one, supreme God and that he created the world forward-looking character: the possession of
with all its inhabitants. It is concerned with the the land is clearly the goal to which they aspire.
nature of this God and with the nature of his There are, of course, a number of subsidiary
human creatures. This universal history taught themes, corresponding to the variety of the
the Israelite readers a moral lesson as well as a material. There is throughout a strong emphasis
theology: human beings are both foolish and
on the inscrutability of God’s purposes.

prone to sinful rebellion against God, arrogant 3. The story of Joseph (chs. 37–50) continues
and ambitious, seeking to achieve divine status that of the previous section, but has its own
for themselves and capable of murderous inten- independent character and its own themes. Ex-
tions towards one another. It warned about the cept at the very end of the book the divine prom-
consequences of such behaviour: God, who at ises are not specifically mentioned in these
the beginning had approved his created world chapters, though the theme of the endangered
as good, determined to obliterate the human heirs continues to be prominent: at different
race when it became corrupted; but he merci- times both Joseph and his family are placed in
fully refrained from carrying out this intention: peril. The Egyptian setting is a major feature of
he punished, but did not destroy. So the first the Joseph story and is described in some detail,
genesis 56
partly to give it a plausible local colour but later chapters of the book, can hardly be ad-
mainly in order to enhance the impression of equate as a structural marker since it is used
Joseph’s eminent position in Egypt. Joseph’s char- with different meanings, e.g. genealogy or list
acter is portrayed with consummate skill. This of descendants (6:9; 10:1) and story or history
final part of the book leaves the readers with (2:4; 37:1). One way of viewing the purpose and
hopes of a splendid future. The final verses spe- structure of chs. 1–11 is to see them as presenting
cifically foretell the Exodus from Egypt which will a picture of the growing power of sin in the
lead at last to the possession of the promised land. world, together with a parallel picture of a ‘hid-
den growth of grace’ (von Rad 1966a: 64–5).
This view has some plausibility as regards chs.
COMMENTARY 3–9. If this is so, however, the story of the Tower
of Babel (11:1–9) surely stands outside the pat-
A History of Origins (chs. 1–11) tern. There, as also in ch. 3, it appears to be
These chapters may be regarded as a prologue God’s concern for his own status rather than
to Genesis, and indeed to the whole Pentateuch. his grace that is to the fore. It may be best to
Beginning as they do with the activity of God regard this story as an appendix to chs. 1–9, or
even before the universe came into existence as a negative foil to the story of Abraham that
(Gen 1:1–2), they clearly cannot be based on begins at the end of ch. 11.
any record of what actually occurred; and the Why does the Pentateuch preface its history
fact that in them a number of persons are of Israel’s ancestors with these universal stories?
reported as having lived preternaturally long It is of interest to note that the origin-stories of
lives is sufficient to show that the world other nations (see Van Seters 1983) show a simi-
depicted here is different even from that of the lar pattern: many of them also begin with myth-
later chapters of the book. These stories do not ical tales and then proceed gradually to the
constitute a connected sequence; they have more historical. The aim of such works, apart
been linked together only in a very artificial from a wish to satisfy the readers’ natural curi-
way by a series of genealogies (Gen 4:17–22; osity about ‘how it all began’, was to create or
5:1–32; 10:1–32; 11:10–32). They are universal strengthen their sense of national or ethnic
stories, depicting not human beings as we identity, especially at critical times when for
know them but giants or heroes in something specific reasons this was threatened. In order
like the fairytale sense of those words. What is to foster such a sense it was thought necessary
being conveyed is how the authors or collectors to account for the nation’s place in the world;
of the stories imagined that it might all have and, since the human race was thought to have
begun. However, as we shall see, these stories had a single origin, to explain how the various
were intended to convey a much more pro- peoples had come into existence. In Gen 1–11
found meaning than that. these aims come to the fore in ch. 10, which was
Many peoples have at an early stage of their clearly intended to be a ‘map’ of all the peoples
development possessed a fund of stories about of the world, and in 11:1–9, which accounts for
the origin of the world and the earliest history their failure to remain united. At this point the
of the human race; and many of the stories in history of Israel’s ancestors could begin.
Gen 1–11 have a family likeness to origin-stories But beyond these motives Gen 1–11 was
current in the Near-Eastern milieu to which designed to reflect certain distinctive Israelite
ancient Israel belonged (cf. ANET 3–155). These (Yahwistic) articles of faith. Not the least of
Israelite versions, however, are unique in that these was monotheism. Despite the inclusion
they are monotheistic: all the divine actions that of the phrases ‘Let us make man in our own
they depict are attributed to a single deity, and image’ (1:26) and ‘like one of us’ (3:22), on which
there is no mention of other gods. The term see below, this monotheistic stance is quite
‘myth’ is often applied to them; but since there striking and sometimes even polemical—that
is no agreement about the meaning of that term is, anti-polytheistic—especially in ch. 1. The
it is probably best avoided. conflict-tradition of Mesopotamia, according
It is possible that the final author or compiler to which the creator-god had had to fight and
of these chapters has left an indication of their kill a hostile monster before he could create the
structure by his use of the word tôlĕdôt, espe- world, although traces of it are to be found
cially in the phrase ‘These are the tôlĕdôt of . . . ’ elsewhere in the OT (e.g. Ps 74:13–14; Isa 51:9),
(2:4; 6:9; 10:1; 11:10, 27; cf. also 5:1). However, this is entirely absent here: the ‘great sea monsters’
phrase, which also occurs at intervals in the (tannı̂nı̂m, 1:21) are simply listed together with
57 genesis
God’s other creatures. Similarly the sun, moon, implied—it is an agreeable one. The cursing of
and other heavenly bodies, which in the Near- the ground and the consequent harshness
Eastern religious systems are powerful deities of agricultural labour (3:17–19) are the result of
coexisting with the creator-god, are here a part disobedience. The final line of 3:19 (‘You are
of God’s creation and are entirely subservient to dust, and to dust you shall return’), possibly a
him, being assigned by him their proper func- common saying, does not imply that human
tions (1:14–18). Equally distinctive of Israelite mortality is the result of disobedience.
religion is the setting aside by God of the sev- Another matter that evidently called for exp-
enth day, the day on which he rested from his lanation was the wearing of clothing. The feel-
work of creation, to be observed as a day ing of shame at appearing naked before others
of rest—presumably by the whole created (cf. 9:20–7) and the universal custom of wearing
world—in the institution of the Sabbath (2:1–3). clothes are explained as a consequence of the
Some scholars have interpreted these chap- eating of the forbidden fruit (3:7–12, 21): previ-
ters as reflecting the experiences of the Baby- ously (2:25), nakeness had not been shameful.
lonian exile or the early post-exilic period. Thus Other aetiologies in these chapters include the
the themes of punishment for sin, especially reason for the human dislike of snakes and for
banishment from God’s presence and/or disper- the ability of snakes to move without legs (3:14–
sal or destruction (3:23–4; 4:12, 16; 6–8; 11:4, 9), 15), the reason for the rainbow (9:12–17), and the
have been taken as symbolic of Israel’s richly origin of the sabbath.
deserved banishment from the land of Canaan, It is generally agreed that the stories in Gen 1–
while the signs of divine grace and forgiveness, 11 are not a pure invention of the final compiler:
especially God’s acceptance of Noah’s sacrifice however much he may have adapted them for
and the covenant which he made with him his own purpose, he was using material current
(8:20–9:17) would suggest to the exilic or post- in his own time. On the nature and date of this
exilic reader that God had even now not cast off material, however, there is at present no agree-
his people but was a God of infinite patience ment. Arguments have recently been advanced
and forgiveness who would rescue Israel from which suggest that, at least in their present
its folly and its guilt as he had done for human- form, these chapters cannot be older than the
ity in ancient times. sixth century BCE. For example, the Chaldeans,
Some of these stories also betray an interest referred to in 11:28, a verse assigned by the
in aetiology: that is, in seeking the origin of followers of the Documentary Hypothesis to
various phenomena of universal human experi- the oldest source J, did not become significant
ence which appear to defy rational explanation. on the international scene until about that time,
These aetiologies are of many kinds. One of the while the garden of Eden is nowhere mentioned
most important ones concerns the reason for in OT texts before the time of the exilic Isaiah
human mortality, a common theme in both (Deutero-Isaiah, Isa 51:3) and Ezekiel (Ezek 28:13;
Near-Eastern and classical literature that some- 36:35). Similarly Abraham (Abram 11:26–30)
times took the form of narratives in which appears to have been unknown in the pre-exilic
human beings attempted to wrest immortality period: he is never mentioned by the pre-exilic
from the gods but failed; this is alluded to in prophets, and his name occurs only in two OT
Gen 3:22—which appears to imply that mortal- passages which may be pre-exilic but are prob-
ity is inherent in mankind’s status as creature— ably not (1 Kings 18:36; Ps 47:9). This fact is, of
and in the mysterious incident of 6:1–3. The course, significant also for the dating of the
nature of the relationship between man and story of Abraham in chs. 12–25. Finally it is
woman is discussed in 2:18, which explains remarkable that there is no extant ancient
Near-Eastern text that in any way covers the
why both sexes are necessary to a complete

humanity, and in 2:23–4, which explains the same ground as Gen 1–11, and no evidence that
attraction between the sexes and the forming any other people compiled a comparable nar-
of permanent relationships between them as rative before the Graeco-Roman period.
due to God’s providence. In ch. 3, however, the
less ideal realities of the relationship are attrib- (1:1–2:4a) The Creation of the World This cre-
uted to disobedience to God’s command, in ation story is only one of many current in the
which both partners are implicated. ancient Near East; there are, for example, sev-
There is also an aetiology of work here. Work eral extant Egyptian ones in which the creation
in itself is not regarded as a punishment: rather, of the world is attributed to different gods, and
it is a natural (male) activity (2:15); but—it is the creator-god is not necessarily the principal
genesis 58
god. This multiplicity is due to the existence of very good’ (1:31). This is the craftsman’s assess-
different local traditions. In the OT also, where ment of his own work; and it says something
there is only one God, we find several quite about his intention as well as about his artis-
distinct creation traditions. In addition to Gen try. A competently crafted artefact implies a
1 there is a different account in Gen 2, and good intention. The word ‘good’ (tôb) here,
another version is reflected especially in Ps however, refers more directly to the usefulness
74:13–14 and Isa 51:9, in which the creation of of the world—presumably primarily its useful-
the world appears to have followed a conflict in ness to mankind. It does not necessarily have
which YHWH defeated and killed a sea monster an ethical connotation: it is not mankind that
or monsters. Other somewhat different versions is said to be ‘good’, but God’s work as crafts-
are found in Prov 8:22–31, in parts of the book man. The author was well aware of the subse-
of Job, and elsewhere. quent catastrophic introduction of evil into the
The creation story in Gen 1:1–2:4 has long world.
been thought to have particular affinities with In its cosmology—that is, its understanding
the Babylonian Enuma Elish (ANET 60–72); but a of the structure and different parts of the uni-
glance at the latter shows that the relationship is verse—this account of the creation conforms to
at most a very remote one. Apart from the fact that generally current in the ancient Near East.
that the Genesis story is monotheistic, the most (In some OT passages this cosmology is de-
crucial difference between the two accounts is scribed in more detail.) The pre-existent watery
that Enuma Elish belongs to the category of the waste (1:1–2) was divided into two by the cre-
conflict tradition, which is entirely absent from ation of a solid dome or vault (the sky, 1:6–8), so
Gen 1. In the former, the god Marduk first sum- that there was water both above and below it.
mons the other deities and, after killing the sea The lower mass of water was then confined to a
monster Tiamat, creates heaven and earth by limited area, the sea, revealing the dry land,
splitting Tiamat’s body into two. (The com- which God called ‘the earth’ (1:9–10). (According
monly repeated notion that the word ‘the to Gen 7:11 the sky had ‘windows’ which when
deep’—tĕhôm, in 1:2—is a pale reminiscence of opened allowed the rain to fall.) The heavenly
Tiamat cannot be sustained.) There is no trace bodies, sun, moon, and stars, moved across the
of a conflict here: God is alone, and he is vault of the sky, giving light and following a
supreme. prescribed programme (1:14–18).
This account contains no explicit statement A characteristic feature of this account of cre-
about God’s purpose in creating the world; but ation is its precise and meticulous style. It fre-
this purpose is clearly implied in the great quently repeats the same phraseology, listing the
emphasis that is placed on the position of man- various acts of creation with the dryness of a
kind in God’s plan: the creation of mankind, the catalogue, and possesses nothing of the imagina-
last of God’s creative acts, is evidently the climax tive or dramatic skill characteristic of chs. 2–3.
of the whole account, and receives the greatest Yet, as has long been recognized, there remain a
attention (1:26–30). The creatures created on the number of variations or inconsistencies of detail,
previous days—light, day and night, dry land, which suggests that two or more accounts have
heavenly bodies, plants and animals—are all by been combined. In particular, the creative acts are
implication provided for mankind’s use and introduced in different ways. While in some cases
convenience; human beings are given the plants God creates simply by speaking (‘And God
for food, and power over the animals. Above all said . . . ’), in others we are told that he per-
they are created in God’s image and likeness formed certain actions: he made, separated,
(1:26–7). Whatever may be the precise meaning named, blessed, placed. A second anomalous
of that phrase—this question has been endlessly feature is that although the entire work of cre-
debated (see below)—it sets human beings apart ation was carried out in six days (presumably to
from all the other creatures and puts them in a conform to the concept of six days of creation
unique relationship with God himself. concluding with a Sabbath rest on the seventh
A further clue to God’s intention when he day), there are in fact eight creative acts: on the
created the world is to be found in the succes- third day and again on the sixth (1:9–13, 24–31),
sive statements made at the conclusion of each two acts of creation are performed. It is not
act of creation, that ‘God saw that it was good’ possible, however, to reconstruct the earlier
(1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25), culminating in the final accounts whose existence is thus implied.
comprehensive statement that he ‘saw every- The sentence with which ch. 1 begins (1:1–2)
thing that he had made, and indeed, it was has been translated in several ways (see NRSV
59 genesis
marg.). The older English versions have ‘In the Unlike the plants which are to serve as food
beginning God created . . . ’. Some other fea- for both human beings and animals (1:29, 30)
tures of these verses call for comment. The it is significantly not said of them that they may
use of the word ‘God’ (ʾĕlōhı̂m) rather than be killed and eaten. This is a vegetarian regime.
YHWH (2:4b–3:24 mainly uses ‘the LORD The meaning of the statement that mankind
God’—YHWH (ʾĕlōhı̂m) is found elsewhere in was created in God’s image (selem) and likeness
Genesis and has been taken to indicate the (děmût) (1:26, 27) has always _been a matter of
use of different sources. The word rendered discussion, as also has been the use of the plural
by ‘created’ (bārāʾ) is a rare and probably late form (‘Let us make’, ‘in our image’, 1:26, although
term confined almost entirely in the OT to Gen in 1:27 the singular form ‘in his image’ is used).
1–6, where it occurs 9 times, and Isa 40–66; it is The most probable explanation of the second
used exclusively of the creative activity of God. point is that the plural is used to denote the
Elsewhere in the OT that activity is denoted by court of heavenly beings who exist to do God’s
words meaning ‘to form’ or ‘to make’, which bidding. The terms ‘image’ and ‘likeness’ are
are also used of human activity. probably not to be differentiated: the double
1:2 refers to the situation before God’s cre- phrase is simply for emphasis. It clearly defines
ative action began. There is no question here of human beings as resembling God in a way that
a creatio ex nihilo, a ‘creation out of nothing’. The is not the case with the animals (cf. 1:28 and Ps
earth (hāʾ āres) already existed, but it was a 8:3–8). The nature of this resemblance is not
‘formless void’_ (tōhû wābōhû)—not a kind of apparent, however, and hypotheses abound.
non-existence but something empty and form- Since God is often represented elsewhere in
less, without light and covered by the water of the OT as having bodily organs—hands, feet,
the deep (tĕhôm). There are echoes here of the eyes, etc.—and the word selem is elsewhere used
Near-Eastern cosmologies. The word rûah, ren- of images of gods, it has been _ supposed that the
dered by ‘wind’ in NRSV, can also mean _‘spirit’ passage refers to a resemblance to God’s exter-
(see NRSV marg.). Whichever is the correct nal form. It is more probable, however, that
interpretation, NRSV’s ‘swept’ is a participle, some less material resemblance is intended:
denoting a continuous action; it should perhaps that human beings, in distinction from the ani-
be rendered ‘was hovering’. mals, possess the unique capacity to communi-
In 1:3 as in some later verses God creates by cate meaningfully with God, or—particularly
means of a command. His words are presum- with reference to the animals—are God’s repre-
ably addressed to the ‘formless void’ of 1:2. The sentatives or vicegerents on earth.
creation of light before that of the sun and The ordinance that mankind is to rule over
moon (1:14–18) has led to the suggestion that the animal kingdom (1:26, 28), like the state-
this feature of the account is derived from an ment that the sun and moon are to rule over
earlier, somewhat different tradition. God’s sep- the day and the night (1:16), determines man-
aration of light from darkness and his naming kind’s function in the world. It does not imply
them (1:4–5), like his other acts of separating exploitation, for food or for any other purpose;
and naming (1:6, 8, 10, 14, 18), are the acts of a rather, it is a consequence of the gift to mankind
sovereign who determines the destinies of his of the image of God. Mankind is, as it were, a
subordinates. manager or supervisor of the world of living
In 1:11, 12, 21, 24, 25 the phrase ‘of every kind’ creatures. The blessing, accompanied by the
might be better rendered by ‘(each) according to command to ‘be fruitful and multiply’ (1:28) is,
its species’. The reference to signs and seasons as with the animals (1:22), a guarantee that life is
and days and years in the description of the to continue.
heavenly bodies in 1:14 suggests the establish- God’s rest (šābat, 2:2) on the seventh day imp-
ment of the calendar with particular reference lies the sabbath (šabbāt—the word itself does
to the determination of the dates of the sacred not occur here—which is thereby ‘hallowed’ or
festivals. When the account moves on to the made holy (2:3; cf. Ex 20:8). The same reason for
creation of the animal kingdom, first the water the observance of the sabbath is given in the
animals and birds (1:20–3) and then the land Decalogue (Ex 20:11).
animals (1:24–5), these are distinguished from
all that had been previously created as being (2:4b–3:24) This narrative, which could stand
‘living creatures’ (nepeš [ha] hayyâ, 1:20, 21, 24, by itself as an independent story, has taken up
30)—clearly a higher status _ than that of the themes and motifs quite different from those
plants. They receive God’s blessing (1:22, 28). employed in 1:1–2:4a. It was once generally
genesis 60
believed to be older and more primitive in its (male) human in terms of formation from the
theology than the preceding chapter (J as con- soil (perhaps rather, clay). This is a tradition also
trasted with P); but more recently this view has found among modern preliterate peoples (Wes-
been challenged. Blenkinsopp (1992: 63, 65), for termann 1984: 204). In Egyptian mythology the
example, suggests that it may have been ‘gen- god Khnum fashioned living creatures on a
erated by reflection on the creation account in potter’s wheel (ANET 368, 431, 441), while in
Genesis 1’ and may be seen as ‘standing in a the Babylonian tradition the wild man Enkidu
wisdom tradition which indulged in ‘‘philoso- was fashioned from clay (ANET 74).
phizing by means of myth’’ ’. Undoubtedly Eden (2:8—the word means ‘delight’) as the
some of the motifs employed are considerably garden of God occurs again in Ezek 28:13; 31:9;
older than the author’s own time; but the tell- Joel 2:3, and Eden by itself in a few passages in
ing of tales for edifying or didactic purposes is Ezekiel and in Isaiah (51:3), always as a place of
more a characteristic of a late stage of civiliza- ideal fertility and beauty. (It also occurs in Gen
tion than an early one. There is evidence, too, 4:16 as a place-name.) In Ezek 28:13–16 there is
that some elements of the vocabulary an allusion to a myth of an expulsion from the
employed here are late rather than early. garden, but this differs markedly from Gen 2–3.
This is a story about two people, a man and a The two named trees in the garden—the tree
woman, and what happened to them. Although of the knowledge of good and evil (2:9, 17, and
in the context they are necessarily pictured as also, it must be presumed, the ‘tree that is in the
the first man and woman, they are symbols as middle of the garden’, 3:3; cf. 3:11, 12) and the tree
well as ancestors of the human race: behind his of life (2:9; 3:22) constitute a puzzle in that the
statements that ‘This is what happened’ the latter does not appear in the main story but
author is saying ‘This is how human beings only in the two verses mentioned above. The
behave, and these are the consequences that problem is usually, and probably rightly, solved
follow.’ The eating of the fruit is not a single by supposing that the author combined two
event of the remote past, but something that is variant traditions in order to introduce the
repeated again and again in human history. The theme of life and death, and was not concerned
traditional view that it was the first sin that with consistency of detail. Both trees have con-
caused all later generations to be born in ‘ori- nections with wisdom themes. In the book of
ginal sin’ is not borne out by this story, although Proverbs knowledge is a synonymous with wis-
it has the aetiological purpose of explaining the dom; and in Prov 3:18 it is stated that wisdom is
present conditions of human existence. It ‘a tree of life to those who lay hold of her’. This
teaches that God’s intention for human beings might lead one to suppose that the two trees are
is wholly good, but that they can be led astray by the same, but it is clear from 2:9 and 3:22 that
subtle temptations; and that, while disobedience this is not so. So knowledge and (eternal) life are
to God, which is self-assertion, may bring not synonymous in this story.
greater self-knowledge, it leads to disaster: the 2:15 resumes the main narrative after what
intimate relationship with God is broken. Life appears to be a digression. The identity of the
then becomes harsh and unpleasant; however, first two of the four rivers of 2:10–14 is not
God does not entirely abandon his creatures known. 2:16–17 contain the first instance of a
but makes special provisions for their preserva- divine prohibition, on which the plot of ch. 3
tion. An Israel that had suffered devastation and depends. The naming of the animals by the man
exile from its land could hardly fail to get the in 2:19–20 establishes their distinct characteristics
message. and confirms the man’s rule over them. The cre-
It is hardly correct to call ch. 2 a second and ation of woman from the man’s rib is a detail that
no doubt derives from an older tradition. In 2:23
alternative creation story. The reference to the

creation of the world only occupies 2:4b–6, and the word ‘woman’ (ʾiššâ) is stated—erroneously—
is expressed in a subordinate clause: ‘In the day to be derived from ‘man’ (ʾı̄š). 2:24a is an aetiology
when . . . ’. It is introduced in order to provide a explaining the origin of the relation between the
setting for the main story. It belongs to a differ- sexes; it appears, however, to run counter to
ent tradition from that of ch. 1 with its Meso- actual practice. 2:25b probably expresses a view
potamian perspective—that of Palestine, where that was generally held about primitive man. It
rain (2:5) is vitally important for the existence of also points ahead to 3:8–11: shame is one of the
plant and animal life. But other motifs may have consequences of sin.
Mesopotamian or other origins. In 2:7 the The serpent (3:1) is neither a supernatural
author chose to depict the creation of the first enemy threatening God’s creation from outside
61 genesis
nor some kind of inner voice within the woman The reason for the expulsion from the garden is
urging her to disobedience. It is specifically specifically stated in 3:22: it is to prevent man-
stated that it was one of God’s creatures, but kind from eating the fruit of the tree of life and
that it was craftier (ʿārûm) than all the others. so obtaining eternal life. The theme echoes
(There is a play on words here: ʿārôm (2:25) Mesopotamian myths about mankind’s failure
means ‘naked’.) ʿārûm is an ambiguous word: it to attain immortality (see ANET 89–96, 101–3).
can also denote ‘wisdom’ in a positive sense. But There is no implication here or anywhere else in
here it is the wrong kind of wisdom possessed chs. 2–3 that mankind was originally intended to
by the serpent that initiates mankind’s fall into be immortal.
disaster. Snakes played a significant part in the In 3:24 God takes elaborate precautions to
mythologies and religious practices of the anci- ensure that the man and woman do not re-enter
ent Near East, as objects both of fear and wor- the garden. The cherubim (cf. Ezek 10; Ps 18:10)
ship. The question of the origin of the serpent’s are supernatural beings closely associated with
wickedness is not raised here. The phenomenon God who carry out his commands, here as guard-
of the speaking snake (cf. Balaam’s ass, Num ians; the flaming and turning sword reflects a
22:28–30) is a folkloric one. Mesopotamian tradition.
In its conversation with the woman (3:1b–5)
the serpent asserts that God’s threat of immedi- (4:1–16) In its present context this story is a
ate death for eating the fruit of the tree of continuation of the previous chapter, as is
knowledge (2:17) is a false one. The acquisition shown by the mention of the name Eve. How-
of the knowledge of good and evil (that is, of ever, the use of a different source is indicated by
wisdom) will lead rather to the human pair the fact that God is now called not by the
becoming ‘like God’. There is truth in what the appellation ‘the LORD God’ (YHWH ʾĕlōhı̂m) but
serpent says: eating the fruit does not result in by the single name YHWH. In v. 1 there is a play
immediate death, and although the man and on words: Eve called her firstborn Cain (qayin)
woman do not become wholly like God since because she had ‘acquired’ (qānâ) him from
they still lack immortality, God fears that if they YHWH.
also eat the fruit of the tree of life they will This is a story about Cain: his brother Abel’s
obtain full divine status (3:22). But the serpent role is entirely passive. The account of Cain’s
fails to say what will be their actual fate. murder of his brother Abel follows the pattern
The various punishments imposed by God on of ch. 3. This motif of fratricide is found in other
the guilty (3:14–19) all have aetiological bases: ancient myths, for example in the Egyptian
serpents have no legs and are thought to ‘eat story of the murder of Osiris by his brother
dust’, and bite human beings but are killed by Seth and, in Roman mythology, that of Romu-
them; women are attached to their husbands, lus’s murder of Remus. The similarity of motif,
suffer pain in childbirth, and also suffer from however, does not help to elucidate the point of
their husbands’ domination (contrast ‘helper’ Gen 4:1–16. Some scholars have seen this in the
and ‘partner’ in 2:18). The final clause of 3:19, difference between the brothers’ occupations
probably a common saying, adds point to the (v. 2) and in YHWH’s acceptance of Abel’s
first half of that verse, which refers back to 2:7. meat offering while he rejected Cain’s fruit of-
The derivation of the name Eve (hawwâ, 3:20) fering (vv. 3–5), which was the cause of Cain’s
which occurs in the OT only here and _ in 4:1, is anger. But no explanation is given in the text of
unknown. There is a play on words here: hawwâ God’s preference, and it is not probable that the
_ to
echoes hay, ‘living (person)’. This verse seems story, at any rate in its present form, reflects
have no_ connection with the previous verses, an age-old rivalry between pastoralists and
though it is separated from the notice of Eve’s
farmers.
becoming a mother (4:1) by only a few verses. The story is of course significant in that this is
The somewhat ludicrous picture in 3:21 of the earliest instance in Genesis of death and also
God’s acting as seamstress for the man and his of violence committed by one human being
wife is an indication of his continuing concern against another. Although there is no suggestion
for mankind now that he has abandoned his in the text that the sin of disobedience commit-
original intention to impose the death sentence ted by the first human pair is here seen as the
(2:17) on them. 3:22–4 is not to be regarded as the cause of the universal corruption of human na-
imposition of an additional punishment: God ture, the fact that the first murder immediately
has already made it clear that mankind’s way of follows it can hardly be without significance.
life must now change radically and for the worse. There is in these chapters a progression in evil
genesis 62
which culminates in the statements in 6:5, 11 that the verb šı̂t, ‘to put, procure’ (NRSV ‘appointed’).
mankind has become wholly corrupt. The statement at the end of v. 26 that mankind
In his reply to God’s questioning (v. 9) Cain (ʾĕnôs—the word is identical with the name
intensifies his sin by a lie: he pretends that he Enosh) began ‘at that time’ to invoke the name
does not know where Abel is. He also declines of YHWH appears to contradict Ex 6:2–3, where
responsibility for his brother—a denial of family it is stated that the worship of YHWH began
solidarity that would be anathema to Israelite with Moses (cf. also Ex 3:13–15). The attempt to
readers. The blood of Abel is understood as reconcile v. 26 with the Exodus passages by
crying out from the ground (v. 10), demanding arguing that the former only refers to divine
vengeance. God’s answer to this cry is a curse (vv. worship in general is hardly convincing. That
11, 12). Cain is condemned to have no permanent there is a discrepancy here should be admitted.
place to dwell: he will henceforth be a wanderer The proponents of the Documentary Hypoth-
or fugitive on the earth (v. 14), subject to the esis regarded the discrepancy as providing
vengeance of anyone who may meet him strong evidence of their source theory.
(v. 13). (The implication that there are other
human beings on the earth shows that the (5:1–32) The genealogy of Seth of which this
story is not in fact a continuation of ch. 2–3; cf. chapter consists, which traces the history of
the statement in 4:17 that Cain later married a mankind from the beginning to the birth of
wife.) But in v. 15 God mitigates his punishment, Noah, is linked to ch. 1 by the résumé in vv. 1–2.
cursing in turn Cain’s potential murderers, and This is a somewhat different tradition from
puts him under his protection. The nature of the that of the genealogy of Cain in ch. 4, though
mark (ʾôt) that God placed on him as a sign that it has some of the names in common. In this
he was not to be killed is not explained in the chapter Lamech becomes the father of Noah
text, and the various explanations that have been (v. 29). Enoch appears in both lists, but in v. 22
offered by scholars are purely speculative. The there is an additional note about his character
‘land of Nod (nôd)’ to which Cain took himself and fate. He ‘walked with God’, as is also said of
(v. 16) should not be understood as a geograph- Noah in 6:9; and, presumably on account of
ical location: the word probably means ‘aimless this exceptional piety, he was mysteriously
wandering’. taken away by God and disappeared from the
earth. (Cf. the similar translation of Elijah, 2
(4:17–26) The genealogy in vv. 17–22 is in two Kings 2:10–11.) (The late Jewish books of Enoch
parts: vv. 17–18 list six generations (making used this information to develop elaborate
seven in all if Adam, v. 1, is included), while speculations about Enoch’s adventures after
vv. 19–22 are of a different, collateral, type, his translation.)
listing the children of Lamech by his two There is a partial parallel between this list and
wives. The latter passage has something of the the Mesopotamian King Lists, especially the old
character of an aetiology of the origin of various Babylonian (Sumerian) King List (ANET 265–6)
aspects of civilized life; the origin of cities is which ascribes even more fantastically long
interestingly placed very early (v. 17). This pro- reigns to kings who lived both before and
pensity to satisfy a demand for historical infor- after the Flood. However, these lists differ in
mation about origins by naming the inventors important respects from Gen 5, and there is no
of existing aspects of life is not peculiar to reason to suppose that the latter was modelled
Israel: we may compare the Sumerian ‘seven on the former. But they do share a common
sages’ who taught mankind the pursuits of civ- notion of a succession of distant forebears; and
ilization, and the Greek myth of Prometheus, they also have in common the idea that these
who gave mankind the gift of fire. human beings of the unimaginably remote past
The song of Lamech (vv. 23–4) is an elabor- were of a quite different order of vitality and
ation of the preceding genealogy. It may origin- durability from the puny men and women of
ally have been a boasting song; but in its the present age.
present context its prediction of dramatically v. 29 refers back to 3:17. The name Noah (nōah)
increased violence marks a new stage in the is improbably associated in the Hebrew text _
progress of human wickedness. vv. 25–6 appear with the root n-h-m, ‘to comfort’ (NRSV ‘bring
to be a fragment of a separate genealogy (of _ translation seems to presup-
us relief’); the Greek
Seth) from that of Cain; it is given in a more pose a form of the root n-w-h, which would be
complete form in ch. 5. v. 25 refers back to 4:1. closer to ‘Noah’ and would mean _ ‘give rest’. This
The name Seth is connected by the author with verse is evidently intended to introduce the story
63 genesis
of the Flood, though this summary of Noah’s different parts of the world between whom no
achievements, whichever version is accepted, is kind of historical contact seems possible that
not particularly appropriate. the theme seems almost to be a universal fea-
ture of the human imagination. The flood story

(6:1–4) It must be admitted that the meaning of Genesis is a clear example of a type that was
and purpose of this story remain uncertain after characteristic of the Mesopotamian world. The
a long history of attempts to interpret it. Every two extant literary accounts that most closely
verse presents difficulties. v. 1 speaks of a great resemble it are Atrahasis (ET in Lambert and
increase of human population—a motif of Millard 1969) and Tablet XI of the Epic of Gilga-
Mesopotamian origin-stories, where this consti- mesh (ANET 93–5). The Babylonian text trans-
tuted a threat to the gods; but as far as one can lated in ANET was, according to Lambert and
see this is not central to the biblical story. Espe- Millard, largely derived from Atrahasis, although
cially problematic is the interpretation of the the latter in its fragmentary state lacks some of
phrase ‘the sons of God’ (bĕnê-hāʾ ĕlōhı̂m), which the details preserved in the former such as the
can also be rendered by ‘the sons of the gods’, in sending out of birds to discover whether the
v. 2. These are mentioned again in Job 1:6; 2:1 waters had receded. But unlike Gilgamesh, Atra-
and—with slightly different wording (bĕnê hasis resembles Genesis in that it contains an
ʾēlı̂m)—in Ps 29:1; 89:6. In those passages they account of the creation of mankind from clay
are heavenly beings subordinate to YHWH and before proceeding to the story of the Flood.
members of his council. In the texts from Ras As was pointed out long ago, there are a
Shamra (Ugarit) the sons of the gods are them- number of details in the Genesis story such as
selves gods and members of the pantheon of the chronology and the numbers of animals
which the high god El is the head. The trad- taken into the ark that are mutually contradict-
itional view of the sons of God here in v. 2 ory. Attempts to reconcile these, however ing-
is that they are angels; but the implication of enious, can hardly be convincing. It is clear that
vv. 1–4 as a whole is that their activities do not more than one version of the story have been
meet with YHWH’s approval. There are other combined. But the text as it stands can no
ancient myths describing marriages between longer be separated into two complete versions:
gods and human women, and also well-known there is, for example, only one account of God’s
myths about a rebellion in heaven. The story detailed instructions to Noah about the con-
here may have been derived from an otherwise struction and dimensions of the ark (6:14–16),
unknown Canaanite myth. without which there could be no story.
In v. 3 YHWH is represented as speaking to The author, who may have known several ver-
himself, expressing his determination to limit sions from which he could choose, has spliced
the span of human life to 120 years. Here we two of them together without concerning him-
have once more the motif of a divine prohib- self about total consistency—a method already
ition of human immortality, which might have noted above with regard to chs. 2–3.
resulted from the union of divine beings with The story of the Flood in Genesis is the cli-
human women. God’s spirit (rûah) here is max of a sequence that begins with the creation
probably equivalent to the ‘breath _ of life’ of of the world and ends, after almost total disaster
2:7. v. 4 appears to be a series of comments on for mankind, with the renewal of mankind
the story, identifying the nature of the children through Noah and his descendants. Despite
born of the divine–human union. They were similarities in some of the details of the account
the Nephilim, interpreted in Num 13:33 as of the Flood itself, no such sequence is to be
giants. In the second half of the verse they found in either Gilgamesh or Atrahasis. In the
are identified with the famous ‘heroes (gib-
former, the Flood is only an episode recounted

bōrı̂m) of old’. The reason why the author by the ‘Babylonian Noah’, one Utnapishtim; no
chose to include this strange story with its information is given about the future of the
polytheistic overtones may be that it served survivors. In Atrahasis as in Genesis the Flood
as a further mark of the corruption of human is part of a connected story, but a quite different
nature and thus as an appropriate prelude to one which involves a quarrel among the gods,
the story of the Flood in chs. 6–9. while the fate of the survivors is barely sketched
in the fragmented manuscripts that have been
(6:5–8:22) The Story of the Flood Stories of a preserved. The Genesis story on the other hand
great flood sent in primeval times to destroy has in the hands of the author acquired a pur-
mankind are so common to many peoples in poseful theological meaning in the context of
genesis 64
the book’s presentation of human nature and of made later with the people of Israel. It is an
the one God’s treatment of it which combines obligation that God imposes on himself; its
mercy and grace with severity. contents are unspecified, but it clearly implies
vv. 5–12 give the reason for the bringing of divine protection and blessing, conditional only
the Flood: human wickedness has now become on Noah’s complete obedience to God’s instruc-
total and universal (Noah being the sole exceptions in 6:18–21, which he carried out (6:22).
tion, 6:9); and God, faced with this apparently In its specification of the numbers of each
complete failure of his hopes, now regrets species of animal to be taken into the ark
his decision to create human beings (6:6) and 6:19–20 differs from that of 7:2–3, which is
determines on their destruction together with clearly from a different source. In 7:2–3 a dis-
all other living creatures (6:7). This striking an- tinction is made between clean and unclean
thropomorphism (i.e. the representation of God animals. This refers to the lists of clean and
as fallible and reacting to a situation as with unclean animals in Lev 11:3–31 and Deut 14:4–
human weakness) is reminiscent of 3:22. Such 20: it is an example of a tendency to carry back
a view of God runs counter to the belief expr- the origin of fundamental institutions (in this
essed elsewhere in the OT (e.g. Num 23:19; 1 case, Mosaic laws) to primeval times. The main
Sam 15:29), but is not unparalleled (cf. e.g. Ex reason for the command to take seven rather
32:14; Am 7:3, 6), though in those instances than two pairs of the clean species into the ark
God’s ‘repentance’ is favourable rather than was that some of the clean animals were to be
unfavourable to those concerned. More analo- reserved to be used, for the first time, as animal
gous to the present passage is God’s threat in Ex sacrifices (8:20).
32:10 to destroy his rebellious people and to The discrepancies in the statements about
start again with Moses. the duration of the Flood in 7:4–8:14, which
The statement that humanity had become to- are due to the combination of different
tally corrupt is repeated in 6:11–12. Since there is sources, are difficult to disentangle, although
a change in the appellation of God here—from the main outline of the narrative is clear. The
YHWH to ʾĕlōhı̂m—this verse has been thought immediate cause of the Flood is a dual one: the
to come from a different source (P as opposed bursting forth of the ‘fountains (i.e. springs)
to J); but in the present context the repetition is of the great deep (tĕhôm rabbâ)’ below the
appropriate since it immediately follows the earth (cf. 1:2) and the opening of the ‘windows
statement about the uniquely righteous Noah of the heavens’ (7:11; cf. Isa 24:18; Mal 3:10) to
in 6:8–9. In 6:12, 13 ‘all flesh’ evidently includes let the torrential rain fall unremittingly for
the animals, though some of these were to be forty days and nights (7:12). This signalled the
preserved by being taken into the ark together undoing of his creation by God’s command:
with Noah and his family. The word ‘ark’ (tēbâ, chaos had come again.
6:14) occurs in the OT only here and in the Ararat (8:4) is mentioned again in 2 Kings
story of the infant Moses (Ex 2:3, 5). It is prob- 19:37; Isa 37:38; Jer 51:27. It was known to the
ably derived from an Egyptian word meaning a Assyrians as Urartu, and was an independent
chest or box. The usual word for ‘ship’ has been kingdom in the early first millennium BCE until
avoided. The use of the word tēbâ may point to its destruction in the sixth century BCE. The area
an earlier version of the story. The identity of corresponds roughly to that of modern Arm-
the word rendered by ‘cypress’ (gōper, older enia. The Epic of Gilgamesh also records the land-
English versions ‘gopher’) is uncertain. The ing of the ark on a mountain. The sending out
impression given of the ark is that of a flat- of a raven and a dove to test the subsidence of
bottomed box-like construction about 450 ft. the waters (8:6–12) also corresponds to a similar
long, 75 ft. broad and 45 ft. deep (6:15) with
incident in Gilgamesh. The first animal sacrifice

three decks, a roof or window (the meaning of on the first altar (8:20) is an act of thanksgiving,
sōhār is uncertain), and a door (6:16; ‘finish it to not an attempt to propitiate God, who had
a_ cubit above’ is incomprehensible). already (6:8, 18) shown his acceptance of
At 6:18 is the first mention of a covenant Noah. But this sacrifice inaugurates a new era
(běrı̂t) in the book. This promise to Noah is in which the slaughter of animals was permitted
reaffirmed in 9:11–17. Since Noah and his family (9:3–4). The anthropomorphical statement that
were to be the only human survivors, it is by God ‘smelled the pleasing odour’, unique in the
implication a covenant made by God with the OT, is no doubt a reminiscence of an earlier
whole future human race; it points forward version of the story: it is a way of saying that
also, however, to the specific covenant to be he approved of the sacrifice. In Gilgamesh at this
65 genesis
point in the story the gods ‘smelled the savour’ with 4:20–2, but with a story attached to it. The
and ‘crowded like flies about the sacrificer’. In point of the story in vv. 20–7 is not that Noah
determining never again to destroy mankind committed a sin in becoming drunk, but that
God now appears to accept that the evil ten- Ham sinned in seeing his father when he was
dency of the human heart is innate and inerad- naked, an act which called forth a curse on Ca-
icable. The negative decision of 8:21 is then naan, Ham’s son. There is nothing in the text to
matched by a positive one: the orderly alterna- support the view advanced by some scholars that
tions of day and night and of the seasons will Ham’s sin was in fact either an act of homosexu-
now resume and will not again be interrupted. ality or the incestuous rape of his mother (Lev
‘As long as the earth endures’ makes it clear, 18:6–19, which speaks of ‘uncovering’ nakedness,
however, that it will not continue for ever but is not speaking of the same thing). Nakedness was
will have an end. shameful (3:7–11), and Ham humiliated his father
by not decently covering him. In vv. 25–7 it
(9:1–17) In vv. 1–7 God, addressing Noah and is already presupposed that Noah’s sons are to
his sons, inaugurates the new era and the become the ancestors of different nations. The
renewed humanity. There are strong indica- incongruity that it is Canaan and not his father
tions here that this is regarded as a new cre- who is cursed (vv. 25, 27) is connected with Israel’s
ation. The passage begins and ends with a traditional hatred of the Canaanites, who are seen
blessing (cf. 1:28) and there is a repetition of as destined to become slaves; but attempts to
the command to be fruitful and multiply and identify the circumstances in which these verses
fill the earth and to rule over the animal world; were written have not been successful. The name
but there are significant differences from ch. 1. Japheth is here aetiologically associated with a
The animals are now to fear their rulers (v. 2), rare Hebrew verb meaning ‘to enlarge’.
and may be killed for food: things are not after
all as idyllic as at the beginning. v. 4 prescribes (10:1–32) This chapter, often known as the
the manner of their slaughter, once more ‘table of the nations’, is an attempt, on the
carrying back the institution of a Mosaic law basis of the presupposition that all humanity
to the primeval period (cf. 7:2–3); this is the is descended from Noah’s three sons, to name
kosher law prohibiting the consumption of an all the nations of the world and to state from
animal’s blood (cf. Lev 7:26–7 and other pas- which genealogical branch they are derived. It
sages). vv. 5–6 forbid homicide: mankind, in con- appears to be quite unique: no comparable anc-
trast to the animals, was created in the image of ient texts exist. Certain stylistic variations and
God. The story of the Flood concludes in vv. 8–17 inconsistencies in the lists of names have led the
on a hopeful note with God’s reaffirmation of the source critics to postulate a combination of the
covenant that he had made with Noah (6:18), sources J and P, despite the fact that there is
which now includes all living creatures as well only one reference to God, where he is referred
as Noah’s descendants. He reveals his previous to by his name YHWH (v. 9). Many but by no
decision (cf. 8:21–2) never again to destroy means all the names are readily identifiable. The
the earth, and makes the rainbow—literally a descendants of Japhet, for example, include the
‘bow in the clouds’—a ‘sign’ of the covenant, a Medes (Madai), the Ionian Greeks (Javan), pos-
reminder both to himself and to mankind— sibly the Cypriots (Kittim), and Rhodians (if the
another example of aetiology. emendation of Rodanim from the Dodanim of
the Hebrew text is correct). The list of Ham’s
(9:18–29) The story of Noah’s drunkenness can descendants, which begins with Nubia (Cush),
hardly be seen as related to that of the Flood. It Egypt, and possibly Lybia (Put), also contains
appears to be a resumption of the history of Canaan, a country which would in modern ter-
human generations in chs. 4 and 5 with its minology be ranked as Semite (i.e. Shemite).
theme of human sin and corruption. vv. 18–19, This is true also of Babylon (Babel) and Assyria.
however, have a connection with the Flood The descendants of Shem, who is called ‘the
story in their reference to the departure of father of all the sons of Eber’, that is, Hebrews,
Noah’s sons from the ark. The notice in v. 18 are listed last as more immediately relevant to
that Ham was the father of Canaan is a link with the readers. There is some inconsistency here:
vv. 20–7; an attempt to account for the curse on Assyria, listed under Ham in v. 11, is given as a
Canaan in vv. 25–7. descendant of Shem in v. 22. Other well-attested
The statement in v. 20 that Noah was the peoples listed as descendants of Shem include
inventor of viticulture is an aetiology comparable Elam and Aram (the Arameans); but most of the
genesis 66
remaining names in these verses are unknown Isaac, and Jacob, the ‘fathers’ of Israel. vv. 27–
or not certainly identifiable, as also is the terri- 32, the genealogy of Terah, Abraham’s father, in
tory mentioned in v. 30. By thus peopling the fact function as the beginning of the story of
world the author has prepared for Abraham’s Abraham, and introduce principal characters in
world, which was already divided into nations. that story: Abraham, his wife Sarai (Sarah), and
The cause of these divisions is given in 11:1–9. his brother Lot. It briefly refers to Sarai’s bar-
renness and a migration of the family from Ur
(11:1–9) This is a compact and self-contained of the Chaldeans, probably in southern Meso-
narrative. It contains an aetiological element in potamia (but ‘Chaldeans’ is an anachronism),
that it purports to explain why the human with the intention of settling in Canaan but
population, which had originally shared the instead getting no further than Haran, a city of
same language, came to be divided by the deve- northern Mesopotamia.
lopment of many languages which prevented
their mutual comprehension and so hindered Abraham and his Family (chs. 12–36)
co-operation; and also how they came to be The world of Israel’s ancestors, Abraham, Isaac,
dispersed throughout the world (though this is and Jacob, and their families, is different from
already implied in the command to ‘fill the that of chs. 1–11: here we are dealing with ‘real’
earth’, 9:1, and its fulfilment in 9:19). But aeti- individuals and their life stories. Yet it is still not
ology is not the main point of the story, which our world. Frequent attempts have been made to
is another account (cf. ch. 3) of human ambition find historical situations into which these patri-
to rise above the human condition, the threat archs can be fitted, but they have all failed to
that this posed to God’s supremacy, and the convince (see Thompson 1974). Gunkel, in
action taken by God to frustrate this. The his famous commentary on Genesis (1901), put
story is located in the land of Shinar, that is, forward a view which was long accepted: that
Mesopotamia (cf. 10:10); the city which they most of these stories were independent short
began to build, perhaps including the tower folk-tales (Sagen) which circulated by word of
(v. 4) is identified in v. 9 with Babylon. There mouth for a very long time before they were
is nothing specifically in the text to indicate combined into longer complexes and eventu-
that the story was inspired by one of the Meso- ally set down in writing. That they have an oral
potamian ziggurats: it is true that the Esagil in origin and are not to be seen as accounts of the
Babylon was supposed to link heaven and lives of historical personages remains a com-
earth; but it was a completed building, not mon opinion; but that they had a long history
one left unfinished as was the city in v. 8. before their incorporation into the present
There is no extant Mesopotamian story com- work is regarded by some recent scholars as
parable with this, though some of its motifs are by no means certain (see Whybray 1987). The
found in a Sumerian epic. The anonymous possibility that these stories may not be much
builders (‘they’) are represented as the whole older than the time of the final redactor of
human population (‘the whole earth’, v. 1). This the Pentateuch is supported by the fact that
means that ‘make a name for ourselves’ implies the pre-exilic parts of the OT with one possible
a universal ambition to attain to a greatness exception (Hos 12:3–4, 12) show no knowledge
superior to their present status, which must of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as individuals or of
mean an infringement of God’s absolute su- events connected with them.
premacy. God’s decision to come down from The true purpose of this part of Genesis was
heaven to see what his puny creatures are try- theological rather than historical in the modern
ing to do (‘Let us go down’, v. 7) is expressed in sense of the latter term. Like some other parts of
the same plural terms as are 1:26 and 3:22. In
the OT which must be regarded as historical

v. 9 the word ‘Babel’ is seen as related to the fiction (e.g. Job, Ruth, Jonah, Esther, and Dan
verb bālal, ‘to mix, confuse’. 1–6), its purpose is to teach a religious lesson. It
is generally admitted that the three patriarchs
(11:10–32) This genealogy spans the gener- were originally unrelated to one another and
ations from Shem to Abram (Abraham). It con- that their stories have been combined in order
centrates on succession from father to son, and to create a family story whose main theme is set
deals with individuals: thus it is intended to be out at the very start (Gen 12:1–3), where Abra-
seen as the family history of a single individual, ham is commanded by God to leave the country
Abraham. It forms a link between the primeval where he has been residing and to migrate to
world and that of the patriarchs, Abraham, another country whose identity will later be
67 genesis
revealed to him, where he will become the ance- the story of the life of Joseph, chs. 37–50, which
stor of a great nation, especially blessed and in belongs to a different literary genre from the
turn conferring his blessing on other peoples. previous stories, see below.) Meanwhile the
This theme of God’s promise dominates these births of all Jacob’s twelve sons had taken
chapters: the promise is repeated on several place, recorded at intervals between 29:32 and
more occasions to Abraham himself (15:4–7, 35:18. Recently attempts have been made to
18–21; 17:4–8; 22:17–18) and then to Isaac (26:2– reconstruct the stages of the process by which
5, 24) and Jacob (35:11–12). The promise of future the patriarchal stories have been composed
blessing implies material success; and it is made (especially Blum 1984), but these remain hypo-
clear that God will guide the fortunes of the thetical.
family. But the continuity of that family dep-
ends on the production of an heir in each suc-
ceeding generation; and the difficulties and The Story of Abraham (chs. 12–25)
dangers attending this provide the dramatic (12:1–3) The story begins with a divine com-
content of many incidents in the story. mand and a dual promise. First, God promises
The promise of the possession of the land, to make Abraham into a great nation; this of
which proved to be the land of Canaan, was not course implies that Abraham himself will have a
in fact fulfilled in the course of the book of male heir and that the succeeding generations
Genesis; but by the end of the book there had will all have numerous progeny, and also that
been a positive development. The twelve sons the future nation will enjoy great political
of Jacob, who were to be the ancestors of the power (the word gôy, ‘nation’, suggests a fully
twelve tribes of Israel, had been born, and had organized group, and the ‘great name’ in this
received their blessings (ch. 49). So the nation of context implies international pre-eminence or
Israel now existed in embryo. Their migration superiority). The second promise is really imp-
to Egypt during a famine, in the final section of lied by the first: it is a promise of divine bless-
the book, may be considered on the one hand as ing, which will ultimately be extended to all
one of the many causes of delay of the fulfil- peoples. There is no specific promise of posses-
ment of the promise; but it is also to be seen as sion of the land here; this appears for the first
the springboard for the miracle at the Sea in the time in 12:7 as a promise not to Abraham per-
book of Exodus and for the subsequent series of sonally but to his descendants. A number of
events related in the rest of the Pentateuch recent scholars, regarding 12:1–3 as representing
which led eventually to the possession of the the earliest stage of the Abraham story, have
land. The readers were thus presented in these maintained that the promise of the land belongs
chapters with a picture of a God who was tota- to a later stage of redaction. This may be so; but
lly in control of events and who had marvel- the initial command to Abraham in v. 1 to travel
lously created their nation and preserved it to a land later to be identified cannot be without
from the beginning, one whose promises they significance, especially to the original readers,
knew to have been ultimately fulfilled; but they who would naturally identify that land with the
were also made aware, through the account of land of Canaan, which they knew had in fact
the wanderings and vicissitudes of their ances- come into the possession of Abraham’s des-
tors, of the precariousness of the life of faith. cendants. The fact that God had arbitrarily
Basically these chapters fall into three sec- uprooted Abraham and exiled him from his
tions, each concerned with the life of one of original country would, however, remind them
the three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. of the precariousness of their own residential
However, since in their present form they are a status. In Gen 23:4 Abraham himself spoke of
combination of separate parts to form the his- his being ‘a stranger and an alien’ in the land. In
tory of a single family, the three stories have 12:1–3, then, the basic promises to the patriarchs
been made to interlock so as to produce a are all already presented.
continuous family saga. Thus Abraham’s death
is recorded in 25:8, but the birth of his heir Isaac (12:4–9) takes Abraham on his journey south
had taken place long before (21:2); similarly the from Haran to Canaan, which God now identi-
birth of Isaac’s son Jacob is noted in 25:25–6, but fies (v. 7) as the land to which he was to go (v. 1).
Isaac’s death only in 35:29. Jacob’s own death His unquestioning obedience to God’s com-
(noted in 49:33) did not occur until the comple- mand is seen by NT writers (Heb 11:8–10; cf.
tion of his son Joseph’s extraordinary success Rom 4; Gal 3) as an outstanding act of faith to
story (Joseph’s birth is recorded in 30:23). (On be imitated. The reference in v. 4 to Lot (cf. 11:27,
genesis 68
31) as Abraham’s travelling companion sets the with ‘great plagues’ (presumably soon cured; a
stage for the story in 13:5–13. The oak of Moreh lacuna in the story has been suspected between
near Shechem (v. 6) is represented as an already vv. 17 and 18) is exemplary and even generous (v.
sacred tree at which oracles were given (mōreh 20). Abraham is left speechless before Pharaoh’s
means ‘one who teaches’); but it was God’s justified reproach. The story is told without the
appearance to Abraham that led him to build making of an overt moral judgement; but the
an altar there and—presumably—to offer sac- contrast between the obedient Abraham of
rifice (cf. Noah’s sacrifice, 8:20). On the invoca- 12:1–9 and the Abraham of this story is unmis-
tion of the name of YHWH at the second altar takable. The story considered by itself is clearly
that he built near Bethel (v. 8) see at 4:26 above. not favourable to Abraham; but in its present
In travelling to the Negeb (the semi-desert area context it has become an illustration of the
to the south of Judah) he reached the southern theme of the promise constantly endangered
border of Canaan, having traversed the land but never annulled. Paradoxically, Abraham
completely from north to south. It is significant emerges from this incident not only unscathed
that it is not stated that he entered any of the but rewarded with great wealth (vv. 16, 20). It is
ancient cities of Canaan; instead, he lived in important to note that it is not said of Abraham
tents as a travelling stranger. as it is of Noah (6:9) that he was morally perfect.
The point of the story in its present context is
(12:10–20) is one of a group of three stories in not his moral character but that he is the bearer
Genesis with the same theme. In 20:1–18, as of God’s promise to him and his descendants.
here, Abraham passes Sarah off as his sister The threefold repetition of what is basically the
during a temporary residence in Gerar, with same story cannot be adequately accounted for
similar consequences, and again in 26:6–11 in terms of a dovetailing of written continuous
Isaac, driven by famine (26:1), as was Abraham strands that were originally independent of one
in ch. 12, seeks refuge, again, in Gerar. It is another. The reason for it is of a literary nature.
generally recognized that these are three vari- Repetition to create particular effects is a com-
ants of one and the same story, which was mon literary device in narrative; and this is
defined by Gunkel as a folk-tale; but there is eminently the case in Genesis (see Alter (1981),
no agreement today about their relationship to especially on type-scenes, 47–62). Here each
one another or the reasons why despite their version of the story marks a crucial point in
basic similarities they differ substantially in the total narrative. 12:10–20 stands at its head,
details. Attempts to discover which of the immediately following the initial promise to
variants is the oldest have resulted in different Abraham of numerous descendants (12:2–3),
conclusions. and shows how God safeguards that promise,
Migrations of groups of people at various keeping both the prospective parents from
times across the eastern frontier of Egypt to harm in a dangerous situation. 20:1–18 occurs
seek more favourable conditions of life are immediately before the crucial account of the
well attested historically (see e.g. ANET 251). In birth of Isaac (21:1–2) which marks the first stage
the OT the migration of Jacob and his sons to in the fulfilment of that promise. 26:6–11 is
Egypt (Gen 47) is another example of this. 12:10– similarly closely connected with the birth of
20 is the first instance of many in which the Isaac’s son Jacob, the next heir (25:21–4) and is
fulfilment of the promise to Abraham is endan- immediately preceded in 26:3–5 by a further
gered. Not only is the departure from Canaan a reiteration of that promise. These repeated stor-
move away from the promised land; even more ies thus help to provide a structure for the
serious is the threat to the marriage of Abraham patriarchal stories.
and Sarah which is still childless, and so to the

promise of progeny. Faced with a choice be- (13:1–18) This chapter and ch. 14, which are
tween death from starvation and the potential mainly concerned with relations between Lot
danger entailed in migrating to an alien and and Abraham, are a kind of interlude or digres-
unknown country, Abraham chooses the latter sion: Lot is not a leading character in the main
course; but, fearful for his own safety, he sacri- patriarchal story; after the events of ch. 19 he
fices his wife to a life in Pharaoh’s harem, which disappears from it, though at the end of that
would also make the promise null and void. In chapter it is noted that he became the ancestor
contrast to his shabby conduct, which also in- of the Moabites and Ammonites whose later
volves telling a lie, the behaviour of Pharaoh, dealings with Israel have a part to play in
whose unsuspecting action is rewarded by God other OT books (19:37–8). Continuity with the
69 genesis
main plot is, however, maintained in the inci- of old traditions, its heroic character and also
dent which determines Abraham’s future area perhaps its style may point to a post-exilic
of residence well away from the corruption and origin.
temptations of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose The peoples named in vv. 5–6 are legendary
evil inhabitants (v. 13) were later to suffer dest- groups who inhabited the Transjordan; the Val-
ruction at the hands of YHWH (v. 10). The final ley of Siddim is unknown. The reference in v. 13
verses of ch. 13 revert to the principal theme of to Abraham as ‘the Hebrew’ conveys the impr-
the promise. ession that he has not been previously intro-
In v. 2 Abraham’s wealth is again stressed, duced to the reader. The word ‘Hebrew’ is used
though he continued to live an itinerant life. in the OT only by foreigners speaking about the
The quarrel between Abraham’s and Lot’s Israelites and not by Israelites about themselves
herdsmen (vv. 5–7) is to be understood as due (see Jon 1:9). In Genesis it occurs elsewhere only
to inadequate living space for the herds in a in the story of Joseph when he is spoken of by
land which was occupied by other, settled, Egyptians or addresses Egyptians. The tiny size
peoples. (The identity of the Perizzites, v. 7, of Abraham’s military force, which consists
who are mentioned fairly frequently in Genesis, entirely of members of his own household
is uncertain.) Abraham’s offer to settle the dis- (v. 14) enhances his heroic stature.
pute, which was not of his making or of Lot’s, Melchizedek, in v. 18, provides a royal ban-
by giving Lot the choice of territory is explained quet to welcome Abraham on his return after
as due to a desire to preserve amicable relations his victory. It is strange that he should suddenly
with his kinsman (lit. brother), while Lot’s dis- appear in the story, having taken no part in the
astrous choice is determined by the attraction preceding events. He is a mysterious and enig-
of the fertility of the Jordan plain, which is matic figure. His name probably means ‘(The
compared to that of Egypt and of the garden god) Melek is righteousness’ and closely resem-
of Eden. The passage ends with a more detailed bles that of a pre-Israelite king of Jerusalem,
reaffirmation of the promise to Abraham of Adoni-zedek (‘The Lord is righteousness’), who
numerous descendants and of the whole land, was defeated and killed by Joshua (Josh 10). It is
with the additional assurance that it will remain not clear whether Salem is intended to be iden-
in their possession for ever (v. 15). tified with Jerusalem, as Jerusalem is never so-
called in any of the non-biblical texts that refer
(14:1–24) This chapter is an unusual one in to (pre-Israelite) Jerusalem. In the OT, only in Ps
several respects. It is self-contained and appears 76:2 is Salem equated with Zion, God’s dwell-
to be unrelated to the surrounding chapters ing-place. In Gen 14:18 Melchizedek is described
except for the names of Abraham and Lot and as a priest-king serving El Elyon (ʾēl elyôn, ‘God
of Sodom and Gomorrah. The documentary Most High’) who is stated to be the creator of
critics with some exceptions were unable to heaven and earth. In Ps 110:4, the only other OT
connect it with any of their main sources (J, E, passage where his name occurs, Melchizedek is
and P), and concluded that it is a quite inde- taken to be a precursor of the later priest-kings
pendent episode. It is the only passage in which of Israel. The author of Gen 14 clearly intended
the otherwise entirely peaceable Abraham is the reader to identify El Elyon with YHWH as is
represented as taking part in military activity. the case with the titles El Olam (ʾēl ʿôlām, ‘the
It begins in the style of a historical narrative; yet Everlasting God’, 21:33), El Shaddai ‘God Al-
none of the nine kings mentioned (vv. 1–2) has mighty’, (ʾēl šadday, 17:1), etc. But in fact El was
been identified, nor is any war such as is desc- the high god of the Canaanite pantheon, who is
ribed here known to have occurred. It puts not infrequently identified with YHWH in the
OT, and Elyon sometimes occurs in the texts
Abraham in a very good light both as an out-

standing warrior who comes to the aid of mem- from Ugarit as an epithet of El. The phrase
bers of his family, and as forgoing the spoils of ‘maker of heaven and earth’ is virtually identical
war. Its purpose thus seems to have been to with what is said of El in those texts. In v. 22 El
glorify Abraham as a great and powerful hero Elyon is specifically identified with YHWH in
of international stature. It has been argued that the solemn oath that Abraham swears to forgo
it is not a single unitary composition; the Mel- his share of the spoils of victory.
chizedek episode (vv. 18–20) has been thought
by some scholars to be a later addition to the (15:1–21) There has been much scholarly discus-
original story. There is no agreement about its sion about the composition of this chapter. It has
date: while some believe that it is a reworking proved resistant to a division into sources along
genesis 70
the lines of the Documentary Hypothesis, and solemn oath-like statement to Abraham
attempts to demonstrate that a relatively short by YHWH in vv. 13–16 and his making of
piece has been massively supplemented by a late a covenant with him (vv. 18–21). Its awesome
hand have also failed to be entirely convincing. accompaniments—the ‘deep sleep’ (tardēmâ, a
Some recent scholars have reverted to something rare word also used of Adam when Eve was
like the pre-critical position that it is mainly or created) and the terrifying darkness—add to
wholly the work of a single author. But all agree the solemnity of the event. The smoking fire
that it is in two parts: vv. 1–6 and 7–21. Both pot and the flaming torch (v. 17) represent
contain further divine revelations to Abraham YHWH’s passing between the rows of animals
reiterating the earlier promises, but they differ to symbolize his binding himself to keep the
considerably in the mode of revelation. covenant. vv. 13–16 are a ‘prophecy after
vv. 1–6 are introduced in the same way as a the event’ foretelling the captivity in Egypt and
prophetical oracle, but take the form of a the Exodus; its purpose is to account for the
vision—the word ‘vision’ (mahăzeh) is very rare long gap between promise and fulfilment. The
and probably indicates a late _date. The call not 400 years of v. 13 and the ‘fourth generation’ of
to be afraid is characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah v. 16 can hardly be reconciled; it has been sug-
(Isa 40–55). This is what is often called an ‘oracle gested that v. 16, which foreshadows the Israel-
of salvation’, and it sounds the note of encour- ites’ conquest of the Amorites (Canaanites), is a
agement. But it becomes clear that Abraham later revision of the prophecy. The Amorites
has begun to doubt whether God will carry are said not to be sufficiently wicked as yet to
out his promise to give him an heir of his deserve this fate. The promise of vv. 18–21, which
body: he has been obliged to appoint his own contains a comprehensive list of the peoples
servant Eleazar as his heir. YHWH reiterates his believed to have preceded Israel in the land,
original promise and shows him the stars as a describes the boundaries of the land in very
demonstration of how numerous his descend- grand terms—from the borders of Egypt to the
ants will be. This direct vision of God convinces Euphrates. In fact the borders of the state of
him: he believes, that is, trusts, God’s word. The Israel were probably never as extensive (1 Kings
author’s statement that YHWH ‘reckoned it to 4:21 is hardly a sober historical statement). The
him as righteousness’, which forms the climax covenant with Abraham (v. 18), who here repre-
of the episode, has rightly been seen as one of sents the future nation of Israel, is a free, uncon-
the most significant in the whole of Scripture ditional promise, unlike the covenant of Sinai.
(see Gal 3:7–9; Jas 2:23; cf. Heb 11:8–10) and has
been taken, together with other instances of (16:1–16) Like the stories in chs. 12, 20, and 26
Abraham’s faith, particularly his readiness to (see above on 12:10–20), the story of Hagar in
leave Haran and his willingness to sacrifice his this chapter has a counterpart (21:9–21). These
son Isaac (ch. 22) as the foundation of the doc- are clearly variants of an older folk-tale; and
trine of justification by faith, even though its once again their placement in the ongoing
precise meaning has been disputed. That it is an story of Abraham is significant. Both are further
expression of Abraham’s readiness to trust examples of the threat to the fulfilment of the
God’s promise cannot be doubted. promise that Abraham will have a legitimate
vv. 7–21, like 1–6, are probably a creation of heir by his wife Sarah and of the setting aside
the author with no older tradition behind it. of that threat (cf. 15:2–4). Ch. 16 immediately
They are also concerned with the promise, but precedes the repetition of the promise guaran-
now specifically with the promise of the land teeing Abraham’s progeny and their destiny
rather than with the question of progeny. Like (17:1–8); 21:9–21 immediately follows the birth
vv. 1–6, they present Abraham as hesitant to
of Isaac (21:1–8) and confirms that it is he who is

believe the promise and demanding to know to be the heir. But the motif of God’s protection
how it is to be fulfilled. YHWH satisfies him by of the rejected Ishmael which is common to
means of a solemn but curious ritual which both versions of the story is an indication that
Abraham is commanded to carry out. This ritual before the story was inserted into the Abraham
does not conform precisely with anything narrative and placed in its two respective posi-
known from elsewhere, although the cutting of tions it was the figure of Hagar who was the
the animals into two is reminiscent of some centre of interest and the principal character.
covenant rituals. The animals specified are There is a somewhat similar story of acrimoni-
those used in sacrifice in the laws of the OT; ous relations between a barren wife and her
but the purpose of the ritual is indicated by the rival in 1 Sam 1:2–8.
71 genesis
The practice alluded to in vv. 2–3 was a com- warning against the breach of the covenant,
mon and accepted one in the ancient Near East; which will entail exclusion from its privileges
it is consequently not possible to fix the date of and from the new special relationship with
the story by reference to any particular extant God; this could be a warning to Jews of the
Near-Eastern law or legal contract as has been immediate post-exilic community who were
proposed by some scholars. The words of the tempted to abandon their Jewish identity. The
‘angel’ (malʾāk) of YHWH who speaks to Hagar in concept of the crucial importance of circumci-
16:7 are identified with the words of YHWH sion was a particular characteristic of the post-
himself in 16:13. Westermann’s comment (1985: exilic period.
244) is apt: ‘God is present not in the messenger, Two further additional features of the chap-
but in the message.’ The promise that YHWH ter are the personal promise to Sarah (vv. 15–19)
makes to Hagar in v. 10, which is curiously like with the precise announcement of the time
that made elsewhere about Isaac, identifies Ish- when her son will be born (v. 21) and the bless-
mael as the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, whose ing of Ishmael (v. 20). Abraham’s sceptical
supposed characteristics are described in v. 12. laughter at the announcement that Sarah will
There are two aetiologies in the later part of the give birth combined with his deep obeisance (cf.
narrative, but they are subordinate to the main Sarah’s laughter on a parallel occasion, 18:12) is
theme of the story. First, the name Ishmael, who strange; but there is here a play on the name
is to be preserved by YHWH’s intervention (v. 11), Isaac (yishāq, that is, ‘he laughs’, possibly an
means ‘God hears’. In the second aetiology the _ _ form of yishāq-ʾēl, ‘God laughs’).
abbreviated
name El-rei (ʾēl rōʾı̂ ) (v. 13, probably ‘God who Abraham’s wish that Ishmael__ should be pre-
sees me’), is stated in v. 14 to be the origin of the served under God’s protection (v. 18) shows
name of the—now unidentifiable—well where that he still places his hopes in Ishmael. God
the angel spoke to Hagar. The aetiology, like grants his wish, conferring a special blessing on
others in Genesis, is not exact, as it is Hagar Ishmael, but excludes him from the covenant
who ‘sees’ God, and not vice versa. that is for Isaac and his descendants. The chap-
ter concludes with a notice that Abraham duly
(17:1–27) This chapter is primarily concerned carried out God’s commands about circumci-
with the covenant (bĕrı̂t) which God undertakes sion, which was performed on all Abraham’s
to make with Abraham—the word bĕrı̂t occurs household (including Ishmael) as prescribed in
13 times in the chapter. It reiterates the promises later legislation (Ex 12:48).
of progeny, of future greatness for Abraham’s
descendants, and of the gift of the land; but it (18:1–16) The motif of the appearance to
contains several new and significant features. In human beings of gods in human disguise is a
v. 1 YHWH introduces himself as El Shaddai common mythological theme of the ancient
(‘God Almighty’): the author supposes that at world. A Greek myth, preserved by the Roman
this time Abraham did not know YHWH by poet Ovid, tells of such a visit in which a mi-
name. The name Shaddai, the meaning of raculous birth is announced; there is a similar
which is uncertain (it may mean ‘the one of story in Judg 6:11–24. Gen 18:1, 13 make it clear
the mountain’ or ‘the one of the field’) was that, although Abraham and Sarah are unaware
probably used as a divine epithet from an of this, the three mysterious visitors (or one of
early period. This incident is regarded as open- them?) are in fact YHWH himself. This passage
ing a new stage in the life of Abraham: this is is thus another version of ch. 17, but expressed
why he now receives a new name (v. 5). (So also in a quite different, more circumstantial style,
with Sarah, v. 15.) Abraham is to be the father of with a precise note of time and place. Abra-
not one but many nations, including that of the ham’s treatment of the strangers is an example
Ishmaelites; but the covenant is clearly for Israel of the traditional customs of hospitality ob-
alone, and will be for ever. It is to Israel that the served by tent-dwellers. The laughter of Sarah,
land of Canaan is to be given ‘for a perpetual like that of Abraham in 17:17, involves a play on
holding’ (v. 8) and YHWH will be their God. But words and is an expression of unbelief about
the covenant is now to be two-sided: Abraham the news that the visitors have brought. Sarah is
and his descendants must keep it by obeying firmly reminded that God has unlimited power
God’s command to practise circumcision, a and can bring about the impossible. Her denial
rite not practised by the peoples of Mesopota- that she laughed (v. 15) is caused by fear:
mia from which Abraham has come. There is she now dimly recognizes the identity of
now for the first time in the Abraham story a the speaker. The reference to Sodom in v. 16
genesis 72
introduces the theme that follows in the second Jordan, whose principal cities (unknown to
half of the chapter and ch. 19. The passage is an archaeology) were Sodom and Gomorrah in
admirable example of the high quality of Heb- the vicinity of the Dead Sea (13:10–13). But it is
rew narrative art at its best. now also connected with ch. 18: the ‘men’ who
visited Abraham (18:2) departed towards Sodom
(18:17–33) This passage is not based on an older with the exception of YHWH himself, who
folk-tale but is a discussion of a theological ques- remained to talk to Abraham (18:22). In v. 1 the
tion of the utmost importance, that the author other two, now called ‘angels’ or ‘messengers’
has himself composed in the form of a dialogue. (malʾ ākı̂m), who are clearly supernatural beings
The question, which is about God’s justice (v. 25), (v. 11), arrive in Sodom, presumably to investi-
was not, for the readers, a purely theoretical one, gate the reported wickedness of the inhabitants
but one of immense practical importance, espe- (it appears to be assumed that there are no
cially for those who had suffered, and were still righteous persons among them), where they
suffering, the effects of the devastation of the find Lot sitting in the city gate. It is to be
Babylonian conquest of Judah in 587 BCE. It is noted that there is no mention at all of Abra-
raised in various forms in other OT books of ham in the main story: he appears only after the
a relatively late period, e.g. in Job, and Ezek event (v. 27) and looks down on the catastrophe
14:12–23. The fate of Sodom is here a paradigm in the valley below. His absence may suggest
of this much wider question. that this was originally a story about an un-
The passage is remarkable in more than one named man (now identified with Abraham’s
respect. It begins (vv. 17–21) with the author’s nephew Lot) and the destruction of a city,
notion of YHWH’s private thoughts: YHWH which the author has incorporated into the
comes to a decision to inform Abraham of his story of Abraham. The reason for its inclusion
intention—if the inhabitants of Sodom and is not obvious; however, it illustrates the con-
Gomorrah prove to be as wicked as they have sequences of grave sin against which Abraham
been reported to be—to destroy them, so that has been warned. It should further be noted that
Abraham, whom he has chosen, may not imitate the main story recounts only the fate of Sodom:
their wickedness and so prove unworthy of the Gomorrah is not mentioned until v. 24. But the
promise (cf. 17:1–2, where Abraham’s righteous- two cities are regularly mentioned together in a
ness appears to have been made a condition of number of passages elsewhere in the OT
the making of the covenant with him). A second as examples of exemplary sin and consequent
outstanding feature of the passage is Abraham’s annihilation (e.g. Deut 29:22–4; 32:32; Isa 1:9–10;
boldness in rebuking YHWH: although he Jer 23:14).
frquently shows awareness of his temerity It is strongly stressed in 19:4 that every male
(vv. 27, 30, 31, 32), he dares to remind YHWH of individual was involved in the homosexual at-
his duty, as universal judge, to deal justly (v. 25)! tack intended against the two angels. This is no
His rebuke is reminiscent of the passionate doubt to be seen as a justification of the subse-
speeches of Job. Equally remarkable is YHWH’s quent annihilation of the whole populace; but
readiness to listen to the rebuke and even to the omission of any reference to the women of
modify his intention. The precise accusation the city (or to the children) reflects at least a
which Abraham makes is that in proposing to residuary notion of communal rather than of
destroy the whole population of Sodom and individual guilt. Lot’s offer of his daughters (v. 8)
Gomorrah YHWH intends to treat the righteous also reflects a moral code, repulsive to the mod-
in the same way as the wicked (v. 25). He extracts ern reader, which put the duty of hospitality
from YHWH a promise that he will not do so above other ethical concerns. vv. 24, 28 attempt
(v. 26). The point appears to be not that YHWH
to describe the nature of the catastrophe that

fell short of his true nature but rather that he is overwhelmed Sodom. That it was an earth-
shown to be a just God after all! There is no quake that caused the release of combustible
particular significance in the diminishing num- gases is a plausible guess; but—apart from the
bers of righteous persons for whose sake he will fact that no historical basis can be found for
not destroy Sodom (vv. 28–32). The principle of the story—it is not possible to be sure what the
justice towards individuals as against indiscrim- author had in mind. The city of Zoar (sôʿār) to
inate collective punishment has been established. which Lot was allowed to flee (vv. 18–23) _ actu-
ally existed in OT times (Isa 15:5; Jer 48:34). Like
(19:1–29) This story is an episode in the life of Sodom and Gomorrah, it lay in the valley, but
Lot, who had chosen to live in the plain of was counted as belonging to Moab. Its name is
73 genesis
here stated to be derived from a verb sāʾar made Abimelech’s wives unable to bear chil-
meaning to be small or insignificant; Lot _calls dren during Sarah’s residence in his harem;
it ‘a little one’ (misʿār). The point of this conclu- and we are explicitly told that Abimelech did
sion to the story _is to emphasize that it is Lot not have sexual relations with her. Like Pharaoh
who is the central character and to present in 12:16, Abimelech behaves with great generos-
God’s merciful nature towards those of whom ity to Abraham, while Abraham, though he is
he approves (19:29) as well as his punitive side. said by God to be a ‘prophet’ (v. 7) and bidden to
The incident of the fate of Lot’s disobedient wife pray for Abimelech, is portrayed as a guilty
(v. 26) may be an aetiology based on a rock man. Nevertheless (21:1) God does not abrogate
formation that existed in later times. his promise.
(19:30–8) These verses mark the conclusion of (21:1–21) This story, although it begins with the
the story of Lot, who now disappears from birth of Isaac, is really about Abraham’s two
Genesis. This is a story of double incest involv- sons, Isaac and Ishmael. vv. 8–21 are a variant
ing father and daughters; but no moral judge- of the earlier story of the banishment of Hagar
ment is made or implied. The information that and Ishmael because of Sarah’s jealousy (ch. 16).
the children born of the incestuous union be- While it is emphasized that it is Isaac who is
came the ancestors of the Moabite and Am- Abraham’s promised heir, the author stresses
monite peoples is probably a secondary God’s concern for Ishmael, contrasting it with
feature of the story rather than its main point. the harsh attitude and action of Sarah. Accord-
It is presupposed (v. 31) that the male popula- ing to the chronology given in 16:16 and v. 5,
tion of the region has entirely perished in the Ishmael would have been about 14 years old
catastrophe which befell Sodom; the observa- when Isaac was born, yet the story used here
tion that Lot is old cannot, in the context, mean by the narrator assumes that he was a small
that he is too old to father children; it probably child whom his mother put on her shoulder
means that he will not marry again and so have and carried away (v. 14). In v. 6 there is yet
legitimate children. This is a situation in which another explanation of the name Isaac (see on
the need to perpetuate the race is paramount, 17:17 and 18:12). The circumcision of Isaac (v. 4)
and sanctions desperate remedies. Like Noah is in accordance with the command in 17:12.
(9:21), Lot is unaware, in his drunkenness, of Abraham’s reactions to Sarah’s demand
what is happening. (vv. 10–11) are more forthright than in 16:5–6,
but he gives way when God intervenes. Hagar’s
(20:1–18) This story is a variant of 12:10–20 and distress in vv. 15–16 is depicted with psycho-
26:1–11 (see at 12:10–20 above). Its position im- logical sensitivity. God’s reaction to her distress
mediately before the notice of the conception illustrates his compassion (vv. 17–20). Finally
and birth of Isaac, which at last fulfilled when he grows up under God’s protection Ish-
YHWH’s promise, is an example of dramatic mael goes to live in the wilderness of Paran near
irony: the reader is made to feel the danger of the border of Egypt where he becomes the an-
the situation. The relationship between the cestor of the Ishmaelites.
three variants is disputed. This version is fuller
than 12:10–20, and there are a number of differ- (21:22–34) These verses presuppose ch. 20, but
ences of detail. The scene is set not in Egypt but are not closely related to it. They are concerned
in Gerar, near Gaza (already mentioned in to enhance Abraham’s status: although he re-
10:19), and the king is Abimelech—a Canaanite mains an alien (v. 34) he is recognized by Abi-
name. Abraham’s residence in Gerar is not due melech as especially protected and favoured by
God; he is thus treated by a king, who com-
to a famine. The main variant detail is Abime-

lech’s dream in which God speaks to him. God mands an army, as an equal. In vv. 22–4 Abi-
exonerates Abimelech as he has acted in ignor- melech thinks it important to safeguard himself
ance of Sarah’s status as Abraham’s wife. An by obtaining from him an oath that he will
additional detail is Abraham’s excuse, made on remain his ally (the phrase is ʿāśâ hesed) and
the specious grounds that Sarah is his half-sister _ gener-
that this alliance will continue in future
as well as his wife (not previously mentioned!), ations. The second incident is quite different:
together with his claim to know that the most Abraham becomes involved in a dispute
basic moral standards are not observed in Gerar with Abimelech over the possession of a well
(vv. 11–12). Also, instead of the plagues inflicted (vv. 25–32). The dispute is settled in Abraham’s
on Pharaoh (12:17) we are told that YHWH had favour with the offering of seven lambs and the
genesis 74
making of a treaty of friendship (běrı̂t, v. 32). what the author had in mind. Every particular
There are two different aetiologies of the name of the journey and of the preparations for the
Beersheba here: it is the place of the well (bĕʾ ēr) sacrifice (vv. 3–9) is meticulously recorded in
of the oath (šĕbuʿâ) but also of seven (šebaʿ). The order to retard the pace of the action and so
tree planted by Abraham marked the spot where increase the tension to an almost unbearable
the covenant was made. The ‘Everlasting God’ (ʾēl degree; it reaches its greatest intensity with
ʿôlām) worshipped by Abraham here, and impli- 22:10 and is then suddenly released in v. 11.
citly identified with YHWH, was probably ori- Abraham’s reply to Isaac’s question (vv. 7, 8) is
ginally a local deity associated with Beersheba. understandably evasive, but he speaks more
The ‘land of the Philistines’ is an anachronism: than he knows. The angel of YHWH is here
the Philistines in fact arrived in Canaan and clearly identified with YHWH himself. The
established their cities there near the Mediterra- name given to the place by Abraham (YHWH
nean coast during the twelfth century BCE and yirʾeh, ‘Yahweh provides’—lit. sees, or looks out)
cannot have been known to Abraham. Abime- echoes his reply to Isaac in 22:8; it expresses his
lech has a Semitic name, and so was evidently a joy that YHWH has now done so in a miracu-
local Canaanite ruler, not a Philistine. lous way. The note in v. 14b is a later addition
to the story, perhaps linking the place with
(22:1–19) This story is one of the most brilli- Jerusalem. vv. 15–18 are also probably an add-
antly told narratives in the book. It has gener- ition to the story: by its repetition of the prom-
ated an immense quantity of interpretative ise of blessing this makes explicit its place in the
comment beginning in early times with Heb wider context of Abraham’s life—by his obedi-
11:17 and Jas 2:21 and continuing up to the pre- ence Abraham has confirmed that he is worthy
sent, and many works of art. It is widely agreed of the blessing.
that no one interpretation is entirely adequate
(see von Rad 1972: 243–5). Its psychological sen- (22:20–4) This genealogy defines Abraham’s
sitivity and stylistic skill in portraying the dis- kinship with the Arameans (Aram) and points
tress of Abraham when commanded by God to forward to Isaac’s marriage with Rebekah (ch. 24).
kill his beloved son and heir are unequalled. It
may be that somewhere in its background lies a (23:1–20) Full possession of the land of Canaan
story about human sacrifice, specifically the was a crucial matter for a people that had lost it
sacrifice of the firstborn; but there is no indica- with the Babylonian conquest in the sixth cen-
tion at all that that practice, which was not only tury BCE and were, even under the milder policy
forbidden but regarded with horror in Israel, of the Persian empire, like Abraham, only
was in the mind of the author of the present ‘strangers and aliens’ (v. 4) in it, subject to for-
story. The statement in the opening verse that eign rule. Abraham’s legal purchase from the
God’s purpose in demanding Isaac’s death was ‘Hittite’—that is, Canaanite—owner of a single
to test Abraham’s obedience—to see whether field containing the cave where he could bury
he ‘feared God’ (v. 12)—is an accurate summary Sarah (vv. 17, 20) was a hopeful sign to these
of the plot. Abraham was forced to choose readers, even though it was no more than
between obedience to an incomprehensible symbolic—the first fruits, as it were, of the
and abhorrent command and his love for his promise that Abraham’s descendants would
child (v. 2). There is a terrible dramatic irony possess the whole land.
here: God did not intend that his command The name Kiriath-arba, here identified with
should be carried out; but Abraham had no Hebron (v. 2), means ‘city of four’—probably
means of knowing that. He passed the test. On referring to its consisting of four districts or
a different level, this is yet another example of ‘quarters’ or to its position at the intersection
the theme of the endangerment of God’s prom- of four roads. The name ‘Hittite’ here and else-
ise: with Isaac’s birth the promise of an heir has where in the Pentateuch does not designate the
apparently been miraculously fulfilled; but now great Hittite empire of Asia Minor, long extinct
the very life of that heir is—as far as the reader when this chapter was written, but is used as a
knows—to be prematurely brought to an end. general designation of the Canaanites. Abra-
The location of the ‘land of Moriah’ is un- ham, having no settled home, is obliged to
known. A later tradition identified Moriah with seek a place of burial for Sarah from the local
the mountain on which Solomon later built the inhabitants. The cave in question belongs to
Jerusalem temple (2 Chr 3:1); but there is no one Ephron (v. 8); but the decision to convey
indication in the text of Gen 22 that this is it to Abraham’s use evidently rests with the
75 genesis
people of Hebron as a whole—the ‘people of he takes no action but kneels down at a well
the land’ (vv. 10–13). The negotiation is carried that he knows will be frequented by the young
on with great courtesy; it is a legal transaction, girls of the town when they come to draw
and the terminology resembles that used in water, and prays that YHWH will signify his
extant neo-Babylonian legal contracts. Abra- choice of a bride for Isaac in a particular way
ham, who is regarded by the Hebronites as a (vv. 13–14); he is miraculously rewarded when
‘mighty prince’ (v. 6), is first offered a choice of the first girl who comes to draw water proves to
burial places, but not legal ownership. He insists be not only beautiful, a virgin, and of a kindly
that the latter is what he seeks; and he finally disposition but also Abraham’s own niece, so
succeeds in buying the entire field, though confirming that YHWH has made his mission
at what is known to have been a very high unexpectedly and completely successful (vv. 15–
price (v. 15). 27; cf. 11:29; 22:22, 23). The reason why it is
Rebekah’s brother Laban rather than her father
(24:1–67) This is by far the longest story in this who plays the principal role in the remainder of
part of the book, and has with some justifica- the story (from v. 29) is not clear, though he
tion been called a novella, or short story (in the is to be a principal character in later chapters
modern sense of that term). It is divided into (29–31). The reference to Rebekah’s mother’s
distinct scenes, and is told with great sensitivity house rather than that of her father (v. 28)
and with acute psychological insight. An un- might lead the reader to suppose that her father
usual feature is the extent to which dialogue is Bethuel was dead; but he appears in a minor
used to portray character and to move the ac- role in v. 50.
tion along: more than half the verses consist of Although it is not specifically stated that
or contain reported speech. Apart from its in- Rebekah’s consent to the marriage was sought,
trinsic interest as literature, the story marks a this seems to be implied in her acceptance of
new and positive stage in the theme of the the valuable jewellery and the ring (v. 22) and by
promise: Abraham’s heir has not only survived; her running home to tell the news (v. 28). It is
he is now provided with an eminently suitable also strongly implied by the fact that, when
wife, who is destined in turn to produce an heir, consulted, she agreed to leave her family imme-
the inheritor of the promise in the third gener- diately and accompany the servant home to
ation. The narrative speaks of the continued meet her designated husband (v. 58). There is
guidance of God at every stage. some difficulty about the Hebrew text of v. 62
Abraham, who is evidently too old to under- and about Isaac’s place of residence. According
take a long journey (but note his second mar- to 25:20 Isaac was 40 years old when he mar-
riage in 25:1!), sends his trusted and confidential ried, and had a separate establishment. The ab-
servant or steward, whom he has entrusted with sence of any reference to Abraham in the last
all his possessions, to seek a wife for Isaac from part of the story is strange: one would have
among those of his kindred who have remained expected that the servant would have first con-
in Mesopotamia (Aram-naharaim, lit. Aram of ducted Rebekah to Abraham and have made his
the two rivers): marriage with an alien Canaan- report to him. The story concludes with the rare
ite is ruled out as unthinkable, and it is equally statement that Isaac loved his wife, paralleled in
out of the question that Isaac should return to Genesis only by the love of Jacob for Rachel
fetch his bride from the country from which his (29:18) and of Shechem the Hivite for Dinah
father had departed at God’s command. If the (34:3).
girl chosen should refuse the match, the mes-
senger is to return alone to Abraham. (25:1–18) With these verses the story of Abra-
The rite of touching the genitals of the other ham comes to an end. They are a somewhat
party while swearing an oath, mentioned in the miscellaneous collection consisting mainly of
OT only here (vv. 2, 9) and Gen 47:29, is attested genealogies but including a brief statement of
in a Babylonian document and is also known Abraham’s death and burial (vv. 7–10). They
from Arabic usage (TWAT 7, 984). Its signifi- contain no real continuous narrative. The
cance is not clear; but it may be related to the point of the genealogies is to continue the
more common practice of swearing by a per- theme of Abraham as the ‘father of many na-
son’s life. The messenger sets out with an im- tions’ (cf. 17:5, 20; 21:13). These lists contain the
pressive retinue and carries valuable gifts names of several nations and tribes known
appropriate to his master’s great wealth and from elsewhere, notably Midian (v. 1) and
high status (v. 10). On arrival at his destination the Ishmaelites (vv. 12–16). The note about
genesis 76
Abraham’s life in v. 8 reflects the Israelite atti- the precedence of Jacob over his brother. The
tude towards both life and death. Death was not former story, which begins with YHWH’s de-
regarded as tragic if it closed a long and fulfilled, cree that the elder is to serve the younger,
honourable life. The statement that Abraham contains a pun on the name Jacob (yaʿăqōb)
was ‘gathered to his people’ (v. 8) obviously who grasped the heel (ʿāqēb) in the womb (v.
does not mean that his body was placed in an 26) and another on Esau, the ancestor of the
ancestral tomb, since only Sarah had yet been Edomites (v. 30; 36:1) who ‘came out red’
buried in the cave of Machpelah (v. 10): it was a (ʾadmônı̂) from the womb. There is yet another
conventional expression testifying a strong pun on the name Edom in the second story,
sense of family solidarity. where Esau calls the dish that Jacob has pre-
pared ‘that red stuff’ (ʾādōm, v. 30). The two
The Story of Jacob (25:19–37:2) brothers are also caricatured as two contrasting
Of the three ‘patriarchs’ Abraham, Isaac, and types: the ruddy, hairy hunter (vv. 25, 27) who is
Jacob only Isaac lacks a really independent an easy prey to the cunning ‘quiet man’ who
story. Although as Abraham’s heir and Jacob’s stays at home (v. 27; Jacob is later to become a
father he obviously holds an essential place in shepherd, ch. 29). vv. 27–34 especially have
the family history and is in his turn the recipient been seen as based on an earlier civilization
of the promise of blessing and of numerous story which reflected problems that arose
descendants ‘for Abraham’s sake’ (26:3–5, 23– when the sedentary way of life began to super-
5), he is the principal character in only one sede the hunting stage (see Westermann 1985:
chapter (26). It must be presumed that the 414–15). The motif is of crucial importance later
author or editor of the book did not possess a in ch. 27; but the point of the present story is to
wealth of narrative material about Isaac as he show that Esau already forfeited the privileges
did about Abraham and Jacob. A large part of of the elder son.
the story of Jacob is concerned with the rela-
tions between Jacob and his elder brother Esau. (26:1–35) This chapter is given a unity by the
God’s choice of Jacob rather than Esau as the theme of Isaac’s relations with Abimelech the
heir and recipient of the promise recounted in ‘Philistine’ (i.e. Canaanite) king of Gerar. vv. 6–11
these chapters introduces a new major theme: are a variant of 12:10–20 and 20:1–18 (on which
God in his sovereignty is not bound by the see the commentary above), the main difference
‘natural’ or legal principle of inheritance by from both the other stories being that it con-
primogeniture but inscrutably singles out cerns Isaac and Rebekah, not Abraham and
younger sons to carry out his purpose (cf. the Sarah. It contains motifs from both the other
choice of David as king of Israel, 1 Sam 16:1–13). versions; and it is commonly held that its
So not Ishmael but Isaac is chosen, and not Esau author was familiar with, and intended to
but Jacob; and, of Jacob’s twelve sons, it is his make certain changes with regard to, both. In
eleventh son Joseph who is chosen to rule over particular, the lie told by Isaac (v. 7) is the same
his brothers (Gen 37:5–11) and to preserve the as that told by Abraham in the other two ver-
lives of the embryo people of Israel (Gen 45:5; sions, but the consequences are less critical,
50:20). Similarly Ephraim is given precedence since Rebekah is not taken into the royal
over his elder brother Manasseh (Gen 48:8–20). harem. vv. 1–5 introduce the story by account-
ing for Isaac’s move to Gerar. It includes an
(25:19–34) In vv. 19–20, which introduce the appearance to Isaac by YHWH in which he
stories about Isaac’s children, the author has repeats the promise of the land and of numer-
inserted a short notice which repeats what the ous progeny but couples it with an injunction
reader already knows, adding the information not to depart from Canaan as Abraham had
that Isaac was 40 years old when he married. done in similar circumstances (12:10).
But the chronology in this chapter is some- In vv. 12–33 the motif of the dispute with the
what confused. If Isaac was 60 when Rebekah Canaanites of Gerar over the ownership of the
bore his first children (v. 26), Abraham, who wells that were essential to life and livelihood
was 175 when he died (25:7), would still have (21:25–34) recurs. But Isaac, who was the first of
fifteen years to live, since he was 100 when the patriarchal family to grow crops (v. 12) as
Isaac was born (21:5)! The two stories about the well as owning flocks and herds (v. 14) and who
birth of Esau and Jacob (vv. 21–6) and the had become wealthy even beyond the wealth
birthright (25:27–34) both point forward to accumulated by his father, had aroused the envy
the later antagonism between the two and to of the ‘Philistines’ (vv. 12–14) who were making
77 genesis
life difficult for him. However, this series of travels. One of the most remarkable features of
incidents ends with the making of a treaty of the story is the portrayal of Rebekah, who plays a
peace between Isaac and Abimelech, in which crucial role in the story and whose personality is
Isaac is credited with taking the initiative thus displayed in marked contrast to the passiv-
(vv. 26–31). The aetiologies of the names of the ity of Sarah in the previous chapters (but we may
wells (v. Ezek 20, ‘contention’; Sitnah, v. 21, compare the enterprising action of Rachel in
‘quarrel, accusation’; Rehoboth, v. 22, ‘broad 31:34–5). Despite Jacob’s disgraceful behaviour
space’) probably come from ancient local tradi- in deceiving his aged and blind father, the story
tions. The naming of Shibah (v. 33) is attributed, is presented in a way that arouses the reader’s
as is Beersheba in 21:31, to an oath, this time sympathy for such a rogue, though the depiction
between Isaac and Abimelech (v. 31). of Esau’s distress (vv. 34–8) is intended to elicit
some sympathy for him as well. There is also a
The Adventures of Jacob (chs. 27–33) humorous quality in the tale that should not be
At one level this is a story of withdrawal and missed. The predominance of dialogue helps to
return, a familiar folk-tale motif. It is also a story give the narrative a particularly lively character.
of hatred between brothers followed by eventual The fact that the action takes place entirely
reconciliation; but in the context of the book as a on the human plane, with no mention of God
whole it is a continuation of the history of the (except for his invocation in Isaac’s blessing,
promise made to the patriarchs. Although Esau v. 28, and Jacob’s lying assertion in v. 20) sets
has his reward in the end in terms of material the chapter, together with 25:27–34, apart from
wealth (33:9–11), it is made clear that he was the surrounding chapters in which the hand of
deprived not only of his birthright but also of God is prominent.
the blessing (27:36). He is to be the ancestor of It is noteworthy that it is Rebekah, who evi-
the Edomites and not of Israel, and accordingly dently loves her ‘smooth’ son Jacob more than
establishes his residence in the region of Seir, the uncouth, hairy Esau (v. 11) and is even pre-
later to be part of Edom (32:3; 33:14, 16; cf. 36:9). pared to risk her husband’s curse, who proposes
Later events are clearly reflected here. Isaac’s the deception; but Jacob, in agreeing to her pro-
blessing of Jacob (27:27–9) and his lesser ‘bless- posal, is equally guilty. The story turns on the
ing’ of Esau (27:39–40) reflect the history of the belief that blessings and curses possess objective
later relations between the state of Israel power and cannot be taken back (v. 33). In v. 36
and Edom: Israel will rule over Edom, but even- Jacob’s name is once more (cf. 25:26) associated
tually Edom will ‘break his yoke’ and achieve its with the root ʿ-q-b, here in a verbal form and
independence (cf. 2 Sam 8:14; 1 Kings 11:14; 2 Chr interpreted as ‘supplant’. It is again Rebekah
21:8–10). This account of Jacob’s adventures is who takes the initiative, overhearing Esau’s inten-
not made of whole cloth: it has incorporated tion to kill Jacob and warning him to flee to
many elements which the final author/editor Haran to his uncle Laban (vv. 43–5). The chapter
has combined. In particular, one major section, ends with her fear that Jacob may marry a ‘Hittite’
ch. 29–31, which describes Jacob’s extended resi- (cf. 26:34–5)—an echo of the theme of 24:3–4.
dence in the house of his uncle Laban, originally
belonged to a quite distinct tradition about the (28:1–9) A different account of the circumstan-
relations between two peoples: Israel and the ces of Jacob’s departure to Laban is given in vv.
Arameans. 1–5 from that given in ch. 27. Here his father
sends him off so that he may marry a girl from
(27:1–46) This chapter is another example of his own family as Isaac himself had done, and
narrative skill. It is structured in a number of Isaac prays that he will inherit the promise once
given to Abraham. Laban’s home is now given
distinct scenes, in each of which, as in folk-

tales, only two characters appear: Isaac and as Paddan-aram, which may mean ‘country of
Esau in vv. 1–4, Jacob and Rebekah in vv. 5–17, Aram’ (so also in 25:20). This region of north
Jacob and Isaac in vv. 18–29, Esau and Isaac in vv. Mesopotamia is called Aram-naharaim in 24:10.
30–40, Esau alone in v. 41, Rebekah and Jacob in vv. 6–9 relate how Esau also conformed to
vv. 42–5, Rebekah and Isaac, v. 46. The theme is Isaac’s wish in that he now married a relation
Jacob’s trickery by which he obtains the paternal in addition to his previous Canaanite wives.
blessing that would normally be given to the
elder son and the consequent implacable hatred (28:10–22) On his way to Laban, whose home
of Esau for his brother which makes it necessary is now specified (as in 27:43) as the city of Haran,
for Jacob to leave home and set out on his Jacob rests for the night at an unnamed place
genesis 78
(v. 11) and takes a large stone there as a pillow. (29:1–30) This chapter begins the story of
He has a dream in which he sees a ladder (prob- Jacob and Laban which continues to the end
ably rather a ramp) stretching from earth to of ch. 31. It is set in foreign territory, outside
heaven on which God’s angels—that is, heav- Canaan. As yet another story about an encoun-
enly messengers—are passing up and down to ter at a well that ends with marriage of the heir
perform tasks assigned to them by God. to the promise to a member (here two mem-
He recognizes the ladder as ‘the gate of heaven’ bers!) of his Aramean kindred, it has many
(v. 17), that is, as the means of communication affinities with ch. 24; but there are significant
between God in his dwelling in heaven and his differences. There is again the apparently for-
manifestations to human beings on earth; and tuitous meeting with the Aramean kindred; but,
so concludes with awe that the place where he unlike Isaac, who was forbidden to leave Ca-
is resting must therefore be ‘the house of God’, naan to seek his wife, Jacob makes precisely that
that is, a place where God manifests himself on journey. He travels to ‘the land of the people of
earth. The imagery of the dream corresponds to the east’ (a rather vague term denoting the land
Babylonian religious beliefs as expressed in to the east of Canaan, but here including the
their structures known as ziggurats. In the more northern territory in the vicinity of
dream Jacob becomes aware that God is indeed Haran); but he does not go specifically to seek
communicating with him: God repeats to him a wife, and does not at first realize where he is.
the promise of the land of Canaan, in which he Further, in contrast to the religious atmosphere
is now resting, and of numerous progeny, and of 28:10–22 and with the pious mission of Abra-
adds a further promise that he will guide and ham’s servant in ch. 24, this is a purely secular
protect him on his journey and wherever he story in which God does not appear, although
may go (vv. 13–15). no doubt he is invisibly present in the back-
It is generally agreed that this passage has ground in the mind of the final editor.
undergone several accretions, but there is no vv. 1–14 are an idyllic tale that gives no hint of
consensus about the details. Jacob names the troubles to come. Jacob is presented as the
place Bethel (lit., ‘house of God’), thus naming mighty hero who is able alone to move the
a place which was later to be one of Israel’s most stone, which normally required several men to
important sanctuaries. The story is thus to be move it, from the mouth of the well to enable
seen as the origin story of the sanctuary of the flocks to be watered (cf. 28:18, where also he
Bethel and will have been used from ancient moves a massive stone); and he does this on
times by the worshippers at that sanctuary. Its perceiving the arrival of Rachel. The kiss which
importance to later generations accounts for the he gives her is no doubt a cousinly kiss (v. 11; cf.
fact that it later came to be embellished in vari- v. 13); but his weeping (for joy) surely speaks of
ous ways (for a recent study of its redactional love at first sight. The continuation of the story
history which understands it without ascribing in vv. 15–30, however, already introduces the
it to an interweaving of two major written reader to the calculating character of Laban,
sources see Rendtorff 1982: 511–23). The stone who succeeds in employing Jacob for fourteen
used by Jacob as a pillow (v. 11), which he erected years without wages and in tricking him into
as a pillar and consecrated with oil (v. 18), marrying the unwanted Leah. There are two
marked the site as a holy place where God had further motifs in this story: Jacob’s marriages
revealed himself and so might be expected to do are a further example of the younger being
so again—that is, as a sanctuary. Such a pillar preferred to the elder; and, in view of Jacob’s
(massēbâ) might be no more than a memorial earlier behaviour (25:27–34; 27), vv. 21–30 may
_ _ or marker, e.g. of a frontier (31:51); but it
stone be seen as an example of the motif of the de-
was often a feature of sanctuaries both Canaan- ceiver deceived. Jacob’s love for Rachel is again
ite and Israelite, though later condemned emphasized in vv. 20 and 30. In vv. 24 and 29
in Israel (e.g. Lev 26:1). In his concluding vow Laban’s assignment of the two maids Zilpah
(vv. 20–2) Jacob acutely translates God’s prom- and Bilhah respectively to serve Leah and Ra-
ise of guidance into concrete, down-to-earth chel prepares the reader for the accounts of the
terms, and in turn promises to worship YHWH birth of Jacob’s twelve sons, who are to be the
as his God. He also undertakes to pay a tithe of ancestors of the twelve tribes of Israel.
future produce, in anticipation of the cult that
will be established at Bethel. He is clearly speak- (29:31–30:24) This section consists mainly of a
ing as a representative of a future Israel and as miscellaneous collection of notices of the births
the founder of the Bethel sanctuary. of Jacob’s first eleven sons (and one daughter,
79 genesis
Dinah), whose names are those of later Israelite Rachel’s own. 30:14–18 reflects an ancient belief
tribes. The reasons given for their names, which that the fruit of the mandrake plant has aphro-
all refer to the circumstances of the mothers disiac properties, although the birth of Issachar
(unlike the tribal blessings in ch. 49) are quite is attributed to divine operation.
fanciful and hardly genuine popular etymolo-
gies. The words attributed to the mothers in (30:25–43) The details of this story are not
naming their sons have been made to fit the clear, and have puzzled the commentators.
names; but they do not fit very well. In some There are strange contradictions, no doubt due
cases they involve the use of very rare words. to glossators who themselves did not fully grasp
The name Reuben (rěʾûbēn) would naturally be what was happening but attempted to set mat-
taken to mean ‘Behold a son’ (29:32), but has ters right. The thrust of the story, however, is
been connected with ʿônı̂, ‘affliction’. Simeon sufficiently plain. This is a battle of wits be-
(29:33) is more reasonably connected with tween Jacob and Laban from which Jacob
šāmaʿ, ‘to hear’. Levi (29:34) is supposedly de- emerges victorious. Jacob, who has suffered be-
rived from lāwâ, ‘to join’. Judah (29:35) has been fore from Laban’s trickery, repays it in kind. The
associated with the mother’s exclamation ʾôdeh, story begins with an abrupt request by Jacob to
‘I will praise’; Dan (30:6) with the verb dı̂n, ‘to Laban for his release from his servitude which
give judgement’; Naphtali (30:8) with a rare verb puts Laban in an embarrassing situation. Jacob
pātal, possibly meaning ‘to twist’, here inter- points out that Laban has greatly benefited from
preted as ‘wrestle’. Gad (30:11) is the name of a his service, but now requests to be allowed to
god of good fortune; Asher (30:13) is explained return to his homeland accompanied by his
as related to ʾiššēr, ‘to pronounce happy’; Issa- wives and children, who are of course Laban’s
char (30:18) as connected with śākār, ‘hire, own daughters and grandchildren (v. 26). This
wages’. In two cases (and possibly a third, Reu- request may not have been within Jacob’s rights:
ben) two alternative explanations are given: the Ex 21:2–4 does not permit a freed slave to take
name Zebulon (30:20) is associated with a verb his family with him; but Jacob’s status is not
that occurs nowhere else in the OT but which clear (cf. Laban’s action in ch. 31). Laban recog-
may refer to exaltation, hence honour, but also nizes the value of Jacob’s service to him, and
with zēbed, ‘gift’, while Joseph (30:24) is related adopts a conciliatory tone. He admits that his
both to ʾāsap, ‘gather, remove, take away’, and to prosperity is due to Jacob, perhaps claiming
yāsap, ‘add, increase’. It was not deemed neces- that he has learned by divination (the meaning
sary to offer an explanation of the name of the of this word is uncertain) that this is due to
daughter, Dinah. YHWH’s having blessed Jacob (v. 27), but com-
Only scraps of narrative and dialogue are plains that the loss of Jacob may damage his
attached to these birth notices. The motif of own economic status. He makes an offer to
the two wives, one of whom is unable to bear reward Jacob, who replies that he is not asking
children (29:31–2), is found also in the story of for a reward, but then inconsistently requests to
the birth of Samuel (1 Sam 1), but with signifi- be allowed to keep some of Laban’s flocks. He
cant differences. In both cases the childless wife proposes (v. 32) that he should be given those
is enabled to bear a son through divine inter- animals that are particoloured (a rarity among
vention; but here this happens to the ‘hated’ sheep and goats) and promises to carry out this
wife (i.e. the one who is unwanted by her hus- operation honestly. Laban pretends to agree,
band) whereas in 1 Sam 1 it happens to the one but then himself deceitfully separates the parti-
who is especially beloved; here too God takes coloured animals from the rest, and sends them
the initiative rather than acting in response to away with his sons to be kept at a distance
(vv. 35–6).
prayer as in the case of Hannah. There are other

OT parallels to God’s initiative in such cases: The account of Jacob’s retaliatory action
not only in the case of Sarah but also in the (vv. 37–42) is again somewhat muddled and
story of the birth of Samson (Judg 13). All these repetitive, but here again its general import is
stories differ considerably in detail; but behind clear. To gain an advantage over Laban Jacob
them lies the conviction that God alone be- had recourse to a trick based on a superstitious,
stows or withholds life. 30:1–7 is another ex- farmers’ belief (taken seriously by the author)
ample of the custom of surrogate birth earlier that newborn animals (and also human babies)
practised by Sarah (so also 30:9–11). The ‘birth can derive certain characteristics from the visual
on the knees’ of Rachel (30:3) is a rite which impressions experienced by their mothers at the
ensures that the child born is to be regarded as moment of conception. Taking advantage of
genesis 80
Laban’s absence, Jacob arranged that the ewes, ing is that owing to their father’s actions they
which mated while they were drinking, should no longer belong to their community, and are
do so while standing facing some rods which he prepared to put their trust in what Jacob has
had taken from appropriate trees that he had told them of God’s call to him. So the heir of the
partly peeled and set before the drinking promise effects his escape from the alien terri-
troughs, so producing particoloured young. tory of Paddan-aram and returns to the land of
(v. 40 is unfortunately obscure.) In addition promise.
(vv. 41–2) he selected for this purpose only the The second scene (vv. 19–42) opens with
more robust animals. As a result he became the Laban, accompanied by his kinsmen, pursuing
owner, following his previous arrangement Jacob, and overtaking him when he has reached
with Laban, of the choice animals because the hill country of Gilead, east of the Jordan.
they were particoloured, while Laban was left Once more Laban receives a divine message
only with the feebler ones. By this device he warning him not to interfere with Jacob
increased his wealth, though the final verse of (v. 24); and in fact when they meet Laban exer-
the chapter (v. 43) about the extraordinary cises restraint. His final complaint against him is
wealth which he acquired in this way seems that he has stolen his ‘household gods’ (tĕr-
entirely disproportionate to the preceding acc- āphı̂m), though in fact it was Rachel who
ount and is probably a later addition made had stolen them without Jacob’s knowledge
to enhance the impression that the patriarchs, (vv. 19, 32). The incident of the search for the
although landless, were nevertheless persons of teraphim (vv. 33–5) is recounted with crude
substance in the world. This is another secular humour. Teraphim, which are mentioned in
story in which (apart from Laban’s remark in several other OT texts, appear to have been
v. 27) God does not appear. fairly small hominiform images of gods whose
use was not confined to Israel. There is a refer-
(31:1–55) This chapter concludes the Jacob– ence to their manufacture in Judg 17:5, and Hos
Laban stories. It is a continuation of ch. 30, 3:4 implies that they were in common use in
but it also marks a return to the theme of the Israel during the period of the monarchy. Later,
promise. The question of Jacob’s departure however, they were condemned as idolatrous
broached in ch. 30 has remained unresolved. (Zech 10:2) together with the practice of divin-
Now he has determined to leave, with his fam- ation with which they appear to have been
ily, without Laban’s permission, partly because associated (Ezek 21:21). They were obviously
relations with Laban and his sons have deteri- very important to Laban, who may have used
orated, but above all because YHWH has com- them for divination. In recent times it was
manded him to do so and has promised to widely supposed, on the basis of purportedly
continue to guide and protect him (vv. 2–3). similar practices known from second-millen-
Jacob meets his wives secretly and speaks to nium BCE texts discovered at the Mesopotamian
them of his reasons for departure: Laban’s ani- city of Nuzi, that possession of such objects
mosity towards him, restrained only by God’s could be used to substantiate legal claims to
protection, and God’s command, here repre- the inheritance of property; but it has now
sented as mediated by an angel in a dream been shown that this view is not tenable, at
(vv. 11–13). There are inconsistencies again least as far as this passage in Genesis is con-
here, e.g. Jacob’s claim that Laban has changed cerned (see Thompson 1974: 272–80). There is
his wages ten times does not accord with what nothing in the Genesis text that indicates why
has been said in the previous two chapters. In Laban’s teraphim were so important to him.
his account of his dream (v. 13) he cites God’s Jacob in his defence of his conduct (vv. 36–
42) attributes his present material success to the
command, but with an additional reference to

ch. 28. Jacob’s proposal to his wives, which ancestral God, whom he here refers as ‘The Fear
involved for them the abandonment of their of Isaac’ (or possibly ‘Kinsman of Isaac’, prob-
family and their community, is accepted with- ably an ancient name of a god who was later
out demur: they too have a grudge against their identified with YHWH). Laban (vv. 43–4) still
father, who has used for himself their bridal maintains his legal right to all Jacob’s posses-
price and has thus ‘sold’ them and in fact treated sions, but is forced to admit defeat. The treaty or
them as foreigners (vv. 14–16). These verses covenant now made between the two is a non-
involve legal questions of marriage and inherit- aggression pact (vv. 48–50); but in a different
ance customs which are not completely clear to version of the event (v. 52) it also defines a
the modern reader; but what the wives are say- territorial boundary which each partner swears
81 genesis
to observe. This is really an agreement not sim- tack travellers who are endeavouring to pass on
ply between two individuals but between rep- their way, but who are powerful only at night;
resentatives of two nations, as is indicated by here we are told that the sun rose only when the
the double naming of the boundary cairn that incident was over (v. 31). The place in question
they have set up in two distinct languages: both here is a ford over the stream Jabbok, which
Jegarsahadutha (Aramaic) and Galeed (Hebrew rises in the mountains east of the Jordan and
galʿēd) mean ‘cairn of witness’. Behind this inci- descends precipitately to flow into the Jordan—
dent there undoubtedly lies an ancient tradition a place where it is difficult to cross on foot. The
of an agreement once made between Israel and supposed connection between its name and the
the Arameans, who were, however, later to be rare Hebrew verb ʾābaq, ‘wrestle’ (v. 24) may
involved in territorial wars (cf. especially 2 Sam have given rise to the story in its original ver-
8; 10; 1 Kings 11; 20; 22; 2 Kings 7–16). sion. The man (ʾı̂š) who attacked Jacob and
struggled with him all night remains unidenti-
(32:1–21) After reporting the peaceful solution fied until v. 30, but is clearly possessed of super-
of Jacob’s dispute with Laban (31:54–5) the story natural power as well as of great physical
resumes the account of his relations with his strength (30:25), and is recognized by Jacob as
brother Esau, from whose hostile intentions he one who is able to confer a blessing on him. He
had fled (ch. 27). First, however, there is a short subsequently reveals himself as divine (ʾĕlōhı̂m,
notice of a (presumably) favourable appearance v. 28); but the statements that Jacob over-
of a group of divine messengers or angels matched him and forced him to bless him
(cf. 28:12) during his journey, which he perceives (vv. 26, 29) remain mysterious in the face of
as ‘God’s camp’ (mahănēh ʾĕlōhı̂m) and so names Jacob’s final realization that he has been locked
the place Mahanaim. _ This incident is no doubt in a struggle with God, and has seen him face to
based on a local foundation legend about the face (pĕnı̄ʾēl means ‘face of God’). At this point of
city of Mahanaim in Gilead east of the Jordan, the story, as in others, features of the original
later to become an important Israelite city. tale are still present. The central and crucial
Now, aware that he is close to the land of point of the story in its present form is that
Edom, Esau’s home, and fearful for his life and Jacob not only received the divine blessing (des-
the lives of his family, he sends an embassy to pite the refusal of the ‘man’ to declare his own
Esau. Learning that Esau is advancing towards name), but that his name is changed to ‘Israel’
him with a strong military force (v. 6), he prays (this name is here associated with the rare verb
to God that he will protect him, and then makes śārâ, ‘struggle’, used in v. 28). The passage thus
preparations for the encounter, sending a fur- declares Jacob to be not only a towering, heroic
ther conciliatory message to Esau together with figure who has close dealings with God himself,
valuable presents which he sends by instal- but also the founder of the nation of Israel.
ments, himself remaining behind with his fam- Despite its evidently somewhat composite na-
ily in the hope of protecting them in case of ture, attempts to analyse its sources have been
attack. Here again the reader finds the heir to controversial; but the final verse is certainly a
the promise and his family in danger of their separate comment on the incident as being the
lives; and once again the narrative is slowed origin of an otherwise unknown food taboo.
down to increase the dramatic tension.
(33:1–20) The reconciliation between Jacob
(32:22–32) This incident, which interrupts the and his wronged brother resolves the tension
account of Jacob’s concluding encounter with built up in 32:1–21. The chapter is a riot of
Esau, is of central importance in the story deferential bowings and honorific expressions
(‘my lord’, ‘your servant’) in oriental fashion on
of Jacob, even more significant than Jacob’s

experience at Bethel (28:10–22). Here once the part of Jacob and his household and mag-
more the heir to the promise is placed in danger nanimity and solicitous concern on the part of
of his life. But the incident remains essentially Esau. Esau’s emotional welcome of Jacob signi-
mysterious, and several of its features are diffi- fies his complete forgiveness, after so many
cult to interpret. This is at least partly due to the years, of a grievous offence which is never men-
fact that it is evidently a pre-Israelite story that tioned, but of which Jacob still remains pain-
has been reworked, probably more than once. fully aware. Until the moment of greeting he
The original version strongly resembles pagan, appears still to be apprehensive of Esau’s inten-
even animistic, tales of spirits or demons guard- tion; and even subsequently he is still reluctant
ing particular places such as streams, who at- to travel in his company, pretending that they
genesis 82
will meet again in Seir, Esau’s home territory (vv. 8–14). The imposing of circumcision on all
(vv. 12–15), whereas in fact he makes for Succoth the Shechemite men as a condition of the mar-
(‘booths’), where he builds a house for himself riage is a trick with sinister and ironical over-
and settles down. Another version (vv. 18–20), tones, a mere excuse for the real cause of the
however, takes him across the Jordan, still living massacre, the desire for revenge for the initial
in tents, to the ‘city of Shechem’. This phrase rape (v. 31). In the Blessing of Jacob (49:2–27) in
must, on grounds of Hebrew syntax, refer to a which Jacob foretells what will be the future
person of that name (cf. v. 19) who was the destiny of each of his sons (now openly called
owner or founder of the city (see Westermann the twelve tribes of Israel, 49:28), Simeon and
1985: 528). The further reference to the man Levi are not blessed but cursed (49:5–7) for their
Shechem and to the sons of Hamor in v. 19 violent behaviour, with an apparent reference
links this chapter to the events of ch. 34. Jacob’s to the incident of ch. 34.
naming of the altar that he erects on the plot of
land that he has bought (‘God, the God of Israel’) (35:1–15) Jacob’s departure from Shechem
might be a reference to Jacob’s new personal to Bethel is here attributed to a positive com-
name Israel, but the reader would understand it mand by God. The preparations for the journey
as a proclamation that Jacob’s God was to be (vv. 2–4) and the use of the technical term ‘to go
the God of the people Israel. up’ (ʿālâ) suggest that this was no ordinary jour-
ney but a pilgrimage. Alt (1959: 79–88), followed
(34:1–31) This brutal and—to the modern by others including von Rad (1972: 336), main-
reader—repulsive story, which may be based tained that these verses reflect an actual annual
on a reminiscence of some actual event in the pilgrimage made by the Israelites at later times.
early history of the Israelite tribes, is widely Bethel was the place where Jacob had already
supposed to have existed in two versions, encountered God and set up a sacred pillar
which have been combined and used by a later (28:10–22) during his flight to Laban, and
writer to make the point that Israelites should which he had vowed to visit again on his return
abstain from intermarriage with the Canaanites. home ‘in peace’ (28:21). The connection be-
The massacre which it describes is in conform- tween the two episodes is specifically made in
ity with the teaching of the Deuteronomists, vv. 1, 3, 7. The change of clothes (v. 2) was an act
who represent Moses as having demanded of purification necessary before an encounter
their extermination (Deut 7:1–3). The protagon- with God (cf. Ex 19:10–14). More important is
ists are Simeon and Levi, who first ensure by a the putting away and burial of ‘foreign gods’
trick that the victims will be in a weakened (vv. 2, 4). The fact that a similar rite, also per-
condition (vv. 25–6). Their brothers, however, formed at Shechem, is recorded in Josh 24:23
all participate in the subsequent plundering of suggested to Alt (1959) that something of the
the city. That Jacob may not have figured in the kind constituted an esential feature of a regular
original story is suggested by the fact that he pilgrimage from Shechem to Bethel, marking an
plays only a marginal and passive role. Jacob’s annual demonstration of exclusive loyalty to
fear that the neighbouring Canaanites will take YHWH. (On v. 5 see above on ch. 34.) The
their revenge on his family and destroy it in name given to the place where Jacob set up an
turn (v. 30) qualifies the story as yet another altar (v. 7) is the same as in 33:20. In vv. 9–15
example of the endangerment of the lives of there occurs a further repetition of the promise
the heirs to the promise, a situation that leads of numerous descendants and of the land, fol-
to Jacob’s removal with his family to Bethel and lowed by a further account of the setting up of a
is only relieved by the mysterious ‘terror’ that pillar and its consecration with oil.
falls on the surrounding cities (35:5, which ap-

pears to be intended as the sequel to this story). (35:16–22) is concerned with events in Jacob’s
The Shechemites are here (v. 2) specified as family. The birth of his twelfth and last son
Hivites, one of the tribes supposed to have Benjamin is recorded. Jacob does not accept
constituted the Canaanite people (cf. e.g. Gen the name given to him by his dying mother,
10:15–18; Deut 7:1). After forcing Dinah into which means ‘son of my sorrow’, but gives him
illicit intercourse with him, Shechem falls in a name which may mean either ‘son of the right
love with her and wishes to marry her at hand’ or ‘son of the south’ but perhaps, more
all costs. The inhabitants of the city, with appropriately and hopefully, ‘son of good for-
Hamor as spokesman, attempt to negotiate the tune’ (Soggin 1961: 432–40). The incest commit-
marriage in all innocence, but are rebuffed ted by Reuben is condemned when Jacob
83 genesis
blesses his sons (49:4). vv. 23–9 conclude the to Pharaoh himself (41:40–4) and so became,
story of Jacob’s adventures with his return under God’s guidance, the saviour of his father
home at last in time to be with his father Isaac Jacob and all his family (45:7–8; 50:19–21). This
before he dies. Jacob lived many more years story raises for the reader a number of questions
after this (his death is recorded in 49:33, at the which have been the subject of much discus-
end of the story of his son Joseph’s brilliant sion, e.g.: What is its relationship to the rest of
career), but he no longer plays an active role the patriarchal stories? What is its literary
in the book. genre? Is it the work of a single author? Does
it contain reliable information about ancient
(36:1–43) After the lengthy story of Jacob the Egypt, and if so, of what period? What is its
author turns his attention to Esau, the ancestor purpose?
of the Edomites, and his descendants—an indi- The function of the story in the context of the
cation that although Israel and Edom were foregoing patriarchal stories and of the follow-
often hostile to one another Israel still consid- ing book of Exodus is that it bridges a gap in the
ered them to be ‘brothers’. These genealogical chronological scheme of the Pentateuch. The
lists are derived from different sources and con- material available to the compiler of Genesis
tain not a few repetitions and inconsistencies. about Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob appears to
The extent to which they contain genuine in- have come to an end. The story of Joseph,
formation about a people about whom little is whose connection with that material is tenuous
otherwise known is disputed. In vv. 20–30 the though real (his birth and his genealogy are
clan of the Horites appears to be reckoned as recorded in Gen 30:22–4; 35:22–6) serves the
related to Esau, but in Deut 2:12, 22 the Horites purpose of accounting for the migration of
are said to have been one of the former peoples Jacob and his family to Egypt, from which
whom the Edomites dispossessed. The lists dis- country the Exodus tradition recounts the sub-
tinguish between three types of socio-political sequent departure of the Israelites (the sons of
organization, referring to heads of families Jacob), so ensuring the continuity of the larger
(vv. 1–8, 20–8), tribal leaders (vv. 15–19, 29–30, narrative tradition. At the same time, it consti-
40–3), and kings (vv. 31–9). The kings of Edom tutes yet another example of the theme of dan-
are said to have reigned ‘before any king reigned ger to the heirs of the promise—again as a
over the Israelites’ (v. 31). This list, which obvi- result of famine—and their miraculous deliver-
ously cannot be very early, may contain some ance. But neither of these functions required or
genuine historical information (so Westermann could account for such an elaborate narrative
1985). The Edomites are known from the evi- as this. Von Rad (1966b), who found parallels
dence of archaeology to have settled in their between the story and Egyptian short stories,
territory before the arrival of Israel in Canaan, saw it as narrative wisdom literature depicting
and that they had acquired the status of a mon- Joseph as an ideal wise man. But others have
archy before Israel had done so is plausible questioned this assessment of the character of
(Num 20:14 mentions a ‘king of Edom’ in the Joseph as here portrayed.
time of Moses). That their monarchy was at first It is this quality that has led to a questioning
non-hereditary as stated in Gen vv. 31–9 is of of the conventional view that the story is the
interest in the light of recent studies of the early result of a combination of two separate ver-
history of Israel. sions, attributed respectively to J and E. Von
Rad’s attempt to combine the latter view with
The Story of Joseph (chs. 37–50) an appreciation of its literary quality was shown
These chapters are of a different kind from the to be inconsistent by Whybray (1968), followed
rest of Genesis. Instead of a catena of brief
independently by Donner (1976). The possibility

incidents and notices about family and tribal that it is the work of a single author, first pro-
affairs we have here—interrupted only by posed by Volz and Rudolph in 1933, who threw
some obviously interpolated material, notably doubt on the existence of an E strand, is now
chs. 38 and parts of 48–50—a single, well-con- seriously, though not universally, accepted.
structed, continuous narrative comprising some Whether the story betrays accurate knowledge
300 verses in our Bibles and skilfully arranged of Egyptian life and customs of any period has
in a series of distinct consecutive scenes, about been disputed by Egyptologists. Some (e.g. Ver-
the career of one man, Jacob’s eleventh son, gote 1959) took a positive view of this, arguing
who rose to an undreamed-of eminence in that it fits well into the Ramesside period which
Egypt as ruler of that whole land second only was believed by some to be a plausible time for
genesis 84
the career of a historical Joseph, but others (e.g. Jacob’s family it was thought to deserve a place
Redford 1970) were sceptical about the authen- in the total narrative, but no satisfactory place-
ticity of the Egyptian allusions. Redford main- ment for it could be found. It is wholly con-
tained that if the author did in fact have genuine cerned with events in the life of Judah, Jacob’s
knowledge of Egypt the work cannot be dated fourth son. But he can hardly be called the hero
earlier than the seventh century BCE. of the story: it is his daughter-in-law Tamar who
fills that role. The story is a complicated one
(37:1–34) The minor inconsistencies and dupli- and involves a number of customs that call for
cations in this chapter (e.g. the apparent confu- elucidation. These can only be briefly sketched
sion between Ishmaelites and Midianites here. vv. 1–11 are introductory to the main story.
in v. 28; the duplication of Joseph’s dreams in Judah’s decision to settle apart from his broth-
vv. 6–7 and 9; the similarity of the compassion- ers probably reflects the fact that the tribe of
ate actions of Reuben and Judah in vv. 21–2 and Judah was located in historical times in the
26–7) are not sufficient to show that two com- south, away from the other tribes, and had a
plete versions of the story have been inter- separate existence until politically united with
woven; at most they may suggest that the them by David (Adullam and Timnah were both
author made use at some points of earlier oral Judaean cities in later times). The story also
material. The story itself is quite straightfor- reflects fraternization and intermarriage be-
ward: it recounts the first of a series of incidents tween Israelites and Canaanites. Tamar’s second
which once again put in danger of his life the marriage, to Onan, conforms to the custom of
person who is destined to hold in his hands the levirate marriage (see Deut 25:5–6). With the
survival of the heirs of the promise. This destiny death of her first two husbands Tamar evidently
is foreshadowed here by Joseph’s dreams; but expected to be married to the third brother,
the dramatic suspense is to continue concern- Shelah; but, afraid that he too might die prema-
ing his fate for several more chapters. Another turely, Jacob made an excuse to avoid this; and
motif, that of hatred between brothers, is rem- Tamar, according to custom, returned to the
iniscent of the hostility between Jacob and Esau; unenviable state of living with her parents. In
once again the issue is solved by the end of the desperation she then tried to force Judah’s hand.
story with the indication that it is not the elder She arranged to have sexual relations with her
brother who has been chosen by God to assure father-in-law in the guise of a prostitute without
the continuation of the chosen race. vv. 1–2 are his being aware of her identity, and retained
an introduction to the whole Joseph story, pro- proof of the relationship by keeping his cylin-
viding the necessary link between the earlier der seal with its cord and his staff as pledge for
patriarchal stories and the present one. In v. 3 her fee (v. 18). It is not clear on what grounds
the precise nature of the ‘long coat with sleeves’ she was condemned to death by Judah in his
(kĕtōnet passı̂m) is not certain. Outside this chap- capacity as undisputed head of the family with
ter this garment is referred to in the OT only in powers of life and death (v. 24); it is perhaps
2 Sam 13:18, 19, where it is the apparel of a assumed that she was betrothed to Shelah,
princess. Here it is a token of Jacob’s especial though not actually married to him (cf. Deut
affection for Joseph and a mark of esteem 22:23–4). After Judah’s recognition that her ac-
which incites the brothers’ hatred. The description was justified (!) the story ends with her
tion of Jacob’s grief at the supposed death of his giving birth to twin boys, Judah’s children,
son (vv. 33–5) closes this first part of the story of whose names (Perez and Zerah) are interpreted
Joseph, after which (in ch. 39) the scene changes as meaning ‘breaking out’ and (perhaps) ‘bright,
to Egypt. shining’ respectively.
(38:1–30) This chapter, in which Joseph does (39:1–41:57) This account of Joseph’s humili-
not appear at all, is an interpolation that inter- ation and subsequent exaltation has some of
rupts the Joseph story, which resumes in 39:1 at the characteristics of the folktale, but is an inte-
the point at which it is broken off at the end of gral part of the story of Joseph as a whole. It is
ch. 37. Attempts to interpret it as in some way full of dramatic tension: Joseph is again placed
relevant to the events narrated in the surround- in great danger; but the tension is finally re-
ing chapters have hardly been convincing, al- solved in an equally dramatic fashion. It is sev-
though on the other hand no convincing eral times (39:3, 5, 21, 23; 41:51–2) specifically
explanation has been found for its interpol- emphasized that both his preservation in dan-
ation. Probably, as a story about a member of ger and his later success are due not to his own
85 genesis
abilities but to the unseen operation of God. meanings of the phrase ‘to lift up the head’, whose
Although there is no evidence in extant Egyp- normal meaning was to restore to favour, but in
tian texts of any comparable elevation of a the case of the baker referred to decapitation or
person of humble status to a position of great hanging. Both interpretations proved to be cor-
power, the theme of the elevation of exiled Jews rect. The last verse of the chapter reintroduces the
by foreign potentates was evidently a favourite tension into the story: although the cupbearer
one in post-exilic times, and is found also in had promised to intercede for Joseph when he
Dan 1–6 and Esther. 39:1, which repeats infor- was restored to favour with Pharaoh, he forgot
mation given at the end of ch. 37, is deliberately him, leaving him in prison with no apparent
resumptive following the interpolation of hope, and possibly again in danger of his life
ch. 38. It specifies that it was Ishmaelites rather should judgement be given against him.
than Midianites who sold Joseph into slavery in Pharaoh’s dreams (41:1–7) are of the same
Egypt (as in 37:28b). The Egyptian name Poti- symbolic kind as those of the cupbearer and
phar means ‘the one whom Re gives’. The initial baker, and required expert decipherment. Like
success of the good-looking Joseph (39:6) as Nebuchadnezzar in similar circumstances (Dan
Potiphar’s trusted servant (39:2–6) is brought 2:4) Pharaoh sent for his experts (hartummı̂m,
to a sudden end and his life once more endan- ‘magicians’, is a form of an Egyptian _ _ word
gered by the lie told by Potiphar’s wife when he meaning ‘soothsayer-priest’), who proved to
twice virtuously refuses her sexual advances be incapable of the task. On the suggestion of
(39:14–18). (On the use of the term ‘Hebrew’, the cupbearer, who at last remembered
39:14, which occurs several times in the story Joseph’s talents, Joseph was sent for from his
of Joseph, see above on 14:13.) But the punish- prison cell and, having shaved and put on clean
ment which Potiphar imposes on Joseph is sur- clothes—matters of great importance to the
prisingly mild for the crime of adultery, and Egyptians—appeared before Pharaoh. His pre-
suggests that Potiphar was not entirely con- parations are symbolic of a great change in his
vinced of his guilt. The chapter ends on a life; from this moment he never looked back.
more positive note: Joseph’s attractive person- But it was his successful interpretation of the
ality (as well as God’s protection) once more dreams that—under God, 41:39—was the cause
leads to success, when he obtains the favour of of his sudden elevation to greatness, together
the jailer. with his eminently practical advice about the
The chief cupbearer and chief baker, whom measures to be taken in the face of an otherwise
Joseph waited upon in prison (40:1–4) were high certain disaster. In a manner typical of
officials imprisoned for some undisclosed of- the folktale, Pharaoh put his entire faith in
fences by the dictatorial king of Egypt. Unlike this one demonstration of Joseph’s ability
Joseph’s own dreams in ch. 37, whose meaning (41:39–40) and lost no time in appointing him
needed no explanation, their dreams, as also Grand Vizier of Egypt, endowing him with all
those of Pharaoh in ch. 41, were dreams whose the symbols and the reality of that office, which
meaning was not obvious and which required an are attested in Egyptian art and tomb furniture.
interpreter with special powers. The interpret- The meaning of the word ʾabrēk (‘Bow the
ation of such dreams was, both in Egypt and in knee!’, 41:43) may be related to the Semitic
Mesopotamia, the speciality and occult art of the root b-r-k, ‘kneel’, or may be related to an Egyp-
professional diviner. Like Daniel, who was re- tian word meaning ‘Watch out!’ In receiving a
quired not only to interpret Nebuchadnezzar’s new and Egyptian name (Zaphenath-paneah
dream but also to remind the king of its contents means ‘God speaks and lives’), Joseph was re-
(Dan 2:31–45), Joseph possessed the power to ceived into the ranks of the Egyptian nobility;
interpret dreams, but attributed this power to and this was confirmed by his being given the
special divine revelation rather than to his own daughter of the high priest of Heliopolis (‘On’)
ability (40:8)—although in 44:15 he speaks of his as his bride. He is presented (41:34–6, 47–57) as a
ability to practise divination (nihēš). The differ- foresighted administrator. The establishment
ence between the cupbearer’s and _ the baker’s of large granaries against times of low grain
dreams—the fact that in the latter’s dream the production was a well-known Egyptian eco-
birds were eating from the basket of food which nomic measure. The final verse of the chapter
he was carrying to Pharaoh, whereas the cup- (57) prepares for the events of the following
bearer dreamed that he had resumed his former chapters by emphasizing the world-wide na-
function—determined Joseph’s interpretations, ture of the food shortage against which Joseph
in which Joseph played—gruesomely—on two successfully prepared Egypt.
genesis 86
(42:1–45:28) With ch. 42 the scene switches for his aged father, and is overjoyed, and again
back to Canaan and to Jacob and his other deeply affected, on seeing Benjamin (43:30).
sons. Egypt was the granary of the ancient There is again astonishment at Benjamin’s treat-
world; and journeys from such countries as ment as guest of honour, and probably at
Canaan to try to buy food in times of famine Joseph’s dining at a separate table in accordance
are recorded in extant Egyptian texts (see ANET with Egyptian rules of purity; but in the relaxed
250–1) and depicted in Egyptian graphic art. The atmosphere they forget their fears and even
main problem of the interpretation of these drink to excess (‘were merry’) in Joseph’s com-
chapters is to understand the reason for pany, unaware of further trouble to come.
Joseph’s harsh treatment of his brothers before
he reveals his identity in ch. 45. One of his (44:1–34) By the repetition of the earlier inci-
motives was certainly to force them to bring dent of 42:35 with the planting in the brother’s
his youngest brother Benjamin to see him. But luggage of Joseph’s cup (the reference to the
there can be little doubt that a main motive was money here is probably a later addition), the
connected with his brothers’ treatment of him pursuit and apprehension of the brothers and
many years before (ch. 37). In his present pos- the accusation of theft (vv. 1–13) the tension is
ition of unlimited power he was in a position to still further increased. It seems to them that
punish them, and he did so; but in the end Joseph has now trapped them as they had
brotherly love and family feelings proved feared all along, and that it is all up with them.
stronger than his desire for revenge (ch. 45). The cup is particularly important to Joseph
The story is replete with dramatic tension and because he uses it to practise lecanomancy
also with dramatic irony (the brothers do not (v. 5), a form of divination in which oil was
know who he is, but the readers do) and is told poured into a cup or bowl to give psychic
with psychological subtlety. By pretending to insight (see Cryer 1994: 145–7, 285)—a practice
believe that the brothers are spies (42:9), Joseph somewhat resembling modern foretelling of the
extracts the information that they have left their future by tea-leaves. Joseph’s purpose in so
youngest brother behind with his father, and tricking the brothers was to test them to see
demands that he should be brought to him. whether they had changed their nature, and
Imprisoned for three days, they suppose that whether they genuinely cared for their father
they are being punished for their earlier crime, and for Benjamin. They protest their innocence,
even though they do not recognize Joseph but recognize that if found guilty they merit
(42:21). In releasing them all except Simeon, condign punishment (v. 9), though both the
however, Joseph is deeply affected, and supplies steward and Joseph himself are inclined to
them with corn and provisions; but the return mercy except towards the thief, who must be
of their money increases their fears (42:28, 35), enslaved (vv. 10, 17). Joseph adds to their dismay
and their misery is increased when on their by claiming that he has the gift of divination
return home Jacob, in a mood of self-pity, re- even without the use of the cup, and knows
fuses to let Benjamin return with them to Egypt. what has occurred (v. 15). But Judah’s lengthy
When a further supply of corn became an speech in which he heartrendingly depicts the
absolute necessity to Jacob and his family a inevitable fate of Jacob if he is bereft of yet
second visit to Egypt was mooted, and Jacob another son and offers himself as a scapegoat
was persuaded against his will to let Benjamin in Benjamin’s place is a masterpiece of rhetoric
go with his brothers, with Judah as a guarantor which Joseph finds too hard to endure (45:1).
of his safety (43:1–11). This time, fearful of their
reception, they take with them tribute in the (45:1–28) This chapter probably marks the end
form of choice products of Canaan and double of the Joseph story proper. With it all the ten-
the previous sum of money, to prove their hon- sion is released and the problems solved; there
esty (43:11–12). Joseph, however, was to continue is a reconciliation and a happy ending. From the
to play his tricks on them (ch. 44). The scene literary point of view the story is complete, and
with Joseph’s steward (43:16–25) is intended to the chapters that complete the book have rather
allay the brothers’ fears: they are at first suspi- the character of an appendix or series of appen-
cious and naı̈vely afraid of a trap (in such a dices designed to provide an answer to
setting!), but are reassured. They have been nat- the question, ‘And how did it all end?’ (46:1–5
urally astonished and awed by the luxury of already reverts to the style and concerns of the
Joseph’s house and by the invitation to dinner; earlier patriarchal stories, with an appearance
but when Joseph arrives he shows his concern of God in the night to Jacob, reiterating the
87 genesis
promise of making a great nation of him, but suspicious of foreign immigrants, commonly
this time in Egypt rather than Canaan. The settled them. There is a strong hint to the reader
remaining chapters lack the high literary quality in v. 34 about the future in the statement that
of the Joseph story proper, and are rather piece- shepherds are abhorrent to the Egyptians, and
meal in contents.) vv. 1–15 describe a touching in Joseph’s advice to his father to be open in his
scene in which, apart from the emotions that interview with Pharaoh about his profession.
are expressed between Joseph and his brothers, However, Pharaoh is represented in 47:5–6 as
the author is concerned to emphasize Joseph’s being prepared to welcome Jacob for Joseph’s
forgiveness of his brothers and the hidden hand sake on condition that he lived in Goshen, as he
of God in preserving the lives of Jacob’s family had already promised (45:17–20).
through Joseph’s agency. In vv. 10–15, however,
a new theme is announced: Jacob and his family (47:1–26) The narrative of vv. 1–12 follows im-
are to migrate to Egypt to share in Joseph’s mediately on ch. 46, and is continued in v. 27.
good fortune. (His question in v. 3 is strange: vv. 13–26 are an account of Joseph’s economic
the brothers have already told him that his policy as Grand Vizier, and has no connection,
father is still alive.) The rest of the chapter except for the motif of the famine, with the
is concerned with the arrangements for the story of Jacob and his family in Egypt. The
move. Joseph proposes it on his own initiative audience with Pharaoh (vv. 1–12) is in two
(vv. 9–11), and Pharaoh himself confirms this, parts: first Joseph presents five of his brothers
offering the family the best land in Egypt for to Pharaoh (vv. 2–6) and then, separately, his
their residence. In vv. 21–8 Joseph’s lavish pro- father (vv. 7–12). It is probable that two distinct
visions for the journey and Jacob/Israel’s aston- versions have been used here; this is suggested
ishment, incredulity, and final acceptance of the by the fact that in v. 11 the land assigned to the
news of Joseph and of his offer are described. immigrants is called (only here) the land of
Rameses (cf. Ex 1:11) rather than of Goshen.
(46:1–34) Jacob was last heard of as living in The location, however, is probably the same.
Hebron (37:14). Now he passes through Beer- The point of the audience with the brothers
sheba on his way to Egypt, and it is there that seems to be that the brothers do not, as they
he has his reassuring message from God. The might have done, try to use their kinship with
list of names of those who went with him Joseph to enhance their social status: they do
(vv. 8–27) is supposedly a roll-call of the persons not ask for permanent residence in Egypt,
mentioned in vv. 6–7; but it clearly comes from which would have been tantamount to Egyp-
a different source and interrupts the narrative. tian citizenship, and they wish to continue their
Among the total of sixty-six persons alleged to hereditary profession, although Pharaoh sug-
have made the journey (v. 26), expanded to gests that some of them may be capable of
seventy by (presumably) including Jacob him- positions of some responsibility (v. 6). The
self and also Joseph and his two sons Ephraim point of the second audience is to present
and Manasseh, who are counted twice, though Jacob as a dignified old man who is not over-
not named the second time (v. 27) there are awed by Pharaoh but dares to bless him (vv. 7,
some who are expressly stated not to have 10). vv. 13–26 are designed to demonstrate
been among them: Er and Onan (v. 12) were Joseph’s superior wisdom in using his control
already dead (38:7, 10), and Manasseh and Eph- over the corn supply to make slaves of the
raim had been born in Egypt. Joseph, of course, whole Egyptian nation—a triumph which,
was still in Egypt. Moreover, the statement that whatever the modern reader may think of its
Benjamin had ten sons who accompanied him morality, perhaps—although this is a secular
on the journey (v. 21) does not accord with what
story—foreshadows the later triumph of the

had previously been said about his youth. Prob- Israelites over Pharaoh himself (Ex 6–15).
ably this list was originally intended as a list of
all Jacob’s descendants through three gener- (47:27–48:22) The story of Jacob and his family
ations and had no original connection with is now resumed; but the narrative is not all of
this narrative. vv. 28–34 are concerned with one piece. It contains a number of inconsisten-
Jacob’s projected meeting with Pharaoh and cies and incongruities, and is the result of the
with the place of residence designated for the combination of several different kinds of ma-
immigrants. Goshen (vv. 28, 34, already men- terial. 47:27–8 notes the family’s successful life
tioned in 45:10) was an area on the eastern edge in the land of Goshen and the period of their
of the Nile delta, where the Egyptians, who were residence there together with a note of the
genesis 88
length of Jacob’s life—though his death is not The significance of 48:22 is not clear. ‘Joseph’
recorded until 49:33. 47:29–31, however, begins here does not refer simply to the individual but
the account of his last years and death. His to the ‘house of Joseph’, which comprised the
request to be taken back to Canaan for burial tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, and was to be
reintroduces—though indirectly—the theme of the most powerful of the northern group of
the promise of the land: life in Egypt is not to be Israelite tribes. Jacob confers on ‘Joseph’ one
the permanent destiny of the nation of Israel. In ‘portion’ (šĕkem), here unidentified, more than
his deathbed speech in 48:1–4 Jacob first repeats he gives to the others. The word šĕkem is also
the story of his blessing and the promise made the name of the city of Shechem, but as a
to him at Bethel (35:6–12; Luz ¼ Bethel; 28:19; common noun means ‘shoulder’. Here it plainly
35:6) and then informs Joseph that he is adopt- means a shoulder of land or a mountain ridge.
ing his (Joseph’s) sons Ephraim and Manasseh as The military exploit of Jacob referred to here is
his own sons. This action, which points beyond unknown; certainly he did not capture the city
the brothers as individuals to their future char- of Shechem from the Amorites (¼ Canaanites;
acter as Israelite tribes, would mean that the cf. ch. 34).
traditional number of twelve tribes (implied,
for example, in 35:23–6) is augmented to thir- (49:1–33) The sayings about the twelve tribes
teen (if Ephraim and Manasseh are to be of Israel preserved here in the guise of a deathbed
counted instead of their father). In fact the trad- address by Jacob to his twelve sons (vv. 3–27)
itional number of twelve is a fiction; they are are generally known as the Blessing of Jacob,
listed in several different ways in various places partly on the basis of the statement in v. 28. v. 1,
in the OT, and their numbers vary between ten however, describes their character somewhat
and thirteen. more accurately: in their present form the say-
The scene of Jacob’s blessing of Ephraim and ings are, to a large extent, predictions of ‘what will
Manasseh (48:8–20), in which Jacob is called by happen’ to the various tribes in the future. They
his other name Israel, appears not to presup- vary considerably in their contents, and their
pose the previous passage but to be from a assessments are by no means all favourable.
different source. Since it is implied here that They cannot be said to constitute a single
Joseph’s sons are not yet adult and Jacob ap- poem, but differ greatly in form and length as
pears to be encountering them for the first time, well as in contents. They are in fact a collection
the scene is evidently supposed to have taken of originally quite separate sayings or slogans
place soon after Jacob’s arrival in Egypt rather each characterizing an individual tribe (in the
than just before his death (cf. 47:28). This is case of Simeon and Levi, vv. 5–7, two are treated
another example of the younger son being together), some of them alluding to particular
given precedence over the elder (cf. ch. 27). incidents in which they were involved that are
The right hand is assumed to confer the greater now wholly or partly obscure. Some have been
blessing. Jacob deliberately crosses his hands greatly augmented; in those cases it is often
despite Joseph’s protest, in order to give Eph- possible to identify the original, usually
raim, the younger, the greater blessing. 48:15–16 pointed, saying. The intention of the author/
is somewhat confused, and interrupts the main collector was to provide a complete survey of
narrative. It is stated here that it is Joseph who is all the twelve tribes of Israel (Joseph, vv. 22–6
blessed (48:15a), but in fact it is his sons who are being treated as a single tribe—see above); how-
blessed (48:16), and no difference is made be- ever, the persistent tradition that Israel was
tween them. 48:20 also is a somewhat confus- composed of exactly twelve tribes is not derived
ing addition to the story: it purports to be an from this chapter. This is not the only passage
of this kind in the OT: Deut 33, known as the
alternative blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh

(‘them’), but in fact it is a wish rather than a Blessing of Moses, is a parallel instance, and
blessing, and it is addressed to one person (‘you’ Judg 5, the Song of Deborah, also assesses the
is singular). It is noteworthy that ‘Israel’ here characters of almost all the tribes (Judg 5:14–18).
(and perhaps also in 47:27) refers to the nation The latter, however, is a unitary poem which
of Israel, not to the individual Jacob/Israel. The comments on a single incident, and praises or
last sentence in the verse reverts to the main blames the various tribes according to their co-
story, summing it up: Ephraim was preferred operation or otherwise. Here in Gen 49 it
before Manasseh. There is a clear allusion in is significant that Judah (vv. 8–12) and Joseph
this story to the later predominance of the (vv. 22–6)—that is, the tribes which were later
tribe of Ephraim (cf. e.g. Deut 33:17). to become the most powerful and important
89 genesis
tribes—are treated much more fully than the statement at the end of v. 7 reads like a divine
others. pronouncement of judgement similar to those
The Blessing of Jacob is here presented as a found in the prophetical books.
scene that took place at Jacob’s bedside just Judah (vv. 8–12) was David’s tribe, pre-eminent
before his death in the presence of all his in the time of the united kingdom; it was the
sons, and thus as a farewell discourse (a fre- name of the southern kingdom after the dissol-
quent feature in the accounts of the deaths of ution of the union until its destruction in the
great men in the OT—cf. e.g. the Blessing of sixth century BCE. This passage has incorporated
Moses, Deut 33; Josh 24; David’s farewell more than one shorter saying. The reference to
speech, 1 Kings 2:1–9). However, it is clearly Judah as a lion (v. 8) is the first of several ex-
an independent piece that has been inserted amples in the chapter of the association of a
at an appropriate point into the story of tribe with a particular animal. The lion later
Jacob’s death. In its present expanded form it became the traditional symbol of the tribe of
cannot be earlier than the time of David, as it Judah (cf. Rev 5:5). ‘shall praise you’ (yôdûkā) is a
speaks of Judah as the ruler of the other tribes play on the word ‘Judah’. ‘Until tribute comes to
and of other peoples (v. 10). The full and fa- him’ (v. 10) is only one among many alternative
vourable assessment of Joseph—that is, of the renderings of the Hebrew phrase ʿad kı̂-yābōʾ
central tribes—as numerous and powerful šı̂lōh, the meaning of which is one of the un-
(vv. 22–6) expresses a different picture of lead- solved problems of OT interpretation. Its literal
ership; but it also clearly reflects a later period translation could be either ‘Until Shiloh comes’
and has a different orientation from that of or ‘Until he comes to Shiloh’; but no plausible
Judah. The chapter appears to have been sub- connection between Judah (or David) and the
ject to more than one process of redaction. The Ephraimite city and sanctuary of Shiloh can be
function of the individual sayings in their ori- found. The Hebrew text may be corrupt, or the
ginal brief state is not obvious and has been word ‘Shiloh’ may have some hitherto undis-
frequently debated. They were presumably covered meaning; but attempts to correct it or
comments by tribes about other tribes made to find some other explanation based on com-
at an early period; but the circumstances in parative philology have achieved no consensus.
which they were made remain obscure. ‘Until’ suggests that some event will put an end
v. 2 is a formal poetical introduction to the to Judah’s domination; but the traditional no-
collection of sayings, which are also in poetical tion that this is a prophecy of the coming of the
form. Reuben (vv. 3–4) is addressed directly and Messiah to bring to an end temporal earthly
accused of incest—probably referring to 35:22. rule lacks support in the text. That it should be
Little is known of Reuben either as an individ- a prophecy of the accession to rule of David is
ual or as a tribe. It played no prominent part in also improbable, as he can hardly be said to
subsequent history; Deut 33:6 suggests that it have put an end to the rule of Judah! Wester-
died out as a distinct tribe at a fairly early period mann (1986: 231) comments: ‘It is no praise-
despite its initial prominence reflected in Reu- worthy page in the history of O.T. exegesis
ben’s being the eldest son of Jacob. Simeon and that so many studies have been preoccupied
Levi (vv. 5–7) are not blessed but cursed. The with this one word [Shiloh]’. vv. 11–12 appear
crime of which they are accused in v. 6 is almost to be a somewhat fanciful prediction of great
certainly their treacherous murder of the She- fertility and prosperity which will follow the
chemites in ch. 34, though no mention is made accession of the future ruler, when wine will
there of their hamstringing oxen. In historical flow in abundance, and of the ruler’s outstand-
times Levi was a priestly tribe which, unlike the ing beauty. There is an analogous prediction of
a future king in Num 24:5–9; the last two lines
others, had no inheritance in the land: it thus

ceased to be counted among the ordinary tribes, of v. 9 are repeated almost word for word in
though the connection between the Levi of this Num 24:9a.
saying and the later priestly tribe is uncertain. The saying about Zebulon (v. 13) makes no
According to Judg 1:3, 17 Simeon was associated comment on the character of this tribe, but
with Judah in its invasion of Canaanite territory, only—somewhat vaguely—on its territorial lo-
and was probably absorbed into the more cation. These statements do not correspond
powerful tribe of Judah, so being ‘scattered in very closely with the description of its location
Israel’. The use in v. 6 of the first person singular in Josh 19:10–16, which places it in Galilee to the
can hardly be supposed to be that of Jacob, and east of the Sea of Tiberias, but at least ten miles
this is also true of ‘are brothers’ in v. 5. The from the Mediterranean at its nearest point. It is
genesis 90
not known at what period it expanded its terri- The section on Joseph (vv. 22–6) is, like that
tory so far west. Ancient Israel was not, of on Judah, made up of a number of originally
course, a maritime people. The saying may separate elements, not all of which are tribal
have been intended to emphasize Zebulon’s sayings. It is divided into two main parts, a
isolation from the other tribes, though in Judg characterization of the ‘tribe’ of Joseph with an
5:14 it is commended for its participation with allusion to Joseph’s behaviour when attacked (vv.
other tribes in the battle against Jabin and Sisera 22–5a) and a series of blessings (vv. 25b–6). Un-
in the nearby valley of Jezreel. Issachar’s name fortunately much in these verses is difficult to
and character (vv. 14–15) are probably associated understand: there are rare and obscure words,
here, as in 30:18, with śākār, ‘hire, wages’. and the syntax is sometimes unusual and diffi-
Although the tribe, like Zebulon, is praised in cult. There are probably textual corruptions,
Judg 5:15, it is here portrayed as submitting itself and the rendering of NRSV—and of all other
to the harshest form of slavery—that is, under translations—is based to some extent on conjec-
the neighbouring Canaanite cities. Dan’s name tural interpretation, v. 22 is a metaphorical ref-
(v. 16) is understood here, as in 30:6, to be erence to Joseph as a strong and flourishing plant
derived from the verb dı̂n, ‘to judge’; but well supplied with water; ‘fruitful’ (pōrāt) plays on
whereas in 30:6 it is God who is the subject of the word ‘Ephraim’, the predominant member of
the verb, here it is Dan who is the subject: he the ‘house of Joseph’. vv. 23–4 describe an inci-
will be the judge of his people. In v. 17, however, dent, now unidentifiable, in which ‘Joseph’ was
Dan is described as a snake that attacks horse- attacked by enemies but overcame them with
men by biting the horses’ heels. The analogy God’s help. v. 24b introduces a series of divine
may be a reference to the small size of the blessings, and prayers for blessings to be con-
tribe, that cannot attack enemies openly. This ferred on Joseph. In vv. 24–5 God is invoked with
verse is probably intended as praise rather than an amazing, and unique, concatenation of divine
condemnation, referring to attacks against the names, all found elsewhere in the OT, but to-
enemy Canaanites. v. 18 is probably a pious gether betraying a fairly late date of composition.
exclamation of a general kind, not specifically ‘Mighty One of Jacob’ occurs in Isa 49:26; 60:16;
connected with the tribe of Dan. Ps 132:2, 5. God is referred to as a shepherd a
The name of Gad (v. 19) is here derived from number of times, e.g. Ps 23:1 and 80:1. ‘Rock
the Hebrew root g-d-d, ‘to band together’, (ʾeben) of Israel’ occurs only here, but there are
which occurs in various forms four times in fairly frequent references in the Psalms to him as
the verse. It is an appropriate name in that this ‘Rock’ (sûr), and in that form ‘Rock of Israel’
tribe, which was located east of the Jordan occurs in _ Isa 30:29. ‘God of your father’ most
bordering on the desert, would be subject to obviously refers to Abraham or Jacob, and simi-
attacks by marauding raiders. The saying com- lar epithets are found throughout Genesis.
ments that it is known for its ability to give a ‘Almighty’ (šadday) elsewhere in Genesis occurs
good account of itself in such encounters. in the phrase ‘El Shaddai’, but is found frequently
Asher (v. 20), whose name means ‘happiness, by itself in Job and elsewhere. v. 26 is probably a
good fortune’ (cf. 30:13), settled in the fertile very ancient form of blessing. In vv. 25 and 26a
coastal strip between Carmel and the Phoen- Joseph is addressed in the second person, but not
ician border (Josh 19:24–31). But according to in the previous verses or in v. 26b. v. 26b refers
Judg 1:31–2 it was unable to drive out the local primarily to Joseph’s separation from his broth-
Canaanites and so lived among them. The ers while in Egypt, but is also intended to em-
‘royal delicacies’ referred to here may refer to phasize his pre-eminence over the other tribes.
a period when Asher was renowned for its The description of Benjamin (v. 27) refers to the
provision of delicacies for royal courts—either tribe rather than to the individual: it has nothing
for those of Jerusalem or Samaria or for in common with the Benjamin of the preceding
Canaanite or Phoenician royal courts. The say- narratives. This is a fierce tribal saying of great
ing about Naphtali (49:21) is obscure: the text antiquity, unaugmented by later comment. Ben-
may be corrupt. A different spelling of ‘doe’ jamin is here presented, and apparently com-
(ʾayyālâ) would yield ‘terebinth’ (ʾêlâ); ‘fawns’ mended, as a ruthless brigand-like fighter.
could also mean ‘words’. But if the text is cor- Jacob’s charge, now to all his sons, to bury him
rect and ‘fawns’ is a correct interpretation, this with his ancestors in the cave of Machpelah
is another animal analogy: Naphtali is called a (vv. 29–32) essentially repeats his charge to
female deer ‘let loose’, that is, free to roam at Joseph alone in 47:29–31. The repetition was
will in the mountains of Galilee. intended by the final redactor of the book to
91 genesis
form a framework for the whole section about unattested—that Jacob had asked that Joseph
Jacob’s arrangements in anticipation of his death should forgive them (v. 17) cannot be deter-
that stretches from 47:29 to 49:32. mined; to tell such a lie would be an indica-
tion of their panic. On the other hand, there

(50:1–26) This chapter forms an appropriate is nothing in the text to suggest that they
conclusion to the patriarchal stories that acted in bad faith. Joseph’s weeping when
began in ch. 12. Like the deaths of Moses at the they spoke in this way was a sign of deep
end of Deut (34:5–12) and of Joshua at the end of emotion, but gives no hint of his thoughts. In
Josh (24:29–31), that of Joseph marks the end of their fear the brothers fell at his feet in sup-
an epoch. The chapter satisfactorily ties up sev- plication and acknowledged that their fate
eral of the themes of the book, at the same time was in his hands, so unconsciously—though
hinting that it marks no more than a temporary this was certainly in the mind of the author—
stopping-place in the history of the nation: the fulfilling Joseph’s former dreams that he
final words of the book, ‘in Egypt’, make this would eventually rule over them (37:6–10).
clear. The reconciliation of the brothers with But his reply (vv. 19–21) reassures them com-
Joseph is completed and their crime forgiven; pletely. He first points out that it is not for
God’s promise of protection and guidance is human beings, however exalted, to take re-
once more affirmed and demonstrated; the venge, which is a prerogative of God, and
promise of the land is renewed; and the future then, as he had already done on a previous
of the heirs of the promise is assured. Joseph’s occasion (45:5–8), he attributes all that had
love for his father, already noted in his enquiry happened to the hidden hand of God, whose
about him in Gen 45:3, is poignantly brought purpose had been to preserve their lives so
out in v. 1. The elaborate treatment of Jacob’s that they would become a ‘numerous people’
corpse (vv. 2–3) and of his burial (vv. 4–14) (the word ʾam, ‘people’, can denote a group or
reflects the almost royal position of Joseph in family, but here has also overtones of ‘na-
Egypt. Joseph’s application for permission to tion’). This speech, which expresses a high
bury Jacob in Canaan through the court officials theology and also sums up a major theme of
rather than personally to Pharaoh (vv. 4–6), the the book, is the climax of the whole.
granting of which was presumably a foregone
conclusion, though his promise to return to (50:22–6) constitutes the epilogue to the book.
Egypt afterwards (v. 5) may have some signifi- v. 23 hints at the fulfilment of the promise of
cance, is strange; it may mean that as a recent numerous progeny, reported in Ex 1:7 as having
mourner he refrained from appearing at court. already been realized in Egypt. In v. 24 Joseph
The great detail with which the ceremonies of on his deathbed at the end of a long life affirmed
the burial are described (vv. 7–13) certainly re- the promise of the land—not a feature of the
flects his immense prestige among the Egyp- Joseph story proper; and in v. 25 he charged ‘the
tians and so was a matter of great pride to the Israelites’ (lit., ‘the sons of Israel’), to rebury him
Israelite reader. The curious route taken by the after they left Egypt and returned to Canaan.
funeral procession with a first stopping-place That they did so is recorded in Josh 24:32, after
east of the Jordan before the actual burial in the land had been conquered and its territory
Machpelah (i.e. Hebron) on the western side distributed among the tribes. Meanwhile Joseph
(vv. 10–13) is also strange; it has been suggested died in Egypt and was duly buried according
that an alternative tradition about Jacob’s burial to Egyptian custom, as befitted the man who
place has been incorporated into the narrative had been the effective ruler of Egypt. EX 1:6–7
(see von Rad 1972: 431). The place-name Abel- takes up the story. So, the author tells us, Israel
mizraim (v. 11) is interpreted here as meaning became a nation.
‘the mourning of Egypt’; its true meaning, how-

ever, may be ‘brook of Egypt’.
REFERENCES
(50:15–21) Joseph had given the brothers no Alt, A. (1959), ‘Die Wallfahrt von Sichem nach
cause to believe that he was only waiting for Bethel’, Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel
their father’s death to take his revenge on I (Munich: Beck), 79–88.
them; but their consciousness of their guilt Alter, R. (1981), The Art of Biblical Narrative (London:
still remained, and they were afraid. Whether Allen & Unwin).
the author means the readers to understand Blenkinsopp, J. (1992), The Pentateuch. An Introduction
that they invented the story—otherwise to the First Five Books of the Bible (London: SCM).

MuddimanJohnBar 2010 4genesis ThePentateuch PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MuddimanJohnBar 2010 4genesis ThePentateuch PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

53 genesis

great events associated with the Exodus from

been noted; but no attempt has been made to

on the inscrutability of God’s purposes.

why both sexes are necessary to a complete

alternative creation story. The reference to the

ture of the human imagination. The ﬂood story

former, the Flood is only an episode recounted

incident in Gilgamesh. The ﬁrst animal sacriﬁce

the OT which must be regarded as historical

and Sarah which is still childless, and so to the

Abraham in a very good light both as an out-

of Isaac (21:1–8) and conﬁrms that it is he who is

to describe the nature of the catastrophe that

to a famine. The main variant detail is Abime-

distinct scenes, in each of which, as in folk-

prayer as in the case of Hannah. There are other

command, but with an additional reference to

of Jacob, even more signiﬁcant than Jacob’s

falls on the surrounding cities (35:5, which ap-

independently by Donner (1976). The possibility

story—foreshadows the later triumph of the

alternative blessing of Ephraim and Manasseh

others, had no inheritance in the land: it thus

tion of their panic. On the other hand, there

‘the mourning of Egypt’; its true meaning, how-

You might also like