THE WORLD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT: THE PENTATEUCH

(COURSE OUTLINE)

1. The Pre-History
a) The Stone and Copper Ages
b) The Bronze Ages / Archeology
(First and Second Week)

2. The Pentateuch and History

a) How Pentateuch was written
(Third Week)

3. Wellhausen and the History of the Four Sources

a) Process of Transmission of Biblical Texts
b) Pentateuch and History
c) Summary of the Books of the Pentateuch
(Fourth and Fifth Week)

4. Genesis and the Literature of the Ancient Near East

a) The Primeval Cycle
b) The Drama of Paradise

5. The Flood and After

(Sixth and Seventh Week)

6. Main Characteristics of Genesis

The Patriarchal Circle
(Sixth and Seventh Week)

7. The Book of Exodus

a) Importance of the Book
b) The Covenant – the Apex of the Exodus Experience
c) Conquest and Settlement
(Eight and Ninth Week)

8. The Book of Deuteronomy

(Tenth Week)
9. Conquest and Settlement of Canaan
(Tenth Week)

The Introductory Section

1
The Bible, unlike many religious literatures, is not an anthology of sacred book, containing a
series of theological and ethical teachings, but it is the story of a people of Israel who lived in
the land of Israel. They had learnt to confess their faith by telling their history and by seeing
within it the hand of God who rules history. God's own righteous ends in history provided
the framework for the biblical understanding of both communal and personal history. This,
however, is an interpretation by faith which is not subject to objective thinking.

The surviving written records provide us with glimpses of life in antiquity for the
reconstruction of biblical history. Many periods remain obscure due to the silence of the
biblical record. To reconstruct the record where it is silent and to illuminate it where it does
speak, the modern student has turned to archaeology. The results of excavation may aid him
through the study of the material remains and of ancient written sources which lay buried for
thousands of years. He can gather from them all the data that throw a direct or indirect light
upon the events related in the Bible and upon the background of the ancient Hebrews.

CHAPTER ONE: THE PRE-HISTORY

(Culled from Jerome Biblical Commentary, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1968, pp. 671-675)

Up to 150 years ago, our only knowledge of the Ancient Near East (ANE) was the Bible and
Herodotus. The former, among other things, was written from a very limited point of view;
the latter is by no means a thoroughly reliable source. During the past century, through the
science of archaeology and related fields, we have learnt a vast amount about the history of
man and Israel's predecessors and neighbors, and the confrontation of this material with the
bible has produced the modern biblical movement. Some knowledge of these recently
acquired data will be useful to situate the events of the biblical period in the larger context
of man's history. This knowledge is also of exegetical value in helping us to come a proper
understanding of the kind of literature we possess in the pre-history of Gen 1-11. In the
space allotted, we can only the most general outline of pre-history and of the political and
cultural history of the ANE. The dates given below for the various Stone and Bronze ages are
all approximate.

1.The Stone Ages (Before 3200 BC): The various stages of human existence on earth are
distinguished and named according to the material most commonly used for basic tools and
weapons at the respective period. Since change from one material to another did not occur
instantaneously, the designations are always approximate as to both the beginning and the
end of the period. Stone (Gk lithos) was the oldest material, copper (chalkos) or bronze came
next.

a) Old Stone Age or Paleolithic: The origins of man are lost in midst of the past.
Presently, scientists think that our planet is about 3 billion years old, that plant and
animal life appeared some 500 million years ago, and that the oldest certainly human
fossils date from about 6oo,ooo years ago, i.e. Java and Olduvai "Chellean" men. (For
the discoveries of L. Leakey at Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania, E. Africa, see Nat.Geog
(Sept. 1960; Oct. 1961; Jan. '63; Feb. '65; Nov. '66). A dispute exists about the human
quality of older remains on the evolutionary tree, namely an australopithecine state
2
 represented by the findings in E and S. Africa that go back over a million years; but
there is an increasing likelihood that these older types will be accepted as "men". Java
and Olduvai "Chellean" represent an early human stage (Homo erectus) that lasted
through stages represented by the findings of Heidelberg (500,000 BC), Peking
(400,000). Beginning about 400,000 years ago, fully modern skeletons (homo sapiens)
first appear in Europe.
In early Paleolithic, men wandered over large areas, living in the open in the summer and in
caves and other natural shelters in the winter. Man as a hunter and food gatherer; he used
stone tools and had learnt to control fire. There is evidence that around 40,000 BC, people
began to settle down more, perhaps restricting themselves in their wandering and adapting
themselves to a given locality in more intensive ways. This is sometimes described as a
transition to food collecting (i.e. more purposeful and specialized than food gathering).
Approximately 20,000 years ago, the Mongoloid migration began across the Bering Strait
into America.

b) Middle Stone Age or Mesolithic (10,000-7,000 BC In the Near East)

Mesolithic culture is characterized by further intensification of the food collecting process
and a gradual transition to food production, the planting of crops and the domestication of
animal. This first really basic change in man's way of living (the second in a sense being the
Industrial Revolution of the past 200 years) took place in the Near East around 10,000-7,000
BC (from where it rippled out later and independently in the Far East and Middle America
(yet there are still a few primitive peoples in out-of-the way parts of the world whom the
revolution has not yet affected and who remain in the food gathering or food-collecting
stage). In the Near East, the center of the Mesolithic change was the region of the hilly flanks
of the rain-watered grassland (2000-5000ft. of Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Palestine); cites
reflecting this incipient era of cultivation and animal domestication have been discovered at
Beldibi in Turkey, at Karim Shahir, M'lefat, and Zawi Chemi in Iraq, at Mt. Carmel, and
elsewhere.

c) New Stone Age or Neolithic (7000 to 4000 BC in the Near East).

This is the stage of Stone Age culture in which man became a full-fledged food producer.
Food collectors, i.e. hunters, fishermen, berry and nut gatherers, had lived in small groups
and bands for they had to be ready to move whenever the area no longer supplied sufficient
food. There was not enough food to store nor was it the kind that could be stored for long.
Clothing probably consisted of animal skins. There were no breakable utensils, no pottery, no
time to think of much of anything but food and protection. But the food producer lived a
more sedentary life. If one were to plant, one had to remain in the same place for the
harvest. In a given area, enough food could be grown for many people. Hence villages
became common and with them came informal customs and rules. There was more time to
modify nature in other areas than food production (eg, the production of pottery and
textiles), and probably some people began to specialize in such crafts, work full time at them,
and trade their goods for food. Seventh millennium sites of such primary farming villages
have been found among other places at Jericho, and late 5th-millennium sites have been
found at Fayum and Tasa in Egypt and all over Western Asia, at Ras Shmaras, Niniveh, etc.
3
 d) Copper Stone Age or Chalcholitic (4000-3200 BC in the Near East).

In the period following the Neolithic, agriculture was vastly improved and expanded; this
made possible the support of an increasing density of population, and here also we find a
similar progress in culture. In Upper Mesopotamia small groups began to move down from
the highlands to sites adjacent to the mud flats of the rivers to establish farming villages with
increased craft specialization. Painted pottery (a hallmark of Chalcolithic) began to appear.
Soon all of Upper Mesopotamia was rather densely settled and Chalcolithic villages became
fairly numerous in Palestine as well.

But nowhere was the progress more brilliant than in the Lower Mesopotamia, for here the
first experiment in civilization took place. Without attempting to define "civilization", let us
simple describe it as urbanization. There are cities, a formal political set-up (king or
governing bodies), formal laws enacted by the government, formalized projects (roads,
harbors, irrigation canals, and the like), some sort of army or police force, new and different
art forms, and usually writing (we say "usually" because the Incas had everything that goes to
make up civilization except writing, and there is no reason to say that they were not
civilized). The Mesopotamian experiment in civilization took place in the alluvial land of the
lower Tigris and Euphrates, and in the 4th millennium the first city states appeared in Lower
Mesopotamia (Eridu, Al-Ubaid, Warka (Erech), Ur, Susa, etc). No doubt there had been
riverbank food collectors in the area long before and perhaps isolated villages, but the fertile
yet rainless land could not be placed under intensive cultivation until the techniques
necessary for providing irrigation had been mastered. Once the rich bottom land was
gradually made available, settlers must have flocked in by the thousands.

The irrigation required by the area required common effort and an increasing complexity of
organization. It encouraged technological, political, social, and moral advances and was
certainly a factor in the development of the civilization here and in Egypt. And development
was very fast. Among the advances in culture was the invention of writing (about 3200 BC),
and before the end of the period, there were links of trade and cultural exchange between
Mesopotamia and Palestine and pre-dynastic Egypt.
.
The creators of civilization in the Lower Mesopotamia were the Sumerians, a people
unknown to us a century ago, and who still constitute one of the major mysteries of history.
We are not sure of what race they were; their language is unaffiliated with any other known
language living or dead; the time and manner of their arrival in Mesopotamia by the middle
of the 4th millennium, and since the earliest texts known to us are in Sumerian, we assume it
was they who introduced the cuneiform system of writing.

In Egypt, too, great strides were made in the development of agriculture and irrigation,
where again the necessary cooperative effort helped in the formation of political units.
Probably, by the end of the 4th millennium the various local names were united in the
sizable kingdoms one in Upper Egypt and one in Lower Egypt. Copper was in use, its source
being either Sinai or the eastern desert. Writing in hieroglyphic script was invented. Egypt
4
was in touch with Palestine and Mesopotamia had apparently even then with the cedar of
Byblos with which it maintained contact for centuries to come.

2. The Bronze Ages (3200-1550 BC) With this period, we leave the realm of prehistory and
enter the area of history properly speaking for here we are dealing with a period that is
documented by numerous contemporary inscriptions. The terminology for Egyptian,
Palestinian, and Mesopotamian chronology is different for each and there is no standard
terminology covering all these areas. For simplicity, we have adopted the Syrian-Palestinian
terms of Early Bronze (EB), and Middle Bronze (MB), and have grouped under each period
the corresponding history in Egypt and Mesopotamia.

A. Early Bronze Age 3200-2050 BC in the Near East)

Mesopotamia: During the Sumerian Age (2800-2360) Mesopotamia was organized into a
system of city states most of which were quite small. The city-state was a theocracy ruled by
a god of the city; the city and its lands were viewed as the god's estate, the temple, his
manor house, the people, workers of his state. Originally government was by the city
assembly, later kingship developed, first as an emergency measure and then as a permanent
institution, the head of state being seen as the viceroy of the god. There were sporadic and
local wars but it was essentially a time of peace and economic life flourished. Improved
agriculture permitted the support of an increased population, urban life in turn fostered a
greater specialization of the arts and crafts, and the scribal schools about the temple
produced a vast body or religious literature.

The Akkadians also appeared at this stage. They were Semites, and they intermingled with
the Sumerian population, adopted and modified their culture, and even became rulers in
some city-states. In the 24th. century, a dynasty of these Semitic rulers seized power and
created the first true empire in the world history, the Akkadian Empire (2360-2180). The
founder, Sargon, rose to power in Kish, subdued all Sumer to the Persian Gulf, moved his
capital to Agade, and he and his sons then extended their rule over Upper Mesopotamia to
the Mediterranean, with military expeditions into Asia Minor, SE Arabia, and trade contacts
with the Indus Valley. However, Akkadian Empire soon waned and was brought to an end by
the onslaught of a barbarian. people

Egypt: Egypt began the age of her classical flowering and period of creative genius, by which
time all significant features of her culture had assumed a form thereafter to be normative.
This was the age of the pyramids, and it was a period of development in literature,
architecture, sculpture, painting and the minor arts. The Pharaoh was not the viceroy of the
god; he was a god. All Egypt was his property and was managed by a complex bureaucracy
headed by the vizier. No law code was ever developed; the word of the god-king sufficed.
Beginning with the 5th Dynasty, the power of the state began to disintegrate. Egypt entered
into a period of disorder and depression known as the First Intermediate (22-21 cents). There
was internal disunity with rival Pharaohs claiming the throne and many officials seizing
power locally. The situation was further aggravated by the infiltration of semi-nomads into
the Delta. Confusion reigned, law and order broke down, and trade languished.

5
Palestine
Here is the Early Bronze and we find the establishment of many city-states, Jericho (rebuilt
ca. 3200 after a gap of centuries), Beth-shean, Ai, Shechem, Gezer, Lachish, etc. By the 3rd
millennium sedentary occupation had reached to the Southern end of Transjordan. Palestine
never developed a material culture comparable to that found in Mesopotamia and Egypt nor
was any political unity established. The population was predominantly Canaanite, a Semitic
people who had probably inhabited Palestine in the 4th millennium; life in Palestine suffered
a major disruption at the hands of semi-nomadic invaders, and the land was left without
settled population; in Transjordan, sedentary occupation came virtually to an end.

B. Middle Bronze (2050-1550)

Mesopotamia: As the central authority deteriorated the city-states of Mesopotamia one by

one regained independence. The Amorites who had been pressing on the fertile crescent
since late in the 3rd. millennium and had overrun Palestine, flooded into parts of
Mesopotamia, and took over state after state, so that by the 18th century, every state in
Mesopotamia was ruled by Amorites. Gradually, a three-way power struggle materialized for
control of Mesopotamia, between Assyria, Mari and Babylon. Later Assyria entered a period
of brief conquest of Mesopotamia but could not hold her gains, and after a few years, Mari
succeeded her. Eventually, victory in the struggle for power went to Babylon under
Hammurabi (1748-1730).

Egypt: Egypt witnessed a period of prosperity under the Pharaohs, and the country was
again united; there was economic prosperity and political expansion with sporadic control
over Nubia, Libya, Palestine and Phoenicia, and it was golden age in Egyptian culture.
However in the 18th. century, Egyptian power rapidly declined due to internal disintegration
and Egypt entered into the Second Intermediate Period. It was at this time that the Hyskos
pressed upon the land, but were later on expelled by the Egyptians in a bitter fight for
freedom.

Palestine: At the end of Early Bronze the country had been thrown into upheaval by the
Amorite invasion, but beginning in the 19th. century, a rapid recovery took place in W.
Palestine and N. Transjordan. Gradually city-state system evolved and under the Hyskos
Palestine attained a prosperity that is seldom known in ancient times. It is the MB which is
the patriarchal age and against the background of which the narratives of Gen 12-50 are to
be viewed. It is here that biblical story begins.

ARCHEOLOGY
The term Archaeology is derived from two Greek words archaios (ancient) and logos
(Knowledge). In its modern sense it has come to mean the study of the material remains of
the past and is generally restricted to the study of artifacts dating up to the end of the
investigation, its study does not belong to archaeology proper; epigraphy, paleography and
numismatics are thus related to archaeology, but they can be regarded as comprising
separate fields of research.
6
The importance of archaeology obviously decreases as written sources become more
plentiful, For the period before the invention of writing, archaeology is the sole source of
information. The written record of the bible, however, must be supplemented by the study of
material remains: mighty people such as the Sumerians and Hittites would be practically
unknown but for archaeology. Its results have been decisive even for the later periods, as, for
example, in regard to the existence of a Jewish figurative art.

Archaeological research has been naturally most instructive in all matters concerning the
material side of life, such as the transition from food gathering to agriculture, the beginning
of irrigation, the types of wheat and other products grown. It has also been possible to
follow the development of architecture from the earliest fortifications at Jericho, by way of
the Israelite four-room house, the Canaanite palaces and temples, and the revolution
affected by the introduction of Greek models in the Hellenistic period’

Method: The main methods of acquiring knowledge of the material past are survey and
excavation. The survey has been principal archaeological method for exploring unknown and
largely deserted areas in the ancient Orient. The principal method of archaeology is,
however, excavation, i.e. the systematic removal of accumulated earth and debris covering
ancient remains. The period when the excavator searched mainly for removable antiquities
was followed by the systematic excavation by trenches and then by the systematic removal
of the whole strata. This has now been superseded by the stratigraphic examination of
sections of earth accumulated against the foundation trenches and their fill, the midden
accumulated against the face of the wall, robbers' trenches, and levels of destruction, are
distinguished and dated by a careful examination of pottery and other remains. In this way,
the history of each stratum can be determined.

The dating of the strata is based on both absolute criteria (levels of destruction associated
with known events, inscriptions and coins), and the relative dating of pottery sequences.
Pottery vessels are easily broken, and though their shreds are valueless, they are practically
indestructible. As pottery styles change and develop through the ages, these shreds are the
best indication of the chronology of a settlement. Other means of dating, such as the
examination of Carbon (C) contents and fluorine tests, are valid mainly for the long periods
of pre and proto-history.

Archaeology and the Biblical Text: The study of archaeology leads the biblical students,
nevertheless, to an unavoidable risk. He may find that the biblical events did not occur in the
way described or that many happened in different historical order, thus upsetting the
chronological sequence set forth by the writes of the bible. An example from the bible
concerns the Patriarchs, and their appearance on the stage of history. Was there a gap of
more than four centuries between these events and the Israelite invasion of Canaan, as is
stated in the books of Genesis and Exodus? Similarly, we may ask whether the Israelite
occupation of Canaan took place in a brief but violent campaign as recorded in the book of
Joshua. Or coming to the New Testament, while the resurrection of Christ was an inner
certainty to the early Christians, it is something which archaeology cannot illuminate.
7
Nevertheless, the discovery and analysis of the Dead Sea scrolls and Jewish-Christian
inscriptions have thrown an altogether new light on the beginnings of Christianity, thereby
helping to explain much that is elliptical and foreshortened in the NT account of the mission
of Jesus and his disciples.

While it is true that for the most part, archaeology has substantiated and illuminated the
biblical story, the biblical archaeologist must limit his deductive thinking by rigid scientific
discipline. He cannot and does not set out to prove that the "Bible is true" in line with the
traditionalist approach of the believer who accepts the biblical text literally' including the
short antiquity of life and of man upon the earth; nor does this discipline include the
enthusiastic and uncritical approaches expressed too often in recent years by popular books
on the bible and archaeology, which follow no set scientific discipline for lack of an
understanding of the complex problems involved. The biblical archaeologist can illuminate
the historical setting, the cultural background and the events with which the biblical text is
concerned. He thus plays a positive role in biblical exposition but he avoids facile and biased
conclusions. He is bound to test his conclusions through a constant examination of material
remains, written and unwritten, and by continuing discussion with qualified specialists in the
field. The discoveries of the past decades in the Holy Land, and especially in the last few
years in Jerusalem, west and east of the Jordan, and in the south of Israel, call for a re-
assessment of positions and conclusions in many areas of biblical research. Long cherished
views of scholars have had to be discarded for lack of supporting evidence, while there has
been unexpected confirmation of other opinions as a result of those new investigations

CHAPTER TWO: THE PENTATEUCH AND HISTORY

The Pentateuch is the foundational book for Judaism and Christianity, and some of the most
fascinating questions about the Pentateuch are historical questions. These first five books of
the Bible tell the story of the creation of the universe and the beginning of the chosen
people. Through the stories and the laws that God gives the Israelites, we see their most
basic beliefs about who God is, the relationship between God and human beings, what it
means to be the chosen people, and the way people are to live with each other.

The theological importance of the Pentateuch is obvious., but do these books record actual
historical events, or is it all legendary material written centuries later? And how much
difference does it make? If much of the Pentateuch turns out to be stories that do not record
real events, does that mean that its theological message is also invalid? These are the
questions this work is concerned with.

The word “Pentateuch” is from the Greek and literally means “five scrolls”. It refers to the five
books of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. The Pentateuch is also
known as the “Torah”, a Hebrew word meaning “instructions” or “law”. Much of the material
is, in fact, laws, but even the stories that are not explicitly giving laws are giving instruction
on a broader sense. The five scrolls of instruction include some of the most familiar stories
in the Bible, including the stories of creation, Noah’s Ark, the promises to Abraham, the
8
Exodus from Egypt and the giving of the ten commandments to Moses. The stories are all
part of one continuous narrative, beginning with the creation of the world and ending with
the Israelite nation of the verge of taking possession of the land God promised them.
Besides the well-known stories, the Pentateuch also includes lesser known episodes and
characters who show up briefly. The reader of the Pentateuch encounters the most familiar
and most strange parts of the Bible.

The title of each book is descriptive of its contents. Genesis means beginning and the first
book tells of the beginnings of the world and the chosen people. Genesis falls into two parts:
1-11 and 12-50. The second section is made of three Cycles - the Abraham Cycle (11, 27-
25,18), the Jacob Cycle (25,19-36,43) and the Joseph Cycle (27,1-50,26). God creates
everything to be harmonious, but that harmony comes to an end when the first people
disobey God. God tries to restore things by sending a flood to wipe out all evil and starting
the human race over, but people continue sinning, so God sets apart one group of people,
the descendants of Abraham to be the chosen people. The chosen people are to become a
great nation and take possession of the land of Canaan . They are to be a sign to the rest of
the world of the perfect relationship God intended to have with all people. Genesis ends with
the chosen people beginning to become a large number, but they are outside the Promised
Land, having gone to Egypt during famine.

Exodus describes the chosen people now called the Israelites departing from Egypt and
beginning the journey back to the Promised Land. As the book begins the Israelites have
become so numerous that the Egyptians have tried to suppress them with forced labor. God
calls Moses to lead the people out of slavery which he does with miraculous assistance of
God. Nine plagues fail to have lasting effect on Pharaoh; but the last and most dreadful of
them makes him let Israel go. On the night of their escape, the Israelites celebrate the first
Passover festival. As the people begin their journey into the desert, God appears to Moses
on Mt. Sinai and gives him the Ten Commandments and other laws that will form the basis
of a covenant between God and the chosen people.

Much of Leviticus is law-giving to do with worship. Worship was under the control of
Israelite priests, who according to the Pentateuch, all had to be descendants of the tribe of
Levi. During most of the Book God is still speaking to Moses and the book emphasizes laws
on how to conduct sacrifice and other rituals, the ordination of priests, the concept of purity
and impurity, and the calendar of religious feasts. Besides these laws, the Book includes a
small number of narratives about people following or failing to follow the laws.

The Book of Numbers includes census of the Israelite people during their desert journey. It
also includes additional laws for the people to follow as well as descriptions of a failed
attempt to enter the land of Canaan from the South, the Israelite journey around the Eastern
side of Canaan, their victories over kings who try to prevent their progress and their arrival at
the boarder of the Promised Land. The Book also summarizes the entire journey of the
Israelites from Egypt to the boarder of the Promised Land, with the list of the places at which
they camped.

9
The last book of the Pentateuch is Deuteronomy, a Greek word meaning “second law”. The
book repeats and summarizes most of the laws given in the earlier books. It is framed as the
final speech of Moses to the people gathered at the eastern side of the Jordan River, ready
to enter the Promised Land. He repeats many of the laws although sometimes it is a slightly
different version from that in other books, and motivates the people to stay faithful to the
covenant with God. Deuteronomy ends with the death of Moses and the people still outside
the promised land.
version from that in other books, and motivates the people to stay faithful to the covenant
with God. Deuteronomy ends with the death of Moses and the people still outside the
promised land.

In the Hebrew tradition, the titles of the books are different. Each title is the first word, or the
most important word of the first sentence of the book. Genesis is called Bereshit, the Hebrew
word meaning “in the beginning” Exodus is Elle Shemot, “these are the names”; the book of
the twelve tribes of Israel, Leviticus is Veyyiqra, “and he called out”, referring to the Lord
speaking to Moses. Numbers is Bemidbar, “in the desert” since the book describes the
journey of the Israelites through the desert. And Deuteronomy is Haddebarim, “the words”
because the book reports the final words of Moses to the Israelites at the end of the journey.

There is much debate about when, how and by whom these five books were written. It is
certain that these Books of the Pentateuch were the first to become Scripture. Clearly, the
books did not immediately achieve the status of sacred scripture when they were written, but
over a period of decades and centuries they were accepted by Jewish religious leaders and
by the community as a whole as the best expression of what is essential to Judaism. After
becoming Sacred Scripture, the Pentateuch continued to be the most influential part of the
Hebrew Bible. In Judaism, the five books of the Torah are still the most sacred part of the
Bible. Readings from the Torah are central part of the synagogue service, and the events
recounted in the Torah are commemorated in the major Jewish festivals. Later Jewish
literature, including works of the Pseudoepigrapha, the Mishnah and the Talmud is largely
expansion and interpretation of the Torah.

The Pentateuch has also shaped Christianity. Many of Jesus’ teachings are interpretation of
the laws of the Pentateuch. The gospels, especially Matthew assume that the reader knows
the Pentateuch. Matthew also draws several parallels between Moses and Jesus. Paul uses
the story of Abraham and other parts of the Pentateuch to explain his teachings about Jesus
and the Law. Christian liturgy including the Easter Vigil, makes extensive use of the
Pentateuch, and Christian Ethics uses the ten commandments and other laws from these
books as a foundation for proper living.

The Pentateuch has also influenced another great religion, Islam, even though it is not itself
considered Scripture by Moslems. The Koran, the sacred book of Islam, includes stories of
Moses, Abraham and others that are variations of stories in the Pentateuch. Mohammed saw
himself as restoring the authentic religion of Moses and Abraham, which he claimed Jews
and Christians had corrupted.

10
These books have shaped later religious traditions so much that it is no wonder they have
been the object of such intensive study. Scholarly theories on how the Pentateuch was
written were among the earliest efforts of the modern critical approach to the Bible.
Archeologists have searched for evidence confirming or contradicting events in the
Pentateuch. Comparative religion

The Pentateuch has also been the center of controversies over how to interpret the Bible. the
creation stories of Genesis is one of the most frequent areas of disagreement between the
fundamentalist and the critical approach to the Bible, and questions about the degree to
which the stories of Abraham, the exodus and the beginnings of Israel are historical also
bring out sharp disagreements over methodology. Before we can discover what the
Pentateuch teaches, we have to decide on what is the best method to use in achieving the
objective.

How Pentateuch was written

Nowhere in the Pentateuch itself is there any inclusion of who the author is or how the
books were composed. The lack of an explicitly mentioned author is not unusual for biblical
books. In ancient times, books were often the result of a long process involving oral
traditions being put into writing form and written documents going through several stages
before reaching the form in which we know them today. Whoever wrote the Pentateuch
either was not one single person or did not see any need for readers to know his or her
identity.
However a tradition did develop that Moses wrote the Pentateuch (cf. Dt. 31,9). There are
several reasons for associating the books with Moses. After Genesis, Moses is the main
character in the story, and in places it does not refer to Moses writing down the laws that
God gave him (Ex 24,4; Dt 31,24). Later the books of Ezra and Nehemiah refer to the “law of
Moses” and the “book of Moses” as the basis for their religious reforms (Ezra 7,6; Neh 8,1;
13,1).

The New Testament frequently refers to the law of Moses and in some places refer speak of
Moses as if he writer of those laws. Mark the Sadducees saying to Jesus, “Teacher, Moses
wrote for us that, ‘if a man’s brother dies, leaving a wife but no child, the man shall marry the
widow and raise up children for his brother’” (12,10, cf. Lk 20,28).Luke and Acts refer to
“Moses and the prophets” as the two major parts of the Scripture (Lk 16,29; 24,27; Acts
26,22). And Josephus, a Jewish write who lived in the first century AD, speaks of Moses
writing not just the laws of Pentateuch, but all of its stories as well; for example, in the
discussion of the creation story, he introduces sections with “Moses says” or similar phrases
(Antiquities of Jews, 1.1.2).

It is clear that by the first century AD, Jews and Christians did think of Moses as the author of
the Pentateuch in some sense. That view lasted for several centuries, and to this day is still
held by a few conservative Jews and Christians. But there have long been questions about his
precise role in putting together the Pentateuch, or whether he should be considered the
author of all. There is the obvious fact that Moses dies at the end of the story, but that has
11
been explained easily by saying he wrote the rest of it. Note, however, that even the simple
case involves admitting the principle of multiple authors contributing different parts of the
Pentateuch at different times.

The first scientific questions about the origins of the materials in the Pentateuch came with
the observations by Richard Simon and Baruch Spinosa in the 17 th century that these books
were full of repetitions and contradictions and seemed to lack the style of a single author. In
the 18th century, Jean Astruc pointed out that the creation story in Gen 1 used “Elohim” for
God, while a second creation story in Gen 2 & 3 regularly used “Yahweh Elohim”. He
proposed that Moses had combined two sources to produce these early chapters of Genesis.
This was the birth of source criticism. Astruc did not reject the role of Moses, but said that
Moses used these earlier sources when he wrote the Pentateuch. Over the next several
decades, others took Astruc’s basic idea, but said that Moses had no role in writing the
Pentateuch.

To get a sense of how these sources are identified, consider the first two stories in Genesis.
In Gen 1,1-2,4, God is called Elohim. Elohim creates the universe in six days and in an orderly
way, with no opposition and no uncertainty about what to create. At the end, Elohim sets
apart the seventh day to be a day of rest. Everything is in harmony, and everything is under
Elohim’s complete control.
In Gen 2,4-3,24, we have another story about creation, but with very different characteristics.
God is called Yahweh Elohim, and faces uncertainty and opposition. Yahweh Elohim wants to
create a suitable partner for man, but does so by trial and error, creating all other animals,
who turn out not be suitable, before creating woman, who turns out to be perfect. Then the
story takes a turn that Yahweh Elohim seems not to have anticipated. The two people
disobey the order not to eat the fruit of a certain tree, so to punish them, Yahweh Elohim
banishes them from the garden of Eden and makes their life full of hard work and conflict.
Unlike the first story with its certainty, this story is full of ambiguity about how much control
God has, who is at fault for the disobedience, and what the future will be for creation.

At first, scholars thought there were only two earlier documents, one called Yahwist source,
and the other the Elohist. Later it became clear that the passages in Genesis and Exodus
which used Elohim, represented two separate writers. One had a priestly cast to it, with
interest in genealogy lists, rituals, laws and other liturgical matters. This became known as
the Priestly source. The other contained many old stories about Jacob and Moses and were
concerned with historical traditions. This kept the name Elohist for itself. Now there were
three sources and it did not take long to identify the fourth source. The unique style of
Deuteronomy sets it apart from the other three. Deuteronomy loved long speeches and
sermons. These four sources are often simply called by their first letters, JEPD. The “J” instead
of “Y” comes from the German word, Jahve, for it was German scholars who first proposed
the abbreviations.

Many other characteristic elements and ways of thinking identify each of these sources. By
examining the numerous cases of repeated stories and duplicated passages, they can easily
be separated from one another. A few of the most important examples are (1) the three
12
different accounts of the patriarch who lies about his wife as his sister in Gen 12; 20 And 26;
(2) the two creation stories of Genesis 1 and Genesis 2-3; (3) the two accounts of how
Abraham sends out Hagar with her son Ishmael to the desert in Gen 16 and 21; (4) the two
calls of Moses to lead his people out of Egypt in Exodus 3 and 6.

But even within a single story, critics have been able to detect more than one source blended
together by the change in particular words. Two clear cases of this type are the story of the
flood (Gen 6-9) and of Joseph being sold into Egypt (Gen 37-48). In the flood story, Noah is
told to take seven pairs of all clean animals and one pair of all unclean animals in Gen 7,2
and 15 it looks as though God told him to take just one pair of each animal species. In the
Joseph story of Gen 37, his ten brothers plot to kill Joseph, but Reuben pleads for the boy
and they put him into a pit and later Midianites find him and sell him. Side by side with this
account, we find a second in which Judah is the one who pleads for Joseph and so the
brothers sell him to Ishmaelites instead. At other times we find two different words
appearing again and again throughout the Pentateuch for the same object. Thus the
mountain on which God gives the covenant is sometimes called Sinai, and sometimes Horeb.
Or the people who live in Palestine are called sometimes Canaanites and sometimes
Amorites.

CHAPTER THREE: WELLHAUSEN’S HISTORY OF THE FOUR SOURCES

Process of Transmission of the Biblical Texts

More than a century of biblical research has been devoted to the analysis of the process by
which the books of the Bible emerged from a welter of traditions oral and written, and the
determination of the main stages of transmission until the present received text. The
principal result has been the promulgation of the so-called "Documentary Hypothesis" which
is associated with the name of the great German scholar, Julius Wellhausen, because he gave
it its classic formulation. Julius Wellhausen, a German scripture scholar living in the second
half of the nineteenth century and beginning of the twentieth century, is most often
associated with the classic expression of the documentary hypothesis. Wellhausen was not
the first person to come out with the idea, but his works were most influential in convincing
the scholarly world of the validity of the theory.

In the literary analysis of the Hexateuch, Wellhausen distinguished four main sources in the
Pentateuch. In the simplest form of the theory each of these was regarded as an
independent "document" which had been composed or compiled by a single author or
editor. It was understood that various editors had put those sources together with necessary
modifications, bridges, and adjustments to produce a connected whole. Wellhausen also
made a thorough attempt to date each of the four sources to explain how the events going
on during Israel’s history affected the shape of each of the sources.

It was Julius Wellhausen who worked out this schema in its complete form and published it
in his Prolegomena to the History of Israel (1878). Wellhausen’s work shows the proposed
13
development in which the early and mostly oral traditions of Israel were gradually written
down, preserved in four written documents, and then combined to make one Pentateuch.

When David and Solomon united Israel as a kingdom, a new era of trained scribes and
writers was made possible. Sometimes during Solomon’s reign or soon after, an unknown
author put together the Yahwist account from the viewpoint of the southern tribe of Judah,
and to glorify the monarchy created by David and Solomon.

When Solomon died and the nation spilt into a northern kingdom, Israel, and a southern
kingdom, Judah. Jerusalem was the capital of the northern kingdom and the location of the
temple. So, when the northern kingdom separated, it established its own temples and
religious bureaucracy and eventually its own national epic. The northerners needed a revised
version of the traditions which would not glorify Jerusalem and the kings of Judah so much.
They produced a second a revised account of the old traditions which used Elohim for God
and place names that were more familiar to their part of the country. They also stressed the
role of the covenant of Moses over the role of the king, and avoided much of Yahwist’s
intimate language about God walking and talking with humans.

At the same time there arose a group of priests, Levites and prophets who attempted to
reform many bad practices of the faith in Judah. Out of their efforts came the book of
Deuteronomy (D source). The Deuteronomist reformers collected covenant legal traditions
and added to them sermons stressing obedience and faithfulness to the covenant if the
people were to receive blessings in the promised land. Although put together during the
long period from Hezekiah through Josiah, it was only discovered hidden away in the temple
when Josiah began his reforms in 622. The king and the people alike recognized its authority
and genuine Mosaic flavor, and D was joined with J and E as part of the nation’s sacred
tradition.

Finally, when the whole country went into exile under the Babylonians in 597 to 586, a school
of priests seems to have gathered many of the cultic and legal traditions together. This
priestly work called P, thus formed a fourth source which made the earlier historical accounts
more complete and at the same time set forth a whole way of life under the law that would
allow Israel’s covenant with God to be lived and to last even when there was no land or
temple or king. According to Wellhausen, these four sources were finally edited by the
Priestly school into the Pentateuch after the exile ended in 539 BC.

Wellhausens’s documentary hypothesis has not survived in its original form. However,
virtually all scholars today accept the basic idea behind it, that the Pentateuch is not the
work of one single author writing at one time, but was composed over several centuries by
people responding to different circumstances. This is the classical four-source theory.

Date: Working from the same premise and with the same methods, other scholars have
found additional basic sources and evidence of more extensive redactional activity in the
course of accretion and transmission. The dating of these documents is: J and E (Yahwist and
Elohist for their characteristic divine names) before the major prophets of the 8th-7th
14
centuries BC; D (Deuteronomist) in the century before the discovery of the document in the
Temple in 622 BC; and P (Priestly) during or after the Exile (6th. century BC). Y. Kaufmann and
others have defended effectively an earlier date for P, making it roughly contemporary with
D. Various scholars have found in the J material two sources, an earlier one J1 (which O.
Eissfeldt identified as L for Lay Source, running from Genesis 2 to the end of Samuel), and a
later one J2. The question of the separate status of E has been raised by several scholars and
remains unsettled. Though the Documentary Hypothesis continues to command general
acceptance, there have been serious reactions against it, and, in some cases, an
abandonment of the "source critical" method. However, the synthesis of Wellhausen gave a
clear view of the development of the Israelite law and of the composition of the Pentateuch.

Archaeological discoveries, on the other hand have had a very important if indirect impact
on scholarly analysis and interpretation of the text. The net effect has been to support the
general trustworthiness and substantial historicity of the biblical tradition where data are
available. In general this means that all strata and parts of the biblical literature deserve a
measure of credence, regardless of the date of fine edition and publication, and unless direct
evidence to the contrary exist. Archaeological information most often sheds light on the
background and context of the biblical accounts. When literary materials are available they
offer assistance in the clarification of obscure passages.

Some Characteristics of the Documents

“J” Document: Among the documentary sources of Pentateuch, the Jahwist stratum is
regarded rightly as the most important. According to M. Noth, "theologically it contains the
most important testimony found in the Pentateuch narrative as a whole" on one hand, the
radical insight into human sinfulness (Gen 6,5; 8,21); on the other, the promise of a blessing
upon all the families of the earth (12,3). The Yahwist presentation is at the same time the
oldest known history that is so extensive and embraces such varied era of human history. The
Yahwist presents the first written attestation of the Pentateuchal vision that moves from
primeval history to the settlement.

God is called by His name "Yahweh" (hence the name of the source; the letter J is used
because of the German spelling of the word Jahwist before the revelation made to Moses,
hence it make anachronistic use of "Yahweh" in the Genesis material. After the revelation
made to Moses the other sources use the Divine name, and from thence on it is no longer a
distinctive element. The constants distinguishing the tradition include a characteristic
vocabulary, a stylistic elegance reflected in its colorful presentation of scenes, especially the
dialogues, a perspective psychology and a bold use of anthropomorphism - portraying God
as a human-like character.

The J tradition presents a remarkably wide sweep of history, beginning with the first man and
showing the relevance of all early history to God's specific plan for the chosen people as
evidenced first in the patriarchal narrative and more immediately in the events of Exodus.. It
insists on the theological concept of continuity which the other sources ignore to express in

15
a substantially different way: that is to say, for J there is no break of continuity between the
creation narrative and the patriarchal narratives and the story of Moses.

“E” Document: This is called because of its careful use of Elohim in the pre-Sinai material.
The most likely reason for the use of "Elohim" is the author's intention of emphasizing God's
transcendence and thus indirectly a certain universalism about his own faith. Yahweh, the
God of a single people, in God in the unqualified sense. The scope of E tradition is more
restricted than that of J; it begins only with Abraham who is presented, anachronistically, as a
prophet (Gen 20,7). E avoids the more striking anthropomorphism; God speaks to man
generally in dreams or from the clouds or in the midst of fire, or through the medium of
angels. For E, the great climax of history was the covenant of God with Israel which is
stressed as a strictly religious event that determined Israel's life irrevocably.

E is evidently closely related to the prophetic movement. On the one hand, it contains
elements of prophetic tradition. Thus the call of Moses (Ex 3,10ff) is described in accordance
with a formulary that underlines Jgs 6; 1 Sam 9f and Jer 1). Above all, Abraham is called a
"prophet" in Gen 20,7, because he practises intercession. Elohist lacks the universalist
orientation of the Yahwist. In E, Yahweh has not been at work ever since creation but reveals
himself for the first time when he calls Moses. There is rather a tendency to emphasize the
transcendency of God as there are no more stories telling of direct encounter between God
and a human as in Gen 3,18-19. Instead, God keeps a distance and speaks to men. The date
of this tradition is uncertain, but scholars are of the opinion that it possessed its essential
features by the ninth or early eight century BC.

“P” Document” Of the sources of the Pentateuch scattered through the first four books of
the work, P is the easiest to recognize because of its relatively constant vocabulary, its
solemn style tending towards pomposity, its love of elements connected with the cult
(liturgy, ritual, institutions), and its genealogies. P's chronology sets out to be very precise,
and it seeks to include a history of the world from origin. The exactness and precision of the
figures were a source of certainty for biblical scholars down to the beginning of scientific
biblical criticism. It avoids anthropomorphism. Like the Yahwist and perhaps even more so, is
universalist in outlook. History begins with the creation of the world; not only Israelites but
all human beings are images of God.

“D” Document: is more easily distinguished and dated. It is restricted to the book of
Deuteronomy, whence its name and abbreviation. The marked hortatory style, expressed in a
distinctive vocabulary, points to a period of religious crisis for its composition. The
Deuteronomist editor, a deeply religious person saw that the preceding history of Israel was
filled with the saving Acts of God - election, deliverance, covenant, and conquest. These acts
of the Lord demand the response of love on the part of the people. Faithfulness to God will
bring reward and blessedness; infidelity will result in punishment and retribution. A nice
example could be the period of collapse of Israel at the face of Assyrian threat and many evil
kings prostituted Yahweh's religion. In D's opinion, there can still be salvation only a loyal
response to Yahweh's covenant laws and by a return to pure worship of God at the one
sanctuary of Jerusalem. The urgency of D's appeal is marked by a constant reference to "you"
16
and to the "now" or "today" of their decision.

CHAPTER FOUR: GENESIS AND THE LITERATURE OF THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST.

THE PRIMEVAL CIRCLE (1-11)

Creation and Origin Stories

An Introduction: The Book of Genesis consists of the primeval history in the Chapters. 1-11,
and the story of the Patriarchs, which takes up the remaining four-fifths of the book, in
chapters 12-50. The first book of the bible, Genesis refers to "beginnings". It comes from the
Greek geneseos, the book of creation which occurs at Gen 2 and 4 and elsewhere in Genesis.
The book of creation or beginnings may be divided into five sections, each marked by its
own "genealogy" and accompanied by a long narrative of events. They are i) the beginning
of the word (1-4); ii) Antediluvian man (5-6,4); iii) The Flood (6,5-9,29); iv) Renewal of man -
repopulation of the earth (10,1-11,9); v) The ancestry of Abraham (11,10-26).

The first section describes the creation and the principal factors affecting the life of the first
human generations. It consists of five narratives - an account of creation, a second account
of creation, the temptation in Eden and fall, Cain and Abel and Lamech and his children. The
account of creation and human pre-history, though couched in the language of biblical
religion, did not originate with the Israelites. It contains elements drawn form the polytheistic
myths of the Sumerians and Babylonians. This mythology is carefully adapted to the
concepts of Israelite monotheism. The similarity in details only serves to highlight the
uniqueness of Israel's single God acting in the world.

No section of the Old Testament has been more fiercely argued about than Genesis 1-11.
Because the Bible was held to be inspired by God, Jews and Christians believed for many
centuries that the content of Gen 1-11 was accurate science, history and geography. This
does not, however, prevent thinkers from discussing some of the difficulties raised by the
narratives. For example, the creation of light before the moon (Gen 1,3,6) worried
interpreters from at least 5th to the 19th century. For Calvin Gen 1 describes the world as it
would have been seen with the naked eye by Moses and his contemporaries, not as it was
seen through the telescopes of his own time. Despite such concessions however, Gen 1-11
continued to be regarded as the prime authority regarding the origins of the world and
mankind until the end of the 18th century.

The most interesting challenge to the interpretation of Gen 1-11 came towards the end of
the 19th. century with the discovery of ancient Babylonian and Assyrian texts that contained
materials much like Gen 1-11. In 1857, George Smith, a young scholar of the British Museum
announced in a letter to a London newspaper, the discovery of a Babylonian account of
creation, part of the text now know as Enumah Elish. He also gave a lecture entitled "The
Chaldean account of the Deluge", which deals with what is known as Tablet XI of the Epic of
Gilgamesh. Within five years of its discovery, OT scholars began to argue that the material in
Genesis was in fact dependent upon Babylonian material. H. Gunkel in his publication in
17
1895, Creation and Chaos at the beginning and End of Time, argued that the Genesis
Creation Story was dependent upon the Babylonian text.

Genesis 1,1-2,4, cf. The Babylonian Creation Myth: The Enumah Elish.

The poem, "When on high...." was recited in the course of the New Year's liturgy. In
inaugurating the year, it commemorated the beginning of things and expressed the most
profound insights of Mesopotamian thought: its concept of the divine, of the world and of
man. Note the pantheistic and evolutionistic atmosphere which underlies it. The great cosmic
forces are personified and divinized. Gods and things progressively arise from the chaos,
from which a principle of Order, Marduk, finally makes an ordered world. Coming at the end
of the evolution, man is to appease the gods by his worship.

The undifferentiated chaos of the beginning is thus represented under the form of two
sexual principles: Apsu, the sweet waters from below the earth, and Tiamat, the sea waters.
From them arise the gods who will preside over different parts of the universe, and from
these gods, too, emerge more generation of gods. But this evolution became "dialectical"
when war broke out among the ancient gods, those of the chaotic universe and young gods,
those of the organized universe. This happened when the younger gods began to disturb the
elder gods with their noise. Apsu was determined to destroy these younger gods against the
wishes of Tiamat. The young gods heard about Apsu’s plan to destroy them and they killed
him before he could act. When Tiamat discovered that her husband Apsu had been
murdered, she was furious and vowed to revenge against the younger gods. The younger
gods are terrified of Tiamat’s fury and so they assembled to plan their strategy. One of them,
Marduk, is chosen as the most skilled in the battle. He is asked to fight Tiamat. Marduk
agrees but only on the condition that if he was victorious, he would be made the supreme
ruler of all the gods.

Tiamat was accused of contriving the uprising, insinuating sons to revolt. For this purpose
she created an army of terrible monsters and made Kingu their leader, and decided to launch
a well-planned attack on the young gods. When Marduk challenged Tiamat for a battle
encounter, it became furious and uncontrollable and charged. Then Marduk released her
arrow and it tore her belly. After it had been extinguished, the band of monsters with him
wanted to take to their hills but were all surrounded and held in prison. Then Tiamat's skull
was crushed and the blood gushing out was carried by winds to undisclosed locations. Then
wanting to do some artful works, the body was cut into two parts. With half, of the carcass of
Tiamat, the world was created. With the other half, the sky was set up and sealed. Guards
were posted who were commanded not to allow any waters to escape from it. Other
heavenly bodies like the sun and moon were set up. With the other half he created the earth.
He then gave the other gods positions in the sky as the stars.

He constructed stations for the great gods,

fixing their astral likenesses as the images.
He determined the year by designating the zones;
He set up three constellations for each of the twelve months (ANET 67).
18
When Marduk heard the words of the gods, he charged Ea, the craftsman god to execute the
plan he had conceived in his heart, "Blood I will mass and cause bones to be; I will establish a
savage, man shall be his name. Verily, savage man I will create. He will be charged with the
services of the gods, that they might be at ease" (ANET 68). Ea then requested that one of
them, the guilty one be handed over that mankind may be fashioned, and requested the
gods to be present in the assembly. After enquiring who really made Tiamat to rebel, it was
found out to be Kingu. Having had him bound, they imposed on him the guilt and severed
his blood vessels. With his blood, mankind was made, as if man must carry within himself the
original curse brought by the war of the gods. After man had been created, Ea imposed on
him the service of the gods. The Marduk called an assembly of all the gods, where he gave
them instructions for their roles in the new world. The rested and celebrated.

STRIKING CORRESPONDENCE IN DETAILS

Enumah Elish Genesis

-Divine Spirit and cosmic matter are co-
existent and coeternal
- Primeval chaos, Tiamat (a mythological
figure) enveloped in darkness
- Light emanating from the gods
- The creation of the firmament
- The creation of dry land
- The creation of luminaries
- The creation of man
- The gods rest and celebrate
- Divine Spirit creates cosmic matter and exists
independently of it.
- The earth a desolate waste, with darkness
covering the deep.
- Light created
- The creation of the firmament
- The creation of dry land
- The creation of luminaries
- The creation of man
- God rests and sanctifies the seventh day

The Enumah Elish is quite different from Genesis 1, but there are some striking similarities as
we have seen. Both have the same understanding of the shape of the universe - a fixed
dome above, and a firmament below. Both begin with chaotic, unstructured waters before
anything is created (the name Tiamat is even similar to the Hebrew word Tehom,the deep in
Gen 1,2). The order in which things are created is the same. And both stories conclude with
the creator god setting apart a special day for something different.

These similarities are too close to be mere coincidence. They show that the Babylonians and
the authors of Genesis 1 share some basic assumptions about creation and the universe. And
some version of the Enumah Elish have been known by the authors of Genesis 1 especially as
it was written by the Priestly source during or after the exile.

But the differences between the two stories are of more significance. First, there is only one
God in the Genesis story. Despite being similar to the goddess Tiamat, the tehom , the deep
in Genesis is only unformed waters; it is not a competing god that has to be defeated in
battle before God can create anything. And even thought the stars in Genesis are similar to
those in the Enumah Elish, having fixed positions on the dome and making the seasons of
the year, they are just created objects completely under the control of one God. The stars are
19
not other gods whom the chief god has to give positions of honor in order to make sure
they stay loyal to him. By paralleling the Enumah Elish but changing the other gods to
objects without any power of their own, Genesis is emphasizing the control of one God over
all forces in the universe.

Another difference is the emphasis Genesis gives to creation being good. Not only does
Enumah Elish never say creation is good, there is an implicit message that there is something
fundamentally flawed about it - it resulted from conflict among the gods, and is made from
the dead body of a defeated god. In Genesis people are created in the image of God, and
are given dominion over the rest of God’s creation. If creation is good and people are made
in God’s image, then surely God will protect people, even in times like the exile that seem
catastrophic.

The authors of Genesis were aware of the Enumah Elish and share some assumptions about
the universe with it, but they deliberately told the story with a different message. They
wanted a story that clearly differentiated Judaism from Babylonian religion. This was
especially necessary during and after the exile as many Jews were adopting the customs and
views of the people among whom they were scattered. They wanted a story that emphasized
God’s control and a positive role of human beings. Basically they wanted a story that would
give them reason for hope for the better than what they were living through in exile. While
the Priestly authors obviously knew the Babylonian story and used its outline, they did not
accept the theology. P solemnly affirmed the basic insights of Israel’s faith.

Summerian and Akkadian Texts:The situation today with regard to Gen 1-11 and other
texts from the ANE is much more diverse and complicated than it was in Gunkel's day. The
object of the summary that now follows is not to try to prove or disprove the dependence of
Genesis on other traditions. It is, rather, to indicate what themes are treated in the texts that
have been discovered.

Regarding the creation of man, there is again a difference between the Sumerian and
Akkadian texts. Some of the former allow that man may have grown spontaneously from the
ground, rather in the way that the earth generates plants and trees in Gen 1,11-12. At this
stage, mankind was like a wild beast, eating grass and going on the four, and it was
necessary for the gods to introduce a civilization in order to complete the creation of
mankind. Akkadian texts together with other Sumerian compositions, know only of the
forming of mankind from clay, in some cases, mixed with the blood of a god, or, in the case
of Enumah Elish, from blood of a traitor god (ANET p.68).

Both Sumerian and Akkadian texts are agreed that the reason why the gods created
mankind was so that the human race could perform manual labour for the gods, such as
building canals or cities. However, there is apparently a difference between Summerian and
Akkadian texts about the dignity or otherwise of this work. Sumerian texts have a high view
of civilization, and therefore regard it as a privilege for mankind to be allowed by the gods to
share its benefits. Akkadian texts on the other hand, regard the work imposed by the gods as
a heavy burden, and there is a rebellion of mankind that then brings about the Flood.
20
On the question of the destiny of mankind there is also a difference between Sumerian and
Akkadian texts, a difference pointed out by the existence of Sumerian and Akkadian stories
about Gilgamesh. In the Sumerian story, The Death of Gilgamesh (ANET 50-51), Gilgamesh is
told to be content with the fact that he is to die. After all, he has enjoyed great privileges in
his life and has been mighty and victorious king. His reputation will live on after him. The
Akkadian Epic of Gilgamesh is far more pessimistic.

Man formed from Clay: Of the two narratives the earlier is not only the more picturesque
but also the richer folklore, retaining many features redolent of primitive simplicity which
have been effaced by the later writer. The author seems to have imagined that God molded
the first man out of clay, as a potter might do, and that having kneaded and patted the clay
into the proper shape, the deity animated it by breathing into its mouth and nostrils. To the
Hebrews, it may be added, this derivation of our species from the dust of the ground would
have suggested itself the more naturally because, in their language, the word for "ground"
(adamah) is similar to that for "man" (adam).

This fancy is, however, by no means confined to Scripture. In Egyptian mythology, Knum, the
potter god, is said to have molded man on the wheel. Among the Greeks, Prometheus is said
to have molded the first man out of clay mixed with the water of the river Panopeus. The
Australian blacks say that Bunje, the Creator, cut three large sheets of bark with his big knife.
On one of these he placed some clay and worked it up with his knife into a proper
consistence. He then laid a portion of the clay on one of the other pieces of bark and shaped
it into a human form; first he made the feet, then the legs, then the trunk, the arms and the
head. Thus he made a clay man on each of the two pieces of bark and being well pleased
with his handiwork, he danced round them for joy. The Maoris of Newzealand say that a
certain god, variously name Tu, Tiki and Tane, took red riverside clay, kneaded it with his own
blood into a likeness of image of himself, with eyes, legs, arms and all complete, in fact, an
exact copy of the deity; and having perfected the model, he animated it by breathing into it
its mouth and nostrils, whereupon the clay effigy at once came to life and sneezed.

The Bagobo, a pagan tribe of South Eastern Mindanao, say that in the beginning a certain
Diwata made the sea and the land, and planted trees of many sorts. Then he took two lumps
of earth, shaped them like human figures, and spat on them; so they became man and
woman. The creation of man out of clay is duly mentioned in the Indian classic, Satapatha
Brahmana, and likewise forms the theme of many modern folktales current in the country.

The Cheremiss of Russia say that God molded man's body of clay and then went up to
heaven to fetch the soul, with which to animate it. In his absence, he set the dog to guard
the body. But while he was away the Devil drew near and blowing a cold wind on the dog he
seduced the animal by bribe to relax his guard. Thereupon the fiend spat on the clay body
and fouled it so much, that when God came back he despaired of ever cleaning up the mess
and saw himself reduced to the painful necessity of turning the body outside it. That is why
man's inside is now dirty. And God cursed the dog the same day for his culpable neglect of
duty.
21
Turning to Africa, the Shilluks of the White Nile say that the creator Juok molded all men out
of earth, and that while he was engaged in the work of creation he wandered about the
world. In the land of Egypt, he made red and brown men out of the mud of the Nile. Lastly
he came to the land of Shilluks, and finding there black earth he created black men out of it.

It is observed that in a number of these stories the clay out of which our first parents were
molded is said to have been red. The color was probably intended to explain the redness of
blood. Though the Jahwist writer in Genesis omits to mention the color of the clay which
God used in the construction of Adam, we may perhaps, without being very rash, conjecture
that it was red. For the Hebrew word for ground is (Adamah), the word for man is (Adam)
and the word for red is (Adom); so that by a natural and almost necessary concatenation of
cause we arrive at the conclusion that our first parent was modeled out of red clay.

CHAPTER FIVE: THE DRAMA OF PARADISE

The Garden of Eden (Gen 2,8-3,24).

The name of the garden itself is borrowed from the Summerian (3rd-2nd millinium) eden,
perhaps indirectly through the Akkadian edenu, which means garden or paradise. The earthly
paradise is at once the terrestrial pleasance of the gods, the primeval home of man, and the
eventual destination of the blessed dead. It stands for the original state of bliss to which, in
the vale of tears, man longingly looks back, and which he hopes eventually to regain. It thus
symbolizes both the remote memory and the distant hope of human race.

The concept of such fairy garden is virtually universal. In the Sumerian account, it is
described as the "clear and radiant" dwelling of the gods, where "no raven croaked, nor dove
dropped its head, no beast ravened", and where there was neither old age nor sickness nor
sorrow. It was fed by "the waters of abundance" which flowed from a source "when issue all
the streams of the earth". Situated where the sun rises, it was thither that Ziusudra, the
Sumerian Noah was eventually translated as a reward for his piety. This however, was not the
only concept of earthly paradise entertained by the ancient Mesopotamians, for the
celebrated Epic of Gilgamesh tells of a pleasance of the gods likewise situated at the place of
sunrise and distinguished by the fact that its trees bore jewels.

The biblical writer locates the Fairy Garden in the East (Gen 2,8), and even attempts to give it
a precise geographical location. But we need not go off on a wild-goose chase; this trait is
purely mythological and was part of the popular tradition which he inherited. Genesis also
names four rivers which were believed to have converged near the head of the Persian Gulf
(present day Iraq) in a rich garden which was the land of the blessed.

The biblical story includes special features such as the tree of life and the tree of knowledge
of good and evil in the midst of the Garden, the serpent, a mythical monster rather than an
ordinary snake endowed with extraordinary faculties for trouble making, the temptation and
22
fall of the woman, Eve, and the man, Adam, and the subtlety of their relationship and their
common bond in guilt, pleasure and punishment. Such themes of sexual awareness, wisdom,
and paradise are known from various ancient sources, as for example, in a beautiful passage
of the Babylonian Epic of Gilgamesh (Tablet 1, col. 4, lines 16ff), when the legendary hero
Gilgamesh meets his rough friend Enkindu. The latter was seduced by the courtesan
goddess, Ishtar, in a passage noted for its explicit language; he loses his wildness for "he now
has wisdom, broader understanding". Ishtar tells him, "You are wise, Enkindu. You are like a
god", and she improvised some clothing for him. The implied quest for immortality in the
Hebrew version of the story is parallel in other ancient literature. The Mesopotamian
analogies to this theme are the Tale of Adapa and the Epic of Gilgamesh (Tablet 1X) where
both attempts end in failure.

Genesis 2 & 3 can be read as a commentary on the exile. The monarchy was the ideal state,
the nation sinned by failing to follow the covenant with God and as a result, God expelled
them in the broken world of the exile. Alternatively, it has been read as a commentary on
David’s reign. During David’s rise to power and the beginning of his reign, everything works
out perfectly for him, but after his sin with Bathsheba, one disaster follow another. This was
meant to be a comment on the events that happened at the time the text was written. By
telling the story in mythological language and putting it at the beginning of creation, the
Yahwist universalizes its message; it is about the exile, it is about king David, but it is also
about the experience of all humanity.

Trees of Paradise (Gen 2,9): With a few light but mastery strokes the biblical writer depicts
for us the blissful life of our first parents in the happy garden which God had created for
their abode. There every tree that was pleasant to the sight and good for food grew
abundantly; there the animals lived at peace with man and with earth other; there man and
woman knew no shame, because they knew no ill: it was the age of innocence. But this glad
time was short, the sunshine was soon clouded.

In this account everything hinges on the tree of knowledge of good and evil: it occupies, so
to say the center of the stage in the great tragedy with the man and woman and the talking
serpent grouped round it. But when we look closer we perceive a second tree standing side
by side with the other in midst of the garden. It is a very remarkable tree, for it is no less than
the tree of life whose fruit confers immortality on all who eat it. Yet in the actual story of the
fall this wonderful tree plays no part. Its fruit hangs there on the boughs ready to be plucked;
unlike the tree of knowledge, it is hedged about by no divine prohibition, yet no one thinks it
worthwhile to taste of the luscious fruit and live for ever. The eyes of the actors are turned on
the tree of knowledge; they appear not to see the tree of life. Only when it is over, does God
bethink himself of the wondrous tree standing there neglected with all its infinite
possibilities, in the midst of the garden; and fearing man, who has become like him in
knowledge by eating of the one tree, should become like him in immortality by eating of the
other, he drives him from the garden, and appoints cherubim or griffins, and a self-revolving
flaming sword to guard the way to the tree of life.

23
It appears to be generally recognized that some confusion has crept into the account of the
two trees, and that in the origin story the tree of life did not play the purely passive and
spectacular part assigned to it in the existing narrative. Accordingly, some have thought that
there were originally two different stories of the fall, in one of which the tree of knowledge
figured alone, and in the other the tree of life alone, and that the two stories have been
unskillfully fused into a single narrative by an editor, who has preserved the one nearly intact,
while he has clipped and pared the other almost past recognition.

The gist of the story of the fall appears to be an attempt to explain man’s mortality, to set
forth how death came into the world. It is true that man is not said to have been created
immortal and to have lost his immortality through disobedience; but neither is he said to
have been created mortal. Rather we are given to understand that the possibility alike of
immortality and of mortality was open to him, and that it rested with him which he would
choose; for the tree of life stood within his reach, its fruit was not forbidden to him, he had
only to stretch out his hand, take the fruit and eating it live forever. Indeed, far from being
prohibited to eat of the tree of life, man was implicitly permitted, if not encouraged, to
partake of every tree in the garden, with the single exception of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil. This suggests that the forbidden tree was really a tree of death, not of
knowledge, and that the mere taste of its fruits sufficed to entail death on the eater.

Accordingly we may suppose that in the original story there were two trees, a tree of life and
a tree of death: that it was open to man to eat of the one and live forever, or to eat of the
other and die; that God out of good will to his creature, advised man to eat of the tree of
life and warned him not to eat of the tree of death; and that man, misled by the serpent, ate
of the wrong tree and so forfeited the immortality which his benevolent Creator had
designed for him.

The Serpent (3, 1-15): This is one of God's creatures in Gen 2,19; a mythical monster rather
than an ordinary snake endowed with extraordinary faculties for trouble making. In J's mind
this is scarcely Satan (cf. Eichrodt, "Theology of the OT". Vol. II. p.205 for origin of the
concept and word Satan). The serpent is one of the cast characters which the biblical writer
inherited from traditional stories about Paradise, but which he then transmogrified to suit his
own purpose.

Originally the Serpent would have been simply the guardian of the sacred trees or fountain,
for this is a standard role of serpents. The serpent is described as "subtle", but this does not
mean necessarily that it was evil or sly. The same Hebrew word is used regularly in the Book
of Proverbs as the opposite of simple and stupid. The serpent is credited with special
sapience or intelligence for two reasons. First it lives near water, and water was regarded as
the seat of primordial wisdom. Second, since the serpent creeps into the earth and frequents
tombstones, it is often deemed an embodiment of the sapient dead. The Zulus, for example,
consider serpents to be amatongos or spirits of the deceased while the Kaffirs hold that a
python is the incarnation of a dead chieftain.

24
By virtue of associations, the serpent is considered not only wise but also mantic. Serpents
were kept in Greek temples so that oracles might be sought from them, while among the
Tami of New Guinea, they are regularly consulted as being the prophetic spirits of the
ancestors. A belief current both in ancient and in modern times is that if a man's ear be
licked by a serpent, he will thereby acquire the gift of soothsaying.

To the biblical writer, however, the serpent is certainly sinister as well as shrewd, and this too
echoes a popular tradition which is abundantly attested. The Arabs, for example, maintain
that every serpent is a potential demon, and Mohammed instructed his followers that
serpents should be killed on sight, and modern Arabic folklore maintain that to dream of
serpents is an omen of imminent hostility. By reason of the fact that is constantly sloughs its
skin the serpent is popularly deemed immortal, or thought at least to be continually
rejuvenated. A famous passage in the Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh relates how that hero
was told about a magical plant, called "Greybeard-grow-young" which grew at the bottom of
a lake. He dived and recovered it, but subsequently when he went for a swim, a serpent
sniffed the scent and stole it from his boat. The implication is, of course, that the serpent
secured for itself what might have fallen to man.

Plutarch tells us that of all animals on earth the serpent alone does not fear old age, and
even today the Italian speak of "being older than a serpent". According to some people, men
were at one time in possession of this priceless boon, immortality by the simple process of
periodically shedding the skin, but forfeited it through the foolishness of a woman.
According to the Malenesians of the Banks Islands, men and women possessed this quality
but after a time a woman, growing old, went to stream to change her skin. Then she went
home where she left her child. But the child refused to recognize her, crying that its mother
was an old woman, not like this young stranger. So to pacify the child, she went after her cast
integument and put it on. From that time mankind ceased to cast their skins and died.
In Canaan before, during and after the Yahwist wrote his account, worship of the gods of
fertility was a temptation to which many Israelites succumbed. It appears that these gods,
Baals, were often represented by the image of a serpent.

CHAPTER FIVE: THE FLOOD AND AFTER

The Epic of Gilgamesh (6-9). The closest parallel to the Biblical Story of the Flood, and
undoubtedly the primary source of it, occurs in the Mesopotamian Epic of Gilgamesh (Tablet
XI). In this epic, the gods decide to destroy mankind, although no reason is given for this at
the beginning of the account. (In the Akkadian texts, there is a flood story whose hero is
Atrahasis. The reason for the flood, according to this story, is that humans have become
numerous, and their noise has become more than the gods can bear. The hero is informed
by one of the gods not only to build a ship but to take his wife, family and beasts of the field.
In the Sumerian version, Ziusudra is warned by the wind of an impending flood, and likewise
built an ark. After seven days and seven nights, he offered sacrifices to the gods and was
likewise rendered immortal and translated to the paradisal land of Dilum).

25
Gilgamesh, a king of Erech (cf.Gen 10,10), sets out in search of the means of immortality.
After sundry adventures, he is at least advised to betake himself to Utnapishtim, the
Babylonian Noah, who lives on a distant island and is reputed immortal. Voyaging thither at
some hazard, he asks Utnapishtim for the precious secret. Utnapishtim informs him that it all
started when the gods got displeased with the city of Shurrupak which lies on the Euphrates,
and resolved to send a flood. Ea, the god of wisdom and subtlety, however, was privy to their
counsel and revealed this decision to Utnapishtim by having a wind whistle a warning
through the waters of his hut. He was told, "Take thought for your life and belongings. Build
a ship thirty cubits long and thirty cubits wide. Put in it specimens of every living thing,
provision it, and launch it on the waters... tell your country folk that the high god Entil has
taken a dislike to you and will have nothing more to do with you, and that you have
therefore decided to leave his domain and betake yourself to the sea, which belongs to your
lord Ea, who will feed you on fish and fowl".

After Utnapishtim had brought his family and possessions on board, the storms came and
the waters rose killing people and covering mountains.. For six days and nights, wind and
flood raged. It was so violent that it even frightened the gods so that they retreated to the
highest heavens. On the seventh day, however, the battling wind seemed to exhaust itself,
and, suddenly, it died down, and the flood abated. When he surveyed the scene, not a sound
was to be heard. Everything including mankind, had turned to mud and clay. After the ship
had grounded, Utnapishtim released a dove and then a swallow, both of which returned.
Finally a raven was sent out and saw that the waters had receded and never came back - an
implication that the earth was once again fruitful. Then Utnapishtim and his party released
the animals, left the ship and offered sacrifices, which when the gods smelt them, cause them
to gather "like flies over the sacrificer".
As a reward for saving mankind and human civilization, Utnapishtim and his wife were made
to be like gods and to live in a far district far from the world of men. The idea behind this
was that other humans would not see that one had become immortal. Did Gilgamesh
eventually receive the gift of immortality? He was condemned to being mortal like the rest of
humanity, but he did receive a consolation prize, a twig from the plant of rejuvenation that
will enable him to renew his youth as long as the plant lasted. The plant was eventually
stolen by a snake.

The Epic of Gilgamesh has a number of parallels to the story of Noah. In both, one person
receives a divine warning about the flood, is given exact instructions on how to build a ship
to survive, and is told to take the other animals with him. In both everything is submerged by
the waters of the flood. In both, the ship comes to rest on a high mountain. In both three
birds are sent out, and the third one does not return, indicating that the waters have
receded. In both the person comes out and offers a sacrifice and the gods smell and smoke.
The similarities are too close to have happened by chance. That does not mean that the
authors were necessarily borrowing directly from the Epic of Gilgamesh, but it does mean
that they were influenced by the same traditional story.

The differences in the Genesis version, however, reveal its theological message. In Genesis,
the flood, destructive as it is, serves a positive purpose - to give creation a second chance to
26
live righteously. In Genesis, the survival Noah and his family is part of the one plan of the one
God. In the Epic of Gilgamesh, the gods had not planned for anyone to survive, and
Utnapishtim survived only because the gods were divided and one of them secretly warned
of the flood. In Genesis, the flood occurred exactly according to God’s plan. In the Epic, the
gods themselves became frightened of the flood suggesting that there was in the universe
chaotic forces that even the gods could not control. In Genesis the flood concludes with God
making a covenant with all creation and promising never to send such a flood again. In the
Epic, the result is only a private reward for one person, and the gods try to prevent it from
affecting anyone else.

In the Genesis Flood story, there is no suggestion that the punishment to be inflicted is too
severe. The thoughts and intentions of human hearts are, or have become evil (Gen 6,5), and
humans have corrupted the earth (6,11-22). Moreover, because Genesis has one God, as
opposed to many, the biblical account necessarily lacks the motifs that one of the gods
secretly informed a human about what was to happen, and that the hero was rewarded for
thwarting the original plan of the gods to destroy mankind completely. In Genesis, God
intends that a righteous man (6,9) and his family should enable a new start to be made.
Noah is, to be sure, rewarded, but not with immortality.

The Genesis story is concerned with God's justice and His mercy. After the waters have
subsided, and Noah has discovered, by sending our birds, that the land was dry, and has also
offered a pleasing sacrifice to God, there was what might be called a renewal of creation.
There is this puzzling statement that God will never again curse the earth, and the reason
why He will never curse the earth again because of man is because "man's heart is evil from
his youth" (8,21). While the Babylonian flood is the result of the spiteful actions of the gods,
the Bible presents it as indictment of mankind for its sinfulness.

The Flood story may ultimately derive from the memories of a giant cataclysm actually
experienced in recent geological times. Evidence of such an event has been uncovered by
Lees and Falcon in a survey of Lower Mesopotamia (Mesopotamia means land "between two
rivers", the Tigris and Euphrates. Waters from the Persian Gulf submerged a large coast-land
area owing to a sudden rise of the sea level some thousands of years ago in one of the
pluvial periods. Heavy rainfall followed by undersea eruptions may well have left an indelible
impression of the survivors.

In S. Lowenstein's opinion, the Flood story, originally a Mesopotamian epic, was first recited
as a Hebrew epic about the hero Noah and later turned into prose. It reached the Hebrew
medium through Canaanite literature rather than a Mesopotamian import. The evidence
supporting this view is a pottery fragment of the Mesopotamian epic of Gilgamesh found in
a Canaanite stratum of Megiddo dating to the El Amrna period (15th. century BC), and a
fragment of the flood story found in Ugaritic (Northern Canaanite Kingdom).

Archaeology, let it be noted does not supply evidence for a universal flood. When all relevant
data are assembled and weighed, the conclusion would seem to follow that a popular
tradition is common to the biblical and Mesopotamian accounts, and that the inspired
27
author used the popular tradition to teach men a moral lesson. The genre of Gen 6-9 is,
therefore, didactic rather than historical, and it is useless to ponder whether the flood
covered the whole earth or destroyed all men. The point of the story is the horror of sin in
God's sight. The story teaches about the spread of sin, the wickedness of men, and the
justice and mercy of God. It is a parable of how God deals with people: justice causes Him to
punish the wicked, mercy causes Him to spare the good and to give them another chance to
fulfill His design. Many versions and legends of the Flood are found in Egypt, Greece and
other cultures of the world.

The Tower of Babel (11,1-9) The story in Chap. 11 has the most explicit connection with the
Mesopotamian sources of any of the materials in Gen 1-11. The Israelite author, however,
used them to explain the scattering of human beings on earth and the multiplicity of
languages, suggesting that there was increasing tension between God and man over the
proper limits of the latter's activity. While the ultimate source of the biblical story is
doubtlessly the great temple tower of Babylon, the tradition has been mediated in literary
form and the biblical writer was apparently influenced by the account of the building of
Babylon and its temple, Esagila given in line 60-62 of the Enumah Elish epic.

Standard practice with respect to religious architecture in Mesopotamia included the year
long preparation of sacred bricks, which preceded the solemn placement of the first brick.
According to the Akkadian text, "For one whole year they molded bricks; When the second
year arrived, They raised high the head of Esagila equalling Apsu; Having built a stage-tower
as high as Apsu, They set up in it an abode for Marduk, Enil and Ea..."(ANET pp.68-9). This
passage means that the height of the Esagila temple was equal to the depth below the
ground of the primeval waters of Apsu. The Esagila was built not by men but by the
Anunnaki gods. The Sumerian name Esagila means "the structure with upraised head" while
the Akkadian rendering for "they raised it's (Esagila's) head" is a play on the same word. It
appears that the biblical phrase "with its top (literally "head") in the sky" harks back to the
Mesopotamian versions, as does the biblical expression "Let us make bricks", a reference to
the building custom in Babylon.

Just as the primitive stories often identify the mythical Tower with some prominent local
landmark, so the Biblical write identifies it with one in the plain of Shinar - that is in
Babylonia. This reflects a popular identification of it with one of the great stepped pyramids,
or ziggurats, of the area, and such identification was no doubt suggested by the fact that
these edifices were indeed regarded by the Babylonians as links between heaven and earth.
This Esagila, the principal ziggurat of Babylon, shrine of its tutelary god Marduk was styled
"House of the Foundation of Heaven and Earth” (Etemenaki) and King Nabupolassar (625-
605 BC), who restored it, says that "it has its base at the navel of the earth, and its top in
heaven".

Similarly, the ziggurat of Kish is known as "the lofty tower of the deities Zababa and Innana,
the summit whereof is in heaven"; and that at Larsa as"the link between heaven and earth".
The ziggurat was a sacred mountain where heaven and earth met, and those who lived
around it thought they were secure because they had access to the gods. The sacred
28
mountain in a sense allowed them to participate in the life of the gods, and therefore, to live
in a meaningful world.

According to these various views, stories about an uncompleted massive ziggurat in Babylon
could be the origin of the Genesis account of the Tower in Babylon whose unfinished state
suggested divine intervention - in this case to confuse the speech of mankind. Gen 11,9
contains a word-play on "Babylon" (Hebrew babel) and "confuse" (Hebrew babal). As a story
in itself, Gen 11,1-9 is about the attempt of mankind to preserve its unity and perhaps gain
everlasting reputation by building a mighty tower. The Yahwist has used the motifs of the
ziggurat story to illustrate mankind’s trust in its own power and efforts even to the extent of
attempting to scale heaven as if God did not exist. Building a tower to the heavens is a
crossing of the divine/human boundary. The action is seen, however, as a challenge to God.
Humanity wishes to define itself in terms of its own achievements, and to this extent wants
to do without God. The plans seem to succeed for a time, but they are doomed to eventual
failure. The divine punishment in this case is the division of mankind into groups separated
by the barrier of language.

For the Yahwist, the result of sin extends beyond more inability to speak understandably. The
collective human exaltation of self against God, the refusal to be creature, was for the
Yahwist explanation of humanity’s broken community. The primeval tradition which opened
with God speaking the Word into being and speaking with Adam and Eve in the garden, here
concentrates on human beings unable to speak with one another. God thereby promotes
diversity at the expense of any kind of unity that seeks to preserve itself in isolation from the
rest of creation and thereby places creation at risk.

God confounded their ability to communicate effectively. They could no longer cooperate, so
their building plans had to be scrapped. The result was human disunity. Humanity’s attempt
to go up is place alongside God’s going down. The language of the text highlights how
God’s actions are a response in kind to human efforts. For everything that humanity tried to
do, God had a countermeasure. The Tower of Babel’s epic closes the Yahwist primeval story
on a sad note. The humans wanted to be gods themselves. This destroyed the intimacy of
the divine-human relationship and had destructive effects on humanity and the larger
created world.

The Genealogical Table: The Book of Genesis is not all of a piece. It is a patchwork of many
colorful literary units. Some observations on the literary character may enlighten the reader
and spare him a certain perplexity.

Genesis begins with an account of the creation of the world, and of Adam, the father of the
human race. The story of Abraham, father of the Israelite, begins in Genesis 12. Between
Adam and Abraham, stands Noah, survivor of the deluge, described in Gen 6-9. There is a
genealogical table in 11,10-26 that begins with Sem son of Noah, an closes with Thare, father
of Abraham.

29
By this table Abraham is linked to Noah. There is another genealogy in Gen 5 that links Noah
to Adam. It would seem, therefore, that the author's intention is to link Abraham, Father of
Israel to Adam, father of mankind, and thus place in dramatic relief God's choice of Israel -
from all the children of the earth he chooses them.

Note further the character of these genealogies. There are ten generations in the table of
Gen 5, ten generations between Adam and Noah. In Gen 11, there are likewise ten
generations, this time between Noah and Thare, father of Abraham. This neat numerical
balance puts us on the alert. It suggests that the tables a literary creation, not a historical
record. Note further rhythmic structure, the repetitious formulae: A lived X years and begot
B; A lived after he begot B, Y years; and all the days of A were Z years, and he died. This
formula is repeated a like number of times in Genesis 11. This confirms the impression that
we are dealing here with artificial literary structure, fixed patters.

Observe too, the ages of these patriarchs. The age of Adam was 930 years. As the list
progresses the ages consistently decrease until Thare, Abraham's father, achieves 205 years.
The nearer we come to historical time, the nearer the ages come to our own. From these
brief illustrations of the literary character of the genealogical materials the reader may realize
that we encounter here an ancient literary genre and that it would be out of order to
consider it an historical record of mankind between Adam and Abraham. Gen 1-11 contains
the remains of comparatively recent traditions.

The genealogies may serve to bring out another point. There are two genealogical tables in
this section, one in Gen 4, and the other in Gen 10. A comparison of these lists with those we
have just considered will reveal notable differences of style. The systematic scheme, the
precise ages, the repeated formulae do not appear. These lists are informal and chatty: "Ada
bore Jabel: he was forerunner of those who play the harp and the flute" (4,20-22). If we read
these lines in the Hebrew test, we meet an interesting "jeu des mots". The name Yabel
sounds like the verb Jabal meaning "to lead (flocks)"; the name Yubal resembles the word
yobel which means "trumpets". The ancient Israelites delighted in this word play.

These observations suffice to allow us to point to some implications. These are examples of
he literary analysis from which critics derive conclusions as to the literary structure of
Genesis. The fact that the book is a composite work made up of various sources is
recognized by critics of all schools. Opinion is divided on the number and dates of the
source. Independent critics judge that the genealogies in Gen 5 and 11 belong to the same
source, a document of the fifth century, BC. which is called Priestly Document "P". The other
two lists, they affirm, belong to an earlier document, the Yahwist "J" Source of the ninth
century BC.

Other considerations could be of greater interest to the average reader. If, as we feel we
have shown, the genealogical tables are literary artifices or ancient literary genre, can they be
taken as an historical record of man from Adam to Abraham? Can the longevity of the
patriarchs be taken literally? Note well, if the author created the lists under the influence of
the literary forms of the environment, they say no more than he intended them to say. It is
30
not only by a careful study of the forms that we can hope to discern his intention. In light of
what we have said it is a false step to approach these lists in search of an historical record of
the age of man on earth or the life span of primitive man. There was no science of
anthropology when Genesis was written. No fossil man had been uncovered, and the science
of paleontology was yet unborn. The author of Genesis had no scientific knowledge of the
age of the earth or the age of man, nor did God choose to reveal the knowledge to him. His
writings belong to another category altogether.

CHAPTER SIX: MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF GENESIS (1-11)

Genesis, 1-3: The first three chapters of Genesis lead us into a more critical area. The
chapters are related to questions of fundamental importance to Christian theology: the
creation of the world and of man, the original sin. Nevertheless, they, too, must be viewed
exegetically in the perspective of ancient literary forms. When this is done we find that there
are many elements in these chapters that are also found in pagan myths. The tree of life is a
theme of Assyro-Babylonian folklore. The serpent plays a leading role in the mythologies of
the Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians, Canaanites and in other mythologies and folklores of
our contemporary world. In the Babylonain pantheon, Ningishzida is "the serpent god, lord
of the earth". In Canaan, the serpent was a symbol of the goddess of fertility, with whose cult
was linked the ritual of sacred prostitution. It is unthinkable in our day to attempt
interpretations of Genesis without a consideration of the influences of the ideas and the
imagery of the environment on the inspired book.

We owe our fuller knowledge of the ANE to the discoveries of archaeology. The biblical
scholar cannot in conscience ignore this knowledge. If these interpretations change and take
new directions, it is not an arbitrary whim or a passion for novelty. Intellectual honesty forces
him to return to the Bible equipped with ever-growing knowledge of the biblical world. He
must confront the fact that mythological details in the first chapters of Genesis. He
recognizes too that Genesis 1-3 is not a polytheistic myth, but a composition dominated by a
moral motivation and a monotheistic faith. He is forced to conclude that the inspired author
has used mythological elements with a symbolic meaning to teach a religious truth.

He is forced to make a distinction between the content of the chapters and their literary
form. He sees the literary environment of Genesis influencing the form, as later on
Phoenician architecture will influence the temple of Solomon. He distinguishes what is
taught from the way it is taught. In his judgment, to interpret the tree of life as a symbol of
immortality involves no implication of denying Adam's grace of immortality; to interpret the
serpent as a symbol of the devil is not to exclude the theology of the Fall, but to place it on a
sound exegetical foundation.

This distinction between content and form may be perceived more readily in Genesis 1. The
six day frame in which the creative work of God is described is patently modeled on Jewish
work week of six days with Sabbath rest on the seventh. The allotment of God's creative work
to various days is a breakdown of the elements of the world according to the author's
31
cosmology; that is, a flat earth floating on seas and a solid vault above. He runs the creation
film backwards, as it were, reducing order again to chaos and then shows the film of creation
as he imagines it might have happened. This is imaginative writing, albeit divinely inspired. It
is not to be confused with revelation or the manifestation of the manner in which God made
the world.

The revelation in Genesis 1 is that one good principle, God, created all things good; that the
sun, moon, and stars are not gods to be served, but elements subject to the one God who
alone is to be served. The teaching of Genesis 1 is that God created the world by his
omnipotent word. The teaching takes its literary form from the Jewish calendar and the
accepted Ptolemaic cosmology.

The text that felt the impact of the theory of evolution was Gen 2,7: "Then the Lord God
formed man out of the dust of the ground." These words seemed to affirm immediate and
direct formation of Adam's body by God. There can be no question that this is figurative
language. Like him, God is depicted fashioning man's body. The imagery continues in 2,7,
"and (the Lord God) breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living
being". God is depicted as a man (anthropomorphism). The extent of the sacred author's
affirmation is rather difficult to determine.

From 3,19 ("till you return to the ground, since out of it you were taken; for dust you are and
unto dust you shall return"), we may conclude that he affirms the origin of man's body from
the earth. By the figure of God breathing into his nostrils, we understand that the life
principle come directly from god and man's community with god, an idea expressed in 1,26
where man is said to be made "in the image of Go". Man's difference from the animals and
his lordship over them is another obvious motif of the narrative. The fact that Adam names
the animals (2,20) would be an affirmation of his intelligence, since for the Hebrew the name
stood for the thing (cf. 2,19).

In the light of these considerations we can see the wisdom of the words of Pope Pius XII in
Humani Generis (August 12,1950): "For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church
does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred
theology, research and discussions by men experienced in both fields be pursued in regard
to the doctrine of evolution, insofar as it enquires into the origin of the human body as
coming from pre-existent living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls
are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons
for both opinions, that is, those favorable and unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and
judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure and provided that all are
prepared to submit to the judgement of the church, to whom Christ has given the mission of
interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.
Some, however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, acting as if the origin of human
from pre-existing and living matter were absolutely certain and now proved by what has
been discovered and by what has been drawn from these facts, as if they were nothing in the
sources of divine revelation which might here impose the greatest moderation and caution".

32
THE PATRIARCHAL CIRCLE (Genesis, 12-50)

Overview of the Patriarchal History

Abraham (chs. 12-23; 25:1-19).  These chapters detail the story of Abram (as he is initially
known) who was called by God to go to a foreign land in order to be a blessing to all
nations.  Abram subsequently received a covenant from God in which he was promised
two things: an heir of his own flesh and land.  His name was later changed to Abraham to
reflect his role as a "father of a multitude," and the sign of the covenant, circumcision,
was established.  Sarah's role in the Abrahamic covenant becomes the focal point of the
story due to her barrenness.
In sum, Abraham is obedient, and trusting, he does what God commands, even if he is
not sure why he is doing it, God 'credits' this to him as 'righteousness.' Adam, not
burdened with sin and death, chose disobedience. Abram, despite these burdens, is
obedient. But God will not simply reward him with a great nation and many descendants,
Abra(ha)m becomes the father of the people through whom God will act to redeem
humanity.

Isaac (chs. 24; 25:20-26).  Isaac is the patriarch about which we know the least.  Only a few
chapters deal with his story.  These chapters describe his marriage to Rebekah and his
descendants: Jacob and Esau.
Isaac is the son through whom the covenant is continued: Why not Ishmael? Not the son
promised, yet he is made a great nation as well, also becomes the father of 12 tribes,
founder of Arab nations, later considered a patriarch of Islam, which, like Christianity &
Judaism, is considered a religion of Abraham though in Islam, Ishmael is legitimate, Isaac is
'illegitimate.'

Jacob (chs. 25:27-34; 26-36).  Jacob is perhaps the most memorable of all the patriarchs
due to his conniving ways.  These chapters describe how he purchased Esau's birthright
and later stole his brother's blessing.  As a result, Jacob was forced to flee to his uncle's
house where he remained for twenty years, during which time he met and fell in love with
Rachel, his cousin.  Due to his uncle's underhanded trickery, Jacob wound up married first
to Leah, Rachel's sister, and then to Rachel as well.  The fierce rivalry between these two
women in their attempts to produce children resulted in the twelve tribes of Israel.  

Joseph (chs. 37-50).  The son of Rachel, Jacob's beloved wife.   Joseph was the least likely
member of his family to become a patriarch since he was Jacob's eleventh child.  His story
begins with a series of misfortunes which resulted in Joseph's enslavement in
Egypt.  Nevertheless, due to God's providence the misfortunes were turned into blessings,
and Joseph eventually became one of the most powerful men in Egypt as well as the
patriarch of his family.

33
 In sum, the Joseph cycle explains why the Israelites migrate to Egypt. Considered a miracle
child. One of the twelve sons, he had the power to interpret dreams. Prophesized that he
would rule over his brothers. When the brothers are sharing a meal together, Judah (Gk.
0Iudaj) proposes selling him into slavery for 20 pieces of silver. Ironically, this betrayal
enables him to rise to power in Egypt, and to save the tribes (the nation of Israel) from a
famine...

The Ancestral Story: A Summary

ABRAM – ABRAHAM/ISAAC: Abram is called by God to settle in Canaan but he does not possess
it. Instead, land is promised to him in covenant. Like he did with Adam, God makes a promise to
Abram to make of him a great nation with countless descendents. In return, Abram agrees to
circumcise all male children when they are 8 days old. Circumcision becomes the 'mark of the
covenant,' a physical indication of one's inclusion among the 'chosen people. Circumcision established
itself within Judaism as a distinctive mark of covenant commitment. Sealing the covenant by
circumcising the organ of procreation with a knife, with its implied threat of sterility, has the effect of
symbolically handing over the possibility of offspring to the grace of God. By practicing the rite from
generation to generation, the Israelites almost literally placed their future into the hands of the God of
covenant.

Setting precedent for Jewish covenant practice, Isaac was circumcised on the eighth day. The story of
the almost sacrifice of Isaac is one of the most profound tales of the Torah. It conveys a deep lesson in
testing and faith. Not only is it one of the most poignant tales in the Hebrew Bible, but it is also well
told.

In the larger thematic development of the Abraham cycle, the birth narrative of Isaac and the
subsequent expulsion of Ishmael set the stage for this Elohist account of Isaac’s near sacrifice. Now
that Isaac is the only son, God tests Abraham to expose the authenticity and true object of his faith.
This episode is segmented into three units on the basis of repeated phrases. Each of the units is
introduced with a summons addressed to Abraham (Table 2.1). In each unit Abraham responds the
same way.

Why Abram? He is not perfect, he passes his wife off as his sister hastily has a child w/Hagar but: he
is obedient, and trusting. He does what God commands, even if he is not sure why he is doing it. God
'credits' this to him as 'righteousness.' Meaning...Adam, not burdened with sin and death, chose
disobedience. Abram, despite these burdens, is obedient. But God will not simply reward him with a
great nation and many descendants. Abra(ha)m becomes the father of the people through whom God
will act to redeem humanity.
Isaac is the son through whom the covenant is continued: Why not Ishmael? Not the son promised.
Yet he is made a great nation as well, also becomes the father of 12 tribes. Founder of Arab nations,
later considered a patriarch of Islam, which, like Christianity & Judaism, is considered a religion of
Abraham; though in Islam, Ishmael is legitimate, Isaac is 'illegitimate. [he is also considered the son
almost sacrificed]

JACOB - younger brother of Esau; stories where he outwits Esau make him appear deceptive, but
they are etiological. Esau, eponymous founder of the Edomites, rivals of the Israelites; stories portray
'Edom' as dimwitted when compared to 'Israel' explaining why Israel deserves Isaac's
blessing/birthright
In other words, Jacob, impelled by his own (and sometimes also his mother’s) scheming and trickery,
connived to possess the blessing. Do we see here a repeat of primeval sin, trying to steal rather than
34
await God’s favor? The Jacob cycle proceeds in a threefold series of struggles. First, Jacob outwits his
twin brother, Esau, to gain possession of the family birthright. Second, Jacob outmaneuvers his
Aramean Uncle Laban and acquires substantial wealth. Third, Jacob outlasts Elohim in a wrestling
match, determined to receive divine blessing.

JOSEPH: The Joseph cycle, Genesis 37–50, is one of the more well-crafted and cohesive works of
Hebrew literature. The Joseph narrative sustains a story line over many chapters. This block of text,
Genesis 37–50, is called the Joseph cycle because Joseph is indisputably its main character. The
Joseph cycle continues the theme of birth order and birthrights found in both the Abraham and Jacob
cycles. Joseph is the son who receives the greatest attention; although he was the firstborn of Rachel,
he was not the firstborn overall. This theme of the preeminence of the younger is reinforced by Jacob
switching the blessing on Manasseh (the firstborn) and Ephraim.

The Joseph cycle explains why the Israelites migrate to Egypt, considered a miracle child. One of 12
brothers; he has the power to interpret dreams, prophesizes that he will rule over his brothers.
Ironically, this betrayal enables him to rise to power in Egypt. Joseph faithfully served Potiphar
but was sent to jail after Potiphar’s wife tried to seduce him and Joseph rebuffed her. While
in jail, Joseph distinguished himself by his trustworthiness and his ability to interpret dreams
(39–40). When Pharaoh had a series of dreams he could not comprehend, Joseph was
summoned to interpret them. Pharaoh was pleased with his reading and appointed him to a
high government post (41). Under his leadership, Egypt prepared for a famine, thus
providing the occasion for a reunion with his brothers.

Joseph brought his entire family to live in the Goshen region of Egypt, a fertile area in the
eastern Nile delta. They grew into a sizable clan under the care of Jacob. In his old age, Jacob
passed the family blessing on to his grandchildren, Ephraim and Manasseh, (48) and to his
sons (49). Shortly afterward, Jacob died and was taken back to Canaan for burial. Before
Joseph died in Egypt, he extracted a promise from his family that they would not bury him in
Egypt but would carry his bones back to Canaan (50).

CHAPTER EIGHT: THE BOOK OF EXODUS

The word "Exodus" means "going out". It is a fitting title for the story of the deliverance of
the Israelites from Egypt. The book while it has some interesting parallels with our own
history as a nation, is the inspired record of the intervention of God in human history. It is
part of the sacred history which is God's plan for the salvation of the human race; it is part of
that long record of God's intervention in our world, drawing men to Him-self,
communicating His life with them, and bringing about His universal reign.

Importance of Exodus: The Exodus is the central point in the history and faith of Israel. It is
the fact that gave rise to the unconquerable trust of the Israelites in the protection and
fidelity of God. The prophets, the legislation, the religious history, and the liturgy of Israel are
all permeated with the memory of this great event. The primary importance of Exodus is that
it was the time that Yahweh established the Covenant - the berith - at Sinai. The deliverance

35
from Egypt was the fulfilment of the promises made to the Patriarchs; the Lord was faithful
to His Word.

What type of story is the story of the Exodus? Here for the first time, the Pentateuchal
narrative portrays both a hero and a villain - Moses and Pharoah. Moses’ heroic stature
results not from his opposition to Pharoah and victory over him, but also from his role a
leader of Israel. Moses is the founder of the nation. Moses’ role is so central in all that follows
that one could easily construe the books as the biography of Moses or as the “heroic saga”
following upon the primeval and ancestral sagas.

While Exodus traces the rise of a hero and a people, it also traces the movement of the deity
named Yahweh. The movement is from conflict to victory to the exercise of sovereignty and
of the enthronement of the sovereign. The movement of the book reaches its midpoint with
the defeat of Pharoah at the sea and the consequent exaltation of Yahweh as victor over
Pharoah and all other gods (Chap. 15), especially where it is declared that “Yahweh reigns
forever” (15,18). The rest of the book focuses on Yahweh and Israel - on the constitution of
Yahweh’s kingdom (19,6) and the construction of the tabernacle as Yahweh’s throne room
where he will grant audiences with the people’s representatives.

The movement of the book therefore results in the exaltation of three characters - Yahweh as
the supreme deity in heaven and on earth, Moses as the servant of Yahweh, and Israel as the
kingdom of Yahweh and his special possession among the peoples (19,5). Yahweh’s rise to
prominence is highlighted not only by the redactional structure of the book but also appears
specifically in a tradition maintained

The Literary Form of the Book: There can be no doubt that the actual happening during
the period that the Hebrews were in Egypt and the liberation were far more complex than a
casual reading of the Bible would suggest. It must be remembered that the accounts found
in the book of Exodus are the last stages of an oral and literary evolution and that they show
traces of their composite character. The biblical accounts are substantially historical but they
are presented in a form which represent the crystallization of the early spoken traditions of
Israel concerning itself and its history. The events were handed down by word of mouth from
one generation to another and were gradually modeled into their present form by the
context of the Israelite liturgy which formed the setting in which the marvelous deeds of
Yahweh were recounted to the people. Like the other books of the Pentateuch, this book
attained its final form after the Babylonian Exile, after 538 BC.

The book of Exodus does not have for its purpose the recording of history as we conceive it.
Its narratives, therefore, cannot and should not be judged by the standards of the modern
historian. The book aims at bringing out the central and most important idea of the saving
activity on the part of God for His people. It is a great religious epic built around a man,
Moses, and an event, the Exodus from Egypt. It is in a style which is grand, heroic and
majestic. The influences of the liturgical service of the Passover can be felt particularly in
chaps 1-15. The historical event has been "camouflaged" by details which emphasize the
saving power of Yahweh.
36
Meaning of the Name “Yahweh”
The question: Who is this God? What is his name is exactly the question Moses is afraid that
he will be asked when he goes to the Israelites. The name of Israel’s covenant God is Yahweh.
Until the early centuries of the Christian era, the Hebrew language made use only of
consonants. Therefore in Hebrew only the four consonants were used for the divine name,
YHWH. This is the tetragrammaton. During the period after the Babylonian Exile, the name
was not pronounced. Instead, the word Adonai, Lord, was used. It was during the Christian
Middle Ages, in the 13th century, that some Christian readers misunderstood this, and
combined the vowels of Adonai with the vowels of YHWH, creating a non-existent word
pronounced Jehovah. It is certain that this an erroneous spelling of the divine name.
Scholars have shown that the correct spelling in Yahweh.

What does the name Yahweh mean? Yahweh is a third person, causative form of the verb to
be. The meaning actually is to be sought not in linguistics but in Israel’s historical
experiences with their God. Moses is afraid when he following god’s order goes to the
Israelites, they will challenge him. “Who is this God? What is his name?” How should he
answer them? God replied, “I am who am ( Ehyeh asher Ehyeh).” Then he added, “This is what
you should tell the Israelites: I AM (Ehyeh) sent me to you.......Yahweh the God of your
fathers....sent me to you. This is my name forever” (Ex 3,14-15).

The preferable meanings of the name are: "He causes to be" or "He who manifests His
existence by mighty acts on behalf of His people". It may also signify nothing more than a
refusal on the part of God to name Himself: I am who am. In biblical times, the name of a
person carried great power, and knowing the name meant knowing the essence of a person.
Divine beings may refuse to reveal their names, since no human can truly know a divine
being.

The act of revealing the divine name is itself remarkable. In the ancient world, the giving of
ones name is an act of intimacy that establishes relationship. It is related to vulnerability as
well, for to know God’s name is to have access, communication and relationship by those
who name the name. To know the name of God opens the possibility of honoring God more
deeply in relationship, but for God runs the risk of abuse and dishonoring the divine name as
well. One of the commandments of the Decalogue is devoted to the protection of the divine
name from such abuse (Ex 20,7; Deut. 5,11).

Exodus from Egypt

The Exodus from Egypt left its imprint on the memory of the nation and became the symbol
of the hope of liberation for all generations. Apparently many details about the Exodus and
the journey in the desert were blurred, perhaps as a result of the special attitude of the
Hebrews to these events. It is no wonder that legends and stories of miracles were combined
with the account of these events. It is obvious that the main reason for the preservation of
various traditions in the present form was the idea that the Exodus from Egypt was a divine
act which preceded the revelation at Sinai, the dwelling place of the God of Israel where the
37
Torah was given. According to tradition, the essence of Israel's uniqueness as the chosen
people was expressed at the revelation at Sinai. Various analytical trends, especially these
with fundamental inclinations, see in the revelation at Sinai those historic days when the
tribes were consolidated into a nation and their monotheistic belief purified under the
leadership of the outstanding personality - Moses.

No evidence has been found to support the miraculous biblical descriptions nor have the
geographical aspects of the journey of the Hebrews in the Sinai been clarified yet. Even the
location of the Red Sea, where Pharaoh and his soldiers died, and of Mt. Sinai is unknown.
These sites are usually established by reconstructions of the journeys. It would seems that
there is no reason to doubt the reliability of the biblical account according to which the
Hebrews did not choose the shortest way to Canaan "through the way of the land of the
Philistines" (Ex 13,17), i.e. the road along the seashore of the Mediterranean to Egypt. The
indirect journey was difficult and very long, and was dependent on places with drinking
water and oases. There is no doubt that the journey in the desert ended in Kardesh-Barnea,
an oasis with abundant water in Northwestern Sinai. From here the Israelites attempted to
penetrate Canaan.

On the basis of biblical descriptions and archaeological evidence, it became obvious that
these attempts to penetrate Canaan were actually part of the general phenomenon of
invasion and settlement on the part of the elements akin to the Hebrews that took place in
this geographical area around this time, especially in Transjordan where permanent
settlement were re-established wither at the 14th century or in the 13th century, BC, by
Ammon, Moab, Edom and the Amorites. Egypt inability to defend the border of the desert
from nomadic tribes while she was involved in the war against the Hittites enabled these
Western Semitic elements to consolidate in Transjordan, where settlements had ceases to
exist a few centuries earlier.

The Covenant of Sinai as the Basis of the Exodus Experience

The covenant expressed at Sinai (Ex 19,1-25; Lev 1-5,23) is the foundational bond between
Yahweh and Israel. In the Sinai commitment, the people responded to Yahweh’s initiative by
forming a covenant community. The covenant itself represents the suzerainty-vassal treaties
of the ancient Near East. There were always six essential elements in the Hittite treaties
imposed by great Hittite kings on vassal states:
2. Historical Prologue where the suzerain rehearses the historical basis for the treaty,
especially deeds of benevolence on behalf of the vassal.
3. Stipulations imposed on the vassal, and he must take a loyal oath vowing to come to the
aid of the king in case of war.
4. Preservation and public reading of the covenant.
5. Witnesses to the treaty - gods of both countries.
6. Blessings and Curses.

The Sinai covenant has a preamble, “I am Yahweh your God” without titles. The historical
prologue is equally brief and to the point, “who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of
38
the house of slavery”. That alone merited Israel’s gratitude and justified the covenant
stipulations stated in the decalogue. The stipulations were preserved and read publicly to the
people. Other elements of suzerainty treaties are absent from the Sinai covenant.

The Yahweh of Israel’s covenant is its great king and more. The covenant was not a covenant
of equals. The atmosphere of Sinai indicates a clear distinction between the people and its
God. The people could only come to Yahweh’s presence only after acts of purification. If
Israel was to be Yahweh’s people it had to take upon itself the sacred obligations of the
covenant. As Yahweh’s people, it correctly responded to divine redemptive activity by
pledging obedience to Yahweh’s covenant and law.

The Meaning of the Covenant: Yahweh’s covenant with Israel included both what Yahweh
had done and Israel’s appropriate response. It had been initiated by Yahweh’s mighty act of
deliverance, and Yahweh provided covenant law, the vehicle of faithfulness. But Israel was
not forced to agree to the covenant. Its proper response would be an act of gratitude and
faith. Covenant was sustained by Yahweh’s continuing actions on behalf of the people, and
each generation was to renew its grateful response to covenant demands.

The essence of Yahweh’s covenant demands on Israel is found in the ten commandments .
They are the basic statements of the Mosaic Law. Here are found the ethical claims that
Yahweh as a God of holiness makes on the chosen people. The covenant relationship was
grounded in ethical obedience to Yahweh. The first four commandments clarify specific
obligations of the covenant towards Yahweh. The last six deal with responsibility towards
other persons.

CHAPTER EIGHT: THE BOOK OF DEUTERONOMY

Themes (Overview)

Deuteronomy stresses the uniqueness of God, the need for drastic centralization of worship, and a
concern for the position of the poor and disadvantaged. Its many themes can be organized around the
three poles of Israel, Israel's God, and the covenant which binds them together.

Israel

The themes of Deuteronomy in relation to Israel are election, faithfulness, obedience, and God's
promise of blessings, all expressed through the covenant: "obedience is not primarily a duty imposed
by one party on another, but an expression of covenantal relationship. Yahweh has chosen ("elected")
Israel as his special property (Deuteronomy 7:6 and elsewhere) and Moses stresses to the Israelites the
need for obedience to God and covenant, and the consequences of unfaithfulness and disobedience.
Yet the first several chapters of Deuteronomy are a long retelling of Israel's past disobedience – but
also God's gracious care, leading to a long call to Israel to choose life over death and blessing over
curse (chapters 7–11).

Dillard and Longman note that the centralization of worship is an important and repeated theme in
Deuteronomy, and that this is designed to focus the hearer's attention on the unique and exclusive
holiness of Yahweh (Introduction to the Old Testament, 1994).
39
God

Deuteronomy's concept of God changed over time. The earliest 7th century layer is monolatry, not
denying the reality of other gods but enforcing the worship of Yahweh in Jerusalem alone. In the later,
Exilic layers from the mid-6th century, especially chapter 4, this becomes monotheism, the idea that
only one god exists. God is simultaneously present in the Temple and in heaven.

After the review of Israel's history in chapters 1 to 4, there is a restatement of the Ten Commandments
in chapter 5. This arrangement of material highlights God's sovereign relationship with Israel prior to
the giving of establishment of the Law. The Ten Commandments in turn then provides the
foundational principles for the subsequent, more detailed laws. This foundational aspect of the Ten
Commandments is also demonstrated by the emphasis to actively remember the law of God
(Deuteronomy 6:4–9), immediately after the Ten Commandments. The Law as it is broadly presented
across Deuteronomy defines Israel both as a community and defines their relationship with Yahweh.
There is throughout the law a sense of justice. For example, the demand for multiple witness
(Deuteronomy 17:6–7), cities of refuge (19:1–10), or the provision of judges (17:8–13).

Covenant

The core of Deuteronomy is the covenant that binds Yahweh and Israel by oaths of fidelity (Yahweh
and Israel each faithful to the other) and obedience (Israel obedient to Yahweh), God will give Israel
blessings of the land, fertility, and prosperity so long as Israel is faithful to God's teaching;
disobedience will lead to curses and punishment. But, according to the Deuteronomists, Israel's prime
sin is lack of faith, apostasy: contrary to the first and fundamental commandment ("Thou shalt have
no other gods before me") the people have entered into relations with other gods.

The covenant is based on seventh-century Assyrian suzerain-vassal treaties by which the Great King
(the Assyrian suzerain) regulated relationships with lesser rulers; Deuteronomy is thus making the
claim that Yahweh, not the Assyrian monarch, is the Great King to whom Israel owes loyalty. The
terms of the treaty are that Israel holds the land from Yahweh, but Israel's tenancy of the land is
conditional on keeping the covenant, which in turn necessitates tempered rule by state and village
leaders who keep the covenant: "These beliefs", says Norman Gottwald, "dubbed biblical Yahwism,
are widely recognized in biblical scholarship as enshrined in Deuteronomy and the Deuteronomistic
History (Joshua through Kings).

Dillard and Longman in their Introduction to the Old Testament stress the living nature of the
covenant between Yahweh and Israel as a nation: The people of Israel are addressed by Moses as a
unity, and their allegiance to the covenant is not one of obeisance, but comes out of a pre-existing
relationship between God and Israel, established with Abraham and attested to by the Exodus event,
so that the laws of Deuteronomy set the nation of Israel apart, signaling the unique status of the
Jewish nation. The land is God's gift to Israel, and many of the laws, festivals and instructions in
Deuteronomy are given in the light of Israel's occupation of the land. Dillard and Longman note that
"In 131 of the 167 times the verb "give" occurs in the book, the subject of the action is Yahweh."
Deuteronomy makes the Torah the ultimate authority for Israel, one to which even the king is subject

1. The Great Commandment (chaps. 1-11).

Chapter 1 open with a grim warning, creating a sense of urgency that remains unreli3eved
throughout the rest of the book, The redactor wishes us to read Moses’ testament in the

40
light of the story that brought Israel on the brink of destruction and condemned both the
wilderness generation and Moses to die outside the promised land – the story of the
rebellion of Kadesh (Num. 13-14). At the outset, the author emphasizes how this story could
have ended in the fulfillment of the promise to the ancestors; “Look, I have set the land
before you; go in and take possession of the land which Yahweh swore to your ancestors, to
Abraham, to Isaac and to Jacob, to give to them and their descendants after them (vs. 8).
Similarly, Moses affirms in vss. 10-11 that the blessing on Abraham has been fulfilled (You
are this day as the stars of heaven for a multitude), and that an even greater blessing awaits
Israel in the future. Moses reports the rebellion of the people immediately after the good
report from the spies, and before any indication of the opposing military forces (vss. 25-28).
The point is to illustrate a total lack of trust in God who had led them throughout the
wilderness (vss. 32-33).

After the exhortative introduction (vss. 1-3), Moses pronounces what is appropriately called
the Great Commandment, the commandment which above all others, stands at the
theological centre of his testament in the traditional “Shema” of Judaism (the Hebrew which
means “hear”), and the basis of the Great Commandment of Jesus (Mt. 22,34-40), “Hear, O
Israel, our God is Yahwhe, Yahweh alone! And love your God with all your heart, with all your
life and indeed with all your capacity!” The Shema has two main foci: the confession that
Yahweh can be Israel’s God (rather than Yahweh is the only God), and secondly, that the
confession carries with it the demand to love Yahweh. Love here is no sense sentimental;
although it connotes endearment. It is also technical treaty language for loyalty. And that is
precisely what the Great Commandment commands – undivided loyalty to Yahweh. This is
the heart of the covenant, the bedrock of Israel’s responsibility to Yahweh. The exclusivity of
the demand is accentuated by the final phrase: “with all your heart, with all your life, indeed
with all your capacity!” With climactic progression, the Shema emphasizes – tha the total
person and the total community – must pledge its allegiance to Yahweh, and to no other.
The words of the Shema are of such central importance that they must communicated
constantly, day and night, bound on one’s forehead, and written on every doorpost and the
city gate (vss. 6-9).

Clearly, if the Shema is the Great Commandment and the heart of the covenant, it must also
be the heart of the Torah. What then is the relationship between this, the Great
Commandment and the Torah as narrative? Like the parent answering a child’s question
about the ground of all Israel’s ethical behavior, the ethos of the community called Israel.
Moses proposes the parent tell the child a story, It is not just any story, it is the story that
provides Israel’s communal identity, the story that begins, “We were Pharoah’s slaves in
Egypt.” This is also the story that renders the identity of the one who is confessed, witnessed
to in the Shema. To say “Yahweh is our God” and “we were Pharoah’s slaves in Egypt” is to
state Israel’s identity in exact correspondence to Yahweh’s identity. “I am Yahweh your God,
who brought you out of the land of Egypt. Out of the house of bondage” (Deut. 5,6; Ex, 20,2).

The rest of the prologue is preoccupied with three future situations when the Israelites will
be in the land and will be tempted to forget their narrative identity and abandon absolute
allegiance to Yahweh. In any case, remembering the story is posed as the only means to
41
avoid disloyalty and the resultant punishment. In the first case, the Israelites will be tempted
to forget their status as Yahweh’s holy people and instead to fuse indistinguishably with
Canaanite culture (7,1-11). They should therefore remember the story of Yahweh the holy
warrior and his victory over the Egyptians (7, 17-26). In the second case (chap. 8), Israel is
warned against the presumption of self-sufficiency as if the land and all its rich blessings
were a result of human achievement alone. The way to avoid an attitude in which
materialism replaces allegiance to Yahweh is to remember the story of the wilderness
journey and especially the provision of manna. The third case is almost a reversal of the first:
the Israelites are warned against the assumption that their imminent victory over the
Canaanites will a sign of their relative “righteousness” (9,4). In contrast, Moses calls them to
remember the story of the golden calf that exemplifies their “unrighteousness.”

The transitional material in 10,12-11,32 reiterates the paramount call of the Shema (10,12-
13), but also introduces a completely new aspect that will dominate much of the chapters
12-25. The Great Commandment demanding the love of Yahweh also demands the love of
other people. It has a horizontal as well as vertical dimension. Israel is to love Yahweh
because Yahweh first loved Israel (10,15), but Yahweh also loves the poor, the weak and the
defenseless, and therefore Israel is to love them too (10, 18-19)

CHAPTER NINE: THE CONQUEST AND SETTLEMENT OF CANAAN

There are grave difficulties in reconstructing the Conquest of Canaan by the tribes of Israel.
The various biblical sources dealing with this subject are heterogeneous and there are many
contradictory descriptions. Moreover, there are also inconsistencies in important details
between these sources and archeological finds. The biblical evidence, especially that which is
found in Joshua, gives the impression that it had gone through a selective and unified
editing. It is possible that the national memory, too, followed the same process, so that
different traditions which existed among various tribes or in different places, were reduced to
a common denominator, until an "official" version of the history of the Conquest was
formulated. This version represents the Conquest as a single campaign that was conducted
according to an earlier plan which distributed the country in advance and was led by a sole
leader, Moses, and later Joshua. Apart from this version there is other evidence that points to
an entirely different situation. This evidence is to be found especially in Jgs 1 and indirectly in
the genealogical lists at the beginning of 1 Chronicles, in poetic compositions and in other
sources. The contradiction points to a relatively long, heterogeneous process of conquest,
which lacked advanced planning, and in which individual tribes or tribal groups gradually
conquered their territories, leaving Canaanite enclaves which had not been conquered at all
(including towns which are mentioned in the book of Joshua as having been conquered). It
seems that contemporary reality necessitated a slow, continuous series of conquests and it is
precisely this reality which emerges from the evidence that contradicts the "official" version.

Kardesh Barnea, which marked the end of the journey of the tribes of Israel in the desert, was
also the starting point of the Israelites' attempt to enter Canaan. Probably at a certain stage,
they tried to go North straight to the Negev but they were deterred by the chain of
42
Canaanite fortresses (Num 14,40-45; 21,1-9; Deut 1,43-46). This failure made them seek new
solutions. The beginning of the process of conquest apparently occurred at the end of the
14th. Century BC and continued during the 13th century BC. The biblical account about the
process of the conquest of Transjordan places this event approximately at the beginning of
the settlement of Ammon, Moab and Edom (Num 21,21).

Two different traditions about the mode and journeys of the Conquest are found in the Bible.
The best known one is that which appears in Num 20,14ff, according to which the Israelites
circumvented Edom because its ruler did not allow them to pass through his country. They
therefore penetrated through a weak point in Transjordan, which was the Amorite Kingdom
of Heshbon, whose king Sihon had conquered the territory from the Moabite king (Num
21,21ff). The Amorite presence in Eastern Transjordan is explained, according to one theory,
as a Southern migration of certain elements from the kingdom of Ammura in central Syria, in
consequence of the battle between the Hittites and the Egyptians during Ramses's II's reign.
From here on, the tribes of Israel succeeded in enlarging their holdings east of the Jordan as
far as Bashan.

Another tradition was preserved in Num 33, which records the Israelites' march right through
Edom and Moab and lists their stations on the way to Jericho. In the description of this route
there is no mention of the kingdom of Transjordan or of the bypassing of the populated
areas on the desert's border as recorded in the previous tradition. In the light of the
contradiction between the two traditions, the following suppositions arise. There were
probably two waves of penetration into Canaan: The earlier one proceeded without
difficulties along the plateau of Transjordan to Jericho, at a time when this area was still
desolate, i.e. the end of the 14th. century BC; the second wave could not follow the same
route because of the new kingdoms which had been established there in the meantime; it
therefore had to bypass Edom and Moab and then force its way through the Amorite
kingdom North of Arnon. The time of this second was thus later, probably the 13th century.
Although this supposition contradicts the spirit of the biblical texts whose aim is to produce
a picture of a unified conquest, it offers a solution to the contradiction between the two
traditions without negating either of them. It also supports and supplements the above
mentioned passages which suggest a complex and long drawn-out process of conquest. The
two waves of migration to Canaan suggest that there may have been two waves of Exodus
from Egypt, and perhaps also two wanderings in the wilderness of Sinai, especially when the
abortive attempt to penetrate the Negev and the bypassing of Edom are attributed to the
second wave.

It is difficult to decide about the components of these waves. Although it is generally

accepted that they consisted of the tribes of Leah, Rachel and the concubines, scholars
disagree as to the order in which these groups entered Canaan. Some assume that Leah
tribes migrated first, though according to the order of the earlier journey, which terminated
at Jericho as mentioned in Num 33, it is more likely that the tribes of Rachel (called also the
House of Joseph) were those who first invaded Canaan, the land West of the Jordan, without
stopping on its East bank. Therefore it would be a mistake to assume that the campaigns of
those two waves were carried according to the schematic description in Joshua. It seems
43
more likely that these were "waves" in a very broad sense, and neither of them was
necessarily a unified and planned undertaking. It seems that the waves of penetrations were
actually a pattern which points to frequent penetrations of individual tribes or groups of
tribes.

Archaeology: The archaeological finds usually support the biblical evidence concerning the
Conquest, except for a few instances of inconsistency. Research has not yet disclosed
acceptable solutions to these inconsistencies: 1) The description of the conquest of Ai by
Joshua is contradicted by the fact that this place was desolate during the period of the
Israelite penetration of Canaan (Josh 7-8). It is possible that it was confused with the
neighboring Beth-El (cf Jgs 1,33ff). 2) The dramatic description of the conquest of Jericho
(Josh 5-6) is not proportionate to the archaeological evidence which shows that Jericho was
small un-walled and unimportant town.

On the other hand, archaeological finds in various sites of Eretz Israel and surveys clearly
indicate that many towns (as Beth-El, Tell Beit Mirsim, Beth-Shemesh, Eglon, Hazor, etc) were
destroyed during the 13th century and at the beginning of the 12th century BC. Small and
impoverished settlements were established on the ruins of these towns by people whose
standard material culture was below that of the former population. Some were established in
the same period in which the towns were destroyed, while others were established later. In
addition, during this period new settlements were established on entirely new sites by the
same impoverished elements. It should be noted that the destruction of the Canaanite towns
did not occur during a short period; this also fits into the picture of a gradual conquest by
separate conquering units. From the archaeological finds it becomes clear that the Israelites
failed to conquer the whole country, and hat Canaanite enclaves remained (e.g. Shechem),
which were conquered later and not during the period which is described as the period of
the Conquest. This fact, too, corroborates the testimony of the biblical texts which contradict
the version of a single planned campaign.

Details of Settlement: The Conquest of Canaan and the settlement of the tribes of Israel in
the land actually constituted one continuous process, with no intervening lapses. For this
reason the account of the Conquest has to be accompanied by the description of the
settlement in Canaan. The biblical sources make possible only a partial reconstruction, along
general line, of the conquest and the settlement.

The location of the new Israelite territory and also the success of the Conquest raised many
questions. Various political and geographic conditions aided the Israelites. Egypt's inability to
deal with the specific problems of Canaan in the period left the population defenseless
against invaders who employed special tactics appropriate to their social structure, fighting
skill, and armament. However, it should not be forgotten that the Israelites success in
conquering Canaan was limited in so far as they failed to occupy the plains, whose dense
population was defended by strong fortresses and chariots which the tribes could not
overcome (e.g. Josh 17,16-18). Moreover, it is not impossible that the Egyptians intentionally
concentrated their defense on vital interests in those regions which seemed to them

44
decisively important: the districts along the routes of communication which passed through
the plains and along the coast.

(Routes: the main highways played a most important part in the history of the Holy Land. The
settlements of Palestine are located at the cross-road of Ancient Near East. The most
important route was the highway from Mesopotamia to Egypt and on it were founded the
most important political centers. These ways, however, were not open for trade and
commerce alone; military campaigns and conquests also trod them throughout history,
leaving in their wake destruction and desolation. The major international route was the "way
of the sea" (Is 8,23), later called the "Via Maris", leading from North of Egypt along the coast,
through Jezreel Valley to Hazor and Damascus. The second international route was the
"King's Highway" (Num 21,22) which passes through the hill country of Transjordan).

Actually the tribes of Israel occupied only the hill country where the Canaanites were not
able to use their chariots and the southern regions that were under-populated or not
populated at all. The Israelites also had to face the resistance of the Canaanite settlements
which were within the borders of their territories. They succeeded in conquering only part of
them. In light of facts found in various passages in Joshua and in Judges 1, it becomes
obvious that in a few places Israelites were subjugated by the Canaanites. The general
picture of the settlement points to four Israelite regions, separated by narrow strips of
fortified Canaanite cities.

This picture, as it is known, follows the topographic structure of Palestine and emphasizes
the contrast between the population of the mountainous regions and the population of the
plains. The Northern region of settlement was bordered on the south by a strip of plains
(Jezreel and Beth-Shean) with fortifications ranged from Beth-Shean to Megiddo. Further
even in the territories of the northern tribes there were numerous Canaanite enclaves which
undermined the unity of the Israelites; the large block of central mountains was between
Canaanites of the valleys and the chain of Canaanite fortresses in the south, starting with
Jerusalem and ending in Gezer. This chain separated the central tribes from the southern
tribes. Between these three blocks and the Israelite settlements in the east, there was a
natural border - the Jordan. Thus the Canaanite fortresses interrupted the continuity of the
Israelite settlement and prevented close contact among groups of tribes. This isolation
created specific local developments in each group of tribes and weakened their attachments
to one another. It is noteworthy that the break between the central and southern tribes was
so absolute that even the most reliable biblical sources (including the "Song of Deborah") do
not mention the tribe of Judah at all as a component of the tribal alliance during the period
of settlement.

Within the framework of the limited Israelite territory there began, according to the
archaeological finds and surveys, a process of transition from nomadic way of life to a
permanent agricultural mode of life in small, generally un-walled settlements. They were
faced with grave difficulties, in particular a lack of fields suitable for cultivation and a
shortage of water. As a consequence, the settlers had to cut down the forests within their
territories (Josh 17,14-18). Archaeological research shows that the settlement was, to a great
45
extent, made possible by a special technique of waterproof lime-plastered cisterns. In this
way the Israelites were not tied down to the few available sources of water but could settle in
areas which had never been settled before, thus expanding their borders. The Israelite
settlement in the mountains was also facilitated by the use of iron implements which began
about this period. Implements made of hard metal enabled the settlers to cultivate their
fields more efficiently.

The settlement of Israelites was accompanied by shifts and movements of tribal and sub-
tribal units both within an without the tribe's territory. A variety of reasons motivated these
units to seek new territories, including lack or shortage of land suitable for cultivation,
pressure from Israelite or alien neighbors, etc. Evidence of such events is found especially in
the genealogical lists in the bible and in particular in I Chron I-II. In the genealogical lists are
included fragments of information and traditions about tribal and sub-tribal movements.
These genealogies give information on their wanderings, their attachments with (and
separation from) kindred or alien elements, and their elevation and decline. The tribal
genealogy was constructed in a schematic way using familial terminology. This clarifies
various phenomena such as the affiliation of clans and families to two tribes which obviously
attests the transition of tribes from one territory to another. Such relations existed between
Judah and Reuben (cf. e.g. Josh 7,18 with Num 26,6) and Ashar, Ephraim and Benjamin (Josh
16,3; 1 Sam 9,4; 13,17), among others. It is also known that Manassite families in the west
migrated to Transjordan and that families from Ephraim moved in the same direction (2 Sam
18,6). A good example of the migration of family-tribal unit is Dan who, because it was
compressed between the territories of its brother tribes and of alien inhabitants of the plains,
moved to the northern border of the Israelite territory (Judg 18). As mentioned above,
echoes of the absorption of alien elements into Israelite tribal units or territories are
preserved in genealogical lists, in the terminology of the matrimonial relations and by tracing
their lineage to the ancestor of the tribe. Most instructive are the genealogical lists of the
tribes of Judah which are very complicated (1 Chron. 2,4:1-23. These lists show Judah's
affiliation with Canaanite, Edomite, Horite and Gileadite groups.

Similar affiliations and assimilation can be found also in the tribe of Manasseh, whose
genealogy reflects the absorption of Canaanite territories. One can assume that changes in
the status of the tribes, the description of their achievements, their territories, and
occupations as they appear in the Blessings of Jacob (Gen 49), the Blessing of Moses (Deut
33), and the Song of Deborah (Judg 5), reflect changes that took place within the tribes as
consolidated and written down in Joshua reflect a later period.

Some Results of Settlement: The settlement of the tribes of Israel in Canaan brought about
an essential change in their economy: the wandering shepherds became settled farmers and
craftsmen. An important question is how and to what extent the settlement influenced the
social structure of the Israelites, their tribal and sub-tribal organizations, and the intertribal
relation. The Israelite society was essentially patriarchal-tribal, a fact which is reflected in their
customs. In essence the patriarchal order persisted among the Israelites throughout the
biblical period. Biblical society, however, was deeply attached to the nomadic way of life and
its characteristic traditions. It seems that it was in the nomadic period that the small Israelite
46
units with ethnic family ties and common traditions united into tribal structures. There is no
doubt that the tribe remained the largest and most important political and social unit in the
period of the Conquest as well.

However, the transition to permanent settlement left its impact on the tribe and its
leadership. The confrontation with permanent structure and its needs brought about
changes in the relationships between various components of the tribe. Likewise, the concept
of tribal leadership changed earlier. The new challenges in the period of the leadership
insofar as the patriarchal leadership had to adapt itself to the conditions of permanent
settlement. Although the patriarchal pattern survived, the criteria for electing this leadership
underwent changes. Although there are not many references to social problems in biblical
sources, much can be learnt by reading between the lines about the decline of the tribe and
the emergence of the largest sub-tribal unit - the family, with the parallel rise of the power of
the clan. It seems that inter-tribal relationships weakened as a result of the conditions of
settlement. Israel in Canaan was a group of tribes with weak political attachments. It was not
a firmly consolidated framework with distinct political aims and characteristics.

There is disagreement among scholars as to how the unification of the tribes into a nation
took place. One trend in research regards the revelation at Sinai as the time when the tribes
became a nation. Another trend is of the opinion that the settlement period was the
formative stage in national consolidation. While the settlement period did, indeed, bring
about changes, it is more likely that national consolidation took place in a later period, but in
a literary-historical form was projected upon the settlement period and earlier. Nevertheless,
it would be a mistake to assume that the tribes of Israel consisted of entirely separated and
disconnected units. There were still common elements of vital importance: ethnic affinity,
consanguinity, and common religious cultic tradition.

This common tradition in its widest sense was able to take the place of the national
consciousness that was lacking. These factors prompt a search for patterns of intertribal and
supra-tribal organization that emphasizes the common elements among tribes without
confronting the problem of political unity. Several possibilities have been advance. One of
the strongest propositions which has stimulated positive and negative responses maintained
that there existed a supra-tribal organization, like the Amphictyony in ancient Greece and
among the Etruscans in Italy. This organization with cultic-religious and political objectives
united the tribes of Israel around a mobile sanctuary where the Ark of the Covenant was
placed. The biblical sources do not offer much evidence in support of the existence of such
an organization. There were, however, a number of tribal actions, as for example, the
narrative of the concubine of Gibeah (Judg 19ff), which give the impression that there
actually existed some such supra-tribal organization. As is known, it illustrates an episode of
internal conflict among the tribes and supra-tribal pressure of Benjamin. Moreover, the
schematic pattern of 12 tribes, which always remains unchanged even if its components
undergo changes - a fact which can be interpreted as the worship of the tribes around a
sanctuary throughout the year is a factor that cannot easily be ignored.

47
LIST OF BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Boadt, L., Reading of the Old Testament. An Introduction. Makati, The Paulist, 1980..

Cornfeld, G., The Archeology of the Bible. London, Adam & Charles Black, 1977

Gaster, T.H., Myth, Legend and Custom In the Old Testament. New York, Harper &
Row Publishers, 1817

Guinan, M.D., The Pentateuch. Quezon City, The Claretian Publications, 1990.

Mann, T.W., The Book of the Torah. The Narrative Integrity of the Pentateuch. Atlanta,
John Knox Press, 1988.

McDermott, J.J, A Historical Reading of the Pentateuch. A Historical Introduction.

New York, Paulist Press, 2002.
Reviv, M, Israel Pocket Library. History until 1880. Jerusalem, Keter Publishing
House, 1973

Rogerson, J & Davies, P., The Old Testament World. New York, Cambridge University
Press, 1989

Kenyon, K., Archeology In The Holy Land. London. New York, W.E. Norton &
Co., Ltd., 1979

48
Archaeology in Encyclopaedia Judaica. Jerusalem, Keter Publishing House, Ltd.,
1978

49