Part 6
Abraham and his Family (chs. 12-36)
The world of Israel's ancestors, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and their families, is different from that of chs. i—n: here we are dealing with 'real' individuals and their life stories. Yet it is still not our world. Frequent attempts have been made to find historical situations into which these patriarchs can be fitted, but they have all failed to convince (see Thompson 1974). Gunkel, in his famous commentary on Genesis (1901), put forward a view which was long accepted: that most of these stories were independent short folk-tales (Sagen) which circulated by word of mouth for a very long time before they were combined into longer complexes and eventually set down in writing. That they have an oral origin and are not to be seen as accounts of the lives of historical personages remains a common opinion; but that they had a long history before their incorporation into the present work is regarded by some
Basically these chapters fall into three sections, each concerned with the life of one of the three patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, since in their present form they are a combination of separate parts to form the history of a single family, the three stories have been made to interlock so as to produce a continuous family saga. Thus Abraham's death is recorded in 25:8, but the birth of his heir Isaac had taken place long before (21:2); similarly the birth of Isaac's son Jacob is noted in 25:25—6, but Isaac's death only in 35:29. Jacob's own death (noted in 49:33) did not occur until the completion of
49 GENESIS
off as his sister during a temporary residence in Gerar, with similar consequences, and again in 26:6—11 Isaac, driven by famine (26:1), as was Abraham in ch. 12, seeks refuge, again, in Gerar. It is generally recognized that these are three variants of one and the same story, which was defined by Gunkel as a folk-tale; but there is no agreement today about their relationship to one another or the reasons why despite their basic similarities they differ substantially in details. Attempts to discover which of the variants is the oldest have resulted in different conclusions.
his son Joseph's extraordinary success story (Joseph's birth is recorded in 30:23). (On the story of the life of Joseph, chs. 37— 50, which belongs to a different literary genre from the previous stories, see below.) Meanwhile the births of all Jacob's twelve sons had taken place, recorded at intervals between 29:32 and 35:18. Recently attempts have been made to reconstruct the stages of the process by which the patriarchal stories have been composed (especially Blum 1984), but these remain hypothetical.
The Story of Abraham (chs. 12-25)
Migrations of groups of people at various times across the eastern frontier of Egypt to seek more favourable conditions of life are well attested historically (see e.g. ANET2$i). In the OT the migration of Jacob and his sons to Egypt (Gen 47) is another example of this. 12:10-20 is the first instance of many in which the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham is endangered. Not only is the departure from Canaan a move away from the promised land; even more serious is the threat to the marriage of Abraham and Sarah which is still childless, and so to the promise of progeny. Faced with a choice between death from starvation and the potential danger entailed in migrating to an alien and unknown country, Abraham chooses the latter course; but, fearful for his own safety, he sacrifices his wife to a life in Pharaoh's harem, which would also make the promise null and void. In contrast to his shabby conduct, which also involves telling a lie, the behaviour of Pharaoh, whose unsuspecting action is rewarded by God with 'great plagues' (presumably soon cured; a lacuna in the story has been suspected between w. 17 and 18) is exemplary and even generous (v. 20). Abraham is left speechless before Pharaoh's justified reproach. The story is told without the making of an overt moral judgement; but the contrast between the obedient Abraham of 12:1-9 and the Abraham of this story is unmistakable. The story considered by itself is clearly not favourable to Abraham; but in its present context it has become an illustration of the theme of the promise constantly endangered but never annulled. Paradoxically, Abra ham emerges from this incident not only unscathed but rewarded with great wealth (w. 16, 20). It is important to note that it is not said of Abraham as it is of Noah (6:9) that he was morally perfect. The point of the story in its present context is not his moral character but that he is the bearer of God's promise to him and his descendants. The threefold repetition of what is basically the same story cannot be adequately accounted for in terms of a dovetailing of written continuous strands that were originally independent of one another. The reason for it is of a literary nature. Repetition to create particular effects is a common literary device in narrative; and this is eminently the case in Genesis (see Alter (1981), especially on type-scenes, 47—62). Here each version of the story marks a crucial point in the total narrative. 12:10-20 stands at its head, immediately following the initial promise to Abraham of numerous descendants (12:2-3), and shows how God safeguards that promise, keeping both the prospective parents from harm in a dangerous situation. 20:1-18 occurs immediately before the crucial account of the birth of Isaac (21:1-2) which marks the first stage in the fulfilment of that promise. 26:6—11 is similarly closely connected with the birth of Isaac's son Jacob, the next heir (25:21-4) and is immediately preceded in 26:3-5
(12:1—3) Th£ story begins with a divine command and a dual promise. First, God promises to make Abraham into a great nation; this of course implies that Abraham himself will have a male heir and that the succeeding generations will all have numerous progeny, and also that the future nation will enjoy great political power (the word goy, 'nation', suggests a fully organized group, and the 'great name' in this context implies international pre-eminence or superiority). The second promise is really implied by the first: it is a promise of divine blessing, which will ultimately be extended to all peoples. There is no specific promise of possession of the land here; this appears for the first time in 12:7 as a promise not to Abraham personally but to his descendants. A number of recent scholars, regarding 12:1-3 as representing the earliest stage of the Abraham story, have maintained that the promise of the land belongs to a later stage of redaction. This may be so; but the initial command to Abraham in v. i to travel to a land later to be identified cannot be without significance, especially to the original readers, who would naturally identify that land with the land of Canaan, which they knew had in fact come into the possession of Abraham's descendants. The fact that God had arbitrarily uprooted Abraham and exiled him from his original country would, however, remind them of the precariousness of their own residential status. In Gen 23:4 Abraham himself spoke of his being 'a stranger and an alien' in the land. In 12:1-3, then, the basic promises to the patriarchs are all already presented. (12:4-9) takes Abraham on his journey south from Haran to Canaan, which God now identifies (v. 7) as the land to which he was to go (v. i). His unquestioning obedience to God's command is seen by NT writers (Heb 11:8-10; cf Rom 4; Gal 3) as an outstanding act of faith to be imitated. The reference in v. 4 to Lot (cf. 11:27, 31) as Abraham's travelling companion sets the stage for the story in 13:5—13. The oak of Moreh near Shechem (v. 6) is represented as an already sacred tree at which oracles were given (morch means 'one who teaches'); but it was God's appearance to Abraham that led him to build an altar there and—presumably—to offer sacrifice (cf. Noah's sacrifice, 8:20). On the invocation of the name of YHWH at the second altar that he built near Bethel (v. 8) see at 4:26 above. In travelling to the Negeb (the semi-desert area to the south of Judah) he reached the southern border of Canaan, having traversed the land completely from north to south. It is significant that it is not stated that he entered any of the ancient cities of Canaan; instead, he lived in tents as a travelling stranger.
(12:10—20) is one of a group of three stories in Genesis with the same theme. In 20:1-18, as here, Abraham passes Sarah
GENESIS 5°
reader. The word 'Hebrew' is used in the OTonly by foreigners speaking about the Israelites and not by Israelites about themselves (see Jon 1:9). In Genesis it occurs elsewhere only in the story of Joseph when he is spoken of by Egyptians or addresses Egyptians. The tiny size of Abraham's military force, which consists entirely of members of his own household (v. 14) enhances his heroic stature.
by a further reiteration of that promise. These repeated stories thus help to provide a structure for the patriarchal stories.
(13:1—18) This chapter and ch. 14, which are mainly concerned with relations between Lot and Abraham, are a kind of interlude or digression: Lot is not a leading character in the main patriarchal story; after the events of ch. 19 he disappears from it, though at the end of that chapter it is noted that he became the ancestor of the Moabites and Ammonites whose later dealings with Israel have a part to play in other OT books
Melchizedek, in v. 18, provides a royal banquet to welcome Abraham on his return after his victory. It is strange that he should suddenly appear in the story, having taken no part in the preceding events. He is a mysterious and enigmatic figure. His name probably means '(The god) Melek is righteousness' and closely resembles that of a pre-Israelite king of Jerusalem, Adoni-zedek ('The Lord is righteousness'), who was defeated and killed by Joshua (Josh 10). It is not clear whether Salem is intended to be identified with Jerusalem, as Jerusalem is never so-called in any of the non-biblical texts that refer to (pre-Israelite) Jerusalem. In the OT, only in Ps 76:2 is Salem equated with Zion, God's dwelling-place. In Gen 14:18 Melchizedek is described as a priest-king serving El Elyon (ll dyon, 'God Most High') who is stated to be the creator of heaven and earth. In Ps 110:4, me only other OT passage where his name occurs, Melchizedek is taken to be a precursor of the later priest-kings of Israel. The author of Gen 14 clearly intended the reader to identify El Elyon with YHWH as is the case with the titles El Olam ('el fdlam, 'the Everlasting God', 21:33), El Shaddai 'God Almighty', (el sadday, 17:1), etc. But in fact El was the high god of the Canaanite pantheon, who is not infrequently identified with YHWH in the OT, and Elyon sometimes occurs in the texts from Ugarit as an epithet of El. The phrase 'maker of heaven and earth' is virtually identical with what is said of El in those texts. In v. 22 El Elyon is specifically identified with YHWH in the solemn oath that Abraham swears to forgo his share of the spoils of victory.
(19:37—8). Continuity with the main plot is, however, maintained in the incident which determines Abraham's future area of residence well away from the corruption and temptations of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose evil inhabitants (v. 13) were later to suffer destruction at the hands of YHWH (v. 10). The final verses of ch. 13 revert to the principal theme of the promise.
In v. 2 Abraham's wealth is again stressed, though he continued to live an itinerant life. The quarrel between Abraham's and Lot's herdsmen (w. 5—7) is to be understood as due to inadequate living space for the herds in a land which was occupied by other, settled, peoples. (The identity of the Perizzites, v. 7, who are mentioned fairly frequently in Genesis, is uncertain.) Abraham's offer to settle the dispute, which was not of his making or of Lot's, by giving Lot the choice of territory is explained as due to a desire to preserve amicable relations with his kinsman (lit. brother), while Lot's disastrous choice is determined by the attraction of the fertility of the Jordan plain, which is compared to that of Egypt and of the garden of Eden. The passage ends with a more detailed reaffirmation of the promise to Abraham of numerous descendants and of the whole land, with the additional assurance that it will remain in their possession for ever (v. 15).
(14:1—24) This chapter is an unusual one in several respects. It is self-contained and appears to be unrelated to the surrounding chapters except for the names of Abraham and Lot and of Sodom and Gomorrah. The documentary critics with some exceptions were unable to connect it with any of their main sources (J, E, and P), and concluded that it is a quite independent episode. It is the only passage in which the otherwise entirely peaceable Abraham is represented as taking part in military activity. It begins in the style of a historical narrative; yet none of the nine kings mentioned (w. 1-2) has been identified, nor is any war such as is described here known to have occurred. It puts Abraham in a very good light both as an outstanding warrior who comes to the aid of members of his family, and as forgoing the spoils of war. Its purpose thus seems to have been to glorify Abraham as a great and powerful hero of international stature. It has been argued that it is not a single unitary composition; the Melchizedek episode (w. 18-20) has been thought by some scholars to be a later addition to the original story. There is no agreement about its date: while some believe that it is a reworking of old traditions, its heroic character and also perhaps its style may point to a post-exilic origin.
(15:1-21) There has been much scholarly discussion about the composition of this chapter. It has proved resistant to a division into sources along the lines of the Documentary Hypothesis, and attempts to demonstrate that a relatively short piece has been massively supplemented by a late hand have also failed to be entirely convincing. Some recent scholars have reverted to something like the pre-critical position that it is mainly or wholly the work of a single author. But all agree that it is in two parts: w. 1-6 and 7-21. Both contain further divine revelations to Abraham reiterating the earlier promises, but they differ considerably in the mode of revelation.
w. 1-6 are introduced in the same way as a prophetical oracle, but take the form of a vision—the word 'vision' (mahdzeh) is very rare and probably indicates a late date. The call not to be afraid is characteristic of Deutero-Isaiah (Isa 40—55). This is what is often called an 'oracle of salvation', and it sounds the note of encouragement. But it becomes clear that Abraham has begun to doubt whether God will carry out his promise to give him an heir of his body: he has been obliged to appoint his own servant Eleazar as his heir. YHWH reiterates his original promise and shows him the stars as a demonstration of how numerous his descendants will be. This direct vision of God convinces him: he believes, that is, trusts, God's word. The author's statement that YHWH 'reckoned it to
The peoples named in w. 5-6 are legendary groups who inhabited the Transjordan; the Valley of Siddim is unknown. The reference in v. 13 to Abraham as 'the Hebrew' conveys the impression that he has not been previously introduced to the
51 GENESIS
to both versions of the story is an indication that before the story was inserted into the Abraham narrative and placed in its two respective positions it was the figure of Hagar who was the centre of interest and the principal character. There is a somewhat similar story of acrimonious relations between a barren wife and her rival in i Sam 1:2—8.
him as righteousness', which forms the climax of the episode, has rightly been seen as one of the most significant in the whole of Scripture (see Gal 3:7—9; Jas 2:23; cf Heb 11:8-10) and has been taken, together with other instances of Abraham's faith, particularly his readiness to leave Haran and his willingness to sacrifice his son Isaac (ch. 22) as the foundation of the doctrine of justification by faith, even though its precise meaning has been disputed. That it is an expression of Abraham's readiness to trust God's promise cannot be doubted.
The practice alluded to in w. 2—3 was a common and accepted one in the ancient Near East; it is consequently not possible to fix the date of the story by reference to any particular extant Near-Eastern law or legal contract as has been proposed by some scholars. The words of the 'angel' (ma? ok) of YHWH who speaks to Hagar in 16:7 are identified with the words of YHWH himself in 16:13. Westermann's comment
w. 7—21, like i—6, are probably a creation of the author with no older tradition behind it. They are also concerned with the promise, but now specifically with the promise of the land rather than with the question of progeny. Like w. i—6, they present Abraham as hesitant to believe the promise and demanding to know how it is to be fulfilled. YHWH satisfies him by means of a solemn but curious ritual which Abraham is commanded to carry out. This ritual does not conform precisely with anything known from elsewhere, although the cutting of the animals into two is reminiscent of some covenant rituals. The animals specified are those used in sacrifice in the laws of the OT; but the purpose of the ritual is indicated by the solemn oath-like statement to Abraham by YHWH in w. 13-16 and his making of a covenant with him
(1985: 244) is apt: 'God is present not in the messenger, but in the message.' The promise that YHWH makes to Hagar in v. 10, which is curiously like that made elsewhere about Isaac, identifies Ishmael as the ancestor of the Ishmaelites, whose supposed characteristics are described in v. 12. There are two aetiologies in the later part of the narrative, but they are subordinate to the main theme of the story. First, the name Ishmael, who is to be preserved by YHWH's intervention (v. n), means 'God hears'. In the second aetiology the name El-rei (el ro't) (v. 13, probably 'God who sees me'), is stated in v. 14 to be the origin of the name of the—now unidentifiable— well where the angel spoke to Hagar. The aetiology, like others in Genesis, is not exact, as it is Hagar who 'sees' God, and not vice versa.
(w. 18-21). Its awesome accompaniments—the 'deep sleep' (tardcma, a rare word also used of Adam when Eve was created) and the terrifying darkness—add to the solemnity of the event. The smoking fire pot and the flaming torch (v. 17) represent YHWH's passing between the rows of animals to symbolize his binding himself to keep the covenant, w. 13—16 are a 'prophecy after the event' foretelling the captivity in Egypt and the Exodus; its purpose is to account for the long gap between promise and fulfilment. The 400 years of v. 13 and the 'fourth generation' of v. 16 can hardly be reconciled; it has been suggested that v. 16, which foreshadows the Israelites' conquest of the Amorites (Canaanites), is a later revision of the prophecy. The Amorites are said not to be sufficiently wicked as yet to deserve this fate. The promise of w. 18—21, which contains a comprehensive list of the peoples believed to have preceded Israel in the land, describes the boundaries of the land in very grand terms—from the borders of Egypt to the Euphrates. In fact the borders of the state of Israel were probably never as extensive (i Kings 4:21 is hardly a sober historical statement). The covenant with Abraham (v. 18), who here represents the future nation of Israel, is a free, unconditional promise, unlike the covenant of Sinai.
(17:1-27) This chapter is primarily concerned with the covenant (berit) which God undertakes to make with Abraham— the word bent occurs 13 times in the chapter. It reiterates the promises of progeny, of future greatness for Abraham's descendants, and of the gift of the land; but it contains several new and significant features. In v. i YHWH introduces himself as El Shaddai ('God Almighty'): the author supposes that at this time Abraham did not know YHWH by name. The name Shaddai, the meaning of which is uncertain (it may mean 'the one of the mountain' or 'the one of the field') was probably used as a divine epithet from an early period. This incident is regarded as opening a new stage in the life of Abraham: this is why he now receives a new name (v. 5). (So also with Sarah, v. 15.) Abraham is to be the father of not one but many nations, including that of the Ishmaelites; but the covenant is clearly for Israel alone, and will be for ever. It is to Israel that the land of Canaan is to be given 'for a perpetual holding' (v. 8) and YHWH will be their God. But the covenant is now to be two-sided: Abraham and his descendants must keep it by obeying God's command to practise circumcision, a rite not practised by the peoples of Mesopotamia from which Abraham has come. There is now for the first time in the Abraham story a warning against the breach of the covenant, which will entail exclusion from its privileges and from the new special relationship with God; this could be a warning to Jews of the immediate post-exilic community who were tempted to abandon their Jewish identity. The concept of the crucial importance of circumcision was a particular characteristic of the post-exilic period.
(16:1-16) Like the stories in chs. 12, 20, and 26 (see above on 12:10—20), the story of Hagar in this chapter has a counterpart (21:9—21). These are clearly variants of an older folk-tale; and once again their placement in the ongoing story of Abraham is significant. Both are further examples of the threat to the fulfilment of the promise that Abraham will have a legitimate heir by his wife Sarah and of the setting aside of that threat (cf. 15:2-4). Ch. 16 immediately precedes the repetition of the promise guaranteeing Abraham's progeny and their destiny (17:1-8); 21:9-21 immediately follows the birth of Isaac (21:18) and confirms that it is he who is to be the heir. But the motif of God's protection of the rejected Ishmael which is common
Two further additional features of the chapter are the personal promise to Sarah (w. 15—19) with the precise announcement of the time when her son will be born (v. 21) and the
GENESIS 52
deal justly (v. 25)! His rebuke is reminiscent of the passionate speeches of Job. Equally remarkable is YHWH's readiness to listen to the rebuke and even to modify his intention. The precise accusation which Abraham makes is that in proposing to destroy the whole population of Sodom and Gomorrah YHWH intends to treat the righteous in the same way as the wicked (v. 25). He extracts from YHWH a promise that he wi not do so (v. 26). The point appears to be not that YHWH fell short of his true nature but rather that he is shown to be a just God after all! There is no particular significance in the diminishing numbers of righteous persons for whose sake he will not destroy Sodom (w. 28-32). The principle of justice towards individuals as against indiscriminate collective punishment has been established.
blessing of Ishmael (v. 20). Abraham's sceptical laughter at the announcement that Sarah will give birth combined with his deep obeisance (cf. Sarah's laughter on a parallel occasion, 18:12) is strange; but there is here a play on the name Isaac (yishaq, that is, 'he laughs', possibly an abbreviated form of yishaq-'el, 'God laughs'). Abraham's wish that Ishmael should be preserved under God's protection (v. 18) shows that he still places his hopes in Ishmael. God grants his wish, conferring a special blessing on Ishmael, but excludes him from the covenant that is for Isaac and his descendants. The chapter concludes with a notice that Abraham duly carried out God's commands about circumcision, which was performed on all Abraham's household (including Ishmael) as prescribed in later legislation (Ex 12:48).
(18:1—16) The motif of the appearance to human beings of gods in human disguise is a common mythological theme of the ancient world. A Greek myth, preserved by the Roman poet Ovid, tells of such a visit in which a miraculous birth is announced; there is a similar story in Judg 6:11—24. Gen 18:1, 13 make it clear that, although Abraham and Sarah are unaware of this, the three mysterious visitors (or one of them ?) are in fact YHWH himself. This passage is thus another version of ch. 17, but expressed in a quite different, more circumstantial style, with a precise note of time and place. Abraham's treatment of the strangers is an example of the traditional customs of hospitality observed by tent-dwellers. The laughter of Sarah, like that of Abraham in 17:17, involves a play on words and is an expression of unbelief about the news that the visitors have brought. Sarah is firmly reminded that God has unlimited power and can bring about the impossible. Her denial that she laughed (v. 15) is caused by fear: she now dimly recognizes the identity of the speaker. The reference to Sodom in v. 16 introduces the theme that follows in the second half of the chapter and ch. 19. The passage is an admirable example of the high quality of Hebrew narrative art at its best.
(19:1-29) This story is an episode in the life of Lot, who had chosen to live in the plain of Jordan, whose principal cities (unknown to archaeology) were Sodom and Gomorrah in the vicinity of the Dead Sea (13:10-13). But it is now also connected with ch. 18: the 'men' who visited Abraham (18:2) departed towards Sodom with the exception of YHWH himself, who remained to talk to Abraham (18:22). In v. i the other two, now called 'angels' or 'messengers' (mal'aktm), who are clearly supernatural beings (v. n), arrive in Sodom, presumably to investigate the reported wickedness of the inhabitants (it appears to be assumed that there are no righteous persons among them), where they find Lot sitting in the city gate. It is to be noted that there is no mention at all of Abraham in the main story: he appears only after the event (v. 27) and looks down on the catastrophe in the valley below. His absence may suggest that this was originally a story about an unnamed man (now identified with Abraham's nephew Lot) and the destruction of a city, which the author has incorporated into the story of Abraham. The reason for its inclusion is not obvious; however, it illustrates the consequences of grave sin against which Abraham has been warned. It should further be noted that the main story recounts only the fate of Sodom: Gomorrah is not mentioned until v. 24. But the two cities are regularly mentioned together in a number of passages elsewhere in the OTas examples of exemplary sin and consequent annihilation (e.g. Deut 29:22-4; 32:32; Isa 1:9-10; Jer 23:14).
(18:17-33) Tlris passage is not based on an older folk-tale but is a discussion of a theological question of the utmost importance, that the author has himself composed in the form of a dialogue. The question, which is about God's justice (v. 25), was not, for the readers, a purely theoretical one, but one of immense practical importance, especially for those who had suffered, and were still suffering, the effects of the devastation of the Babylonian conquest of Judah in 587 BCE. It is raised in various forms in other OT books of a relatively late period, e.g. in Job, and Ezek 14:12—23. The fate of Sodom is here a paradigm of this much wider question.
It is strongly stressed in 19:4 that every male individual was involved in the homosexual attack intended against the two angels. This is no doubt to be seen as a justification of the subsequent annihilation of the whole populace; but the omission of any reference to the women of the city (or to the children) reflects at least a residuary notion of communal rather than of individual guilt. Lot's offer of his daughters (v. 8) also reflects a moral code, repulsive to the modern reader, which put the duty of hospitality above other ethical concerns, w. 24, 28 attempt to describe the nature of the catastrophe that overwhelmed Sodom. That it was an earthquake that caused the release of combustible gases is a plausible guess; but—apart from the fact that no historical basis can be found for the story—it is not possible to be sure what the author had in mind. The city of Zoar (so'ar) to which Lot was allowed to flee (w. 18-23) actually existed in OT times (Isa 15:5; Jer 48:34). Like Sodom and Gomorrah, it lay in the valley, but was counted as belonging to Moab. Its name is here stated to be derived from a verb sa'ar meaning to be small or insignificant;
The passage is remarkable in more than one respect. It begins (w. 17-21) with the author's notion of YHWH's private thoughts: YHWH comes to a decision to inform Abraham of his intention—if the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah prove to be as wicked as they have been reported to be—to destroy them, so that Abraham, whom he has chosen, may not imitate their wickedness and so prove unworthy of the promise (cf. 17:1—2, where Abraham's righteousness appears to have been made a condition of the making of the covenant with him). A second outstanding feature of the passage is Abraham's boldness in rebuking YHWH: although he frquently shows awareness of his temerity (w. 27, 30, 31, 32), he dares to remind YHWH of his duty, as universal judge, to
53 G E N E S I S
and 18:12). The circumcision of Isaac (v. 4) is in accordance with the command in 17:12. Abraham's reactions to Sarah's demand (w. 10-11) are more forthright than in 16:5-6, but he gives way when God intervenes. Hagar's distress in w. 15-16 is depicted with psychological sensitivity. God's reaction to her distress illustrates his compassion (w. 17—20). Finally when he grows up under God's protection I shmael goes to live in the wilderness of Paran near the border of Egypt where he becomes the ancestor of the Ishmaelites.
Lot calls it 'a little one' (mis'ar). The point of this conclusion to the story is to emphasize that it is Lot who is the central character and to present God's merciful nature towards those of whom he approves (19:29) as well as his punitive side. The incident of the fate of Lot's disobedient wife (v. 26) may be an aetiology based on a rock formation that existed in later times.
(19:30—8) These verses mark the conclusion of the story of Lot, who now disappears from Genesis. This is a story of double incest involving father and daughters; but no moral judgement is made or implied. The information that the children born of the incestuous union became the ancestors of the Moabite and Ammonite peoples is probably a secondary feature of the story rather than its main point. It is presupposed (v. 31) that the male population of the region has entirely perished in the catastrophe which befell Sodom; the observation that Lot is old cannot, in the context, mean that he is too old to father children; it probably means that he will not marry again and so have legitimate children. This is a situation in which the need to perpetuate the race is paramount, and sanctions desperate remedies. Like Noah (9:21), Lot is unaware, in his drunkenness, of what is happening. (20:1-18) This story is a variant of 12:10-20 and 26:1-11 (see at 12:10—20 above). Its position immediately before the notice of the conception and birth of Isaac, which at last fulfilled YHWH's promise, is an example of dramatic irony: the reader is made to feel the danger of the situation. The relationship between the three variants is disputed. This version is fuller than 12:10—20, and there are a number of differences of detail. The scene is set not in Egypt but in Gerar, near Gaza (already mentioned in 10:19), and the king is Abimelech—a Canaanite name. Abraham's residence in Gerar is not due to a famine. The main variant detail is Abimelech's dream in which God speaks to him. God exonerates Abimelech as he has acted in ignorance of Sarah's status as Abraham's wife. An additional detail is Abraham's excuse, made on the specious grounds that Sarah is his half-sister as well as his wife (not previously mentioned!), together with his claim to know that the most basic moral standards are not observed in Gerar (w. 11-12). Also, instead of the plagues inflicted on Pharaoh (12:17)we are told that YHWH had made Abimelech's wives unable to bear children during Sarah's residence in his harem; and we are explicitly told that Abimelech did not have sexual relations with her. Like Pharaoh in 12:16, Abimelech behaves with great generosity to Abraham, while Abraham, though he is said by God to be a 'prophet' (v. 7) and bidden to pray for Abimelech, is portrayed as a guilty man. Nevertheless (21:1) God does not abrogate his promise.
(21:22—34) Thgse verses presuppose ch. 20, but are not closely related to it. They are concerned to enhance Abraham's status: although he remains an alien (v. 34) he is recognized b Abimelech as especially protected and favoured by God; he is thus treated by a king, who commands an army, as an equal. In w. 22-4 Abimelech thinks it important to safeguard himself by obtaining from him an oath that he will remain his ally (the phrase is fdsd hesed) and that this alliance will continue in future generations. The second incident is quite different: Abraham becomes involved in a dispute with Abimelech over the possession of a well (w. 25-32). The dispute is settled in Abraham's favour with the offering of seven lambs and the making of a treaty of friendship (berit, v. 32). There are two different aetiologies of the name Beersheba here: it is the place of the well (be'lr) of the oath (sebu'd) but also of seven (sebaf). The tree planted by Abraham marked the spot where the covenant was made. The 'Everlasting God' ('el 'oldm) worshipped by Abraham here, and implicitly identified with YHWH, was probably originally a local deity associated with Beersheba. The 'land of the Philistines' is an anachronism: the Philistines in fact arrived in Canaan and established their cities there near the Mediterranean coast during the twelfth century BCE and cannot have been known to Abraham. Abimelech has a Semitic name, and so was evidently a local Canaanite ruler, not a Philistine.
(22:1-19) Tlus story is one of the most brilliantly told narratives in the book. It has generated an immense quantity of interpretative comment beginning in early times with Heb 11:17 and Jas 2:21 and continuing up to the present, and many works of art. It is widely agreed that no one interpretation is entirely adequate (see von Rad 1972: 243—5). Its psychological sensitivity and stylistic skill in portraying the distress of Abraham when commanded by God to kill his beloved son and heir are unequalled. It may be that somewhere in its background lies a story about human sacrifice, specifically the sacrifice of the firstborn; but there is no indication at all that that practice, which was not only forbidden but regarded with horror in Israel, was in the mind of the author of the present story. The statement in the opening verse that God's purpose in demanding Isaac's death was to test Abraham's obedience—to see whether he 'feared God' (v. 12)—is an accurate summary of the plot. Abraham was forced to choose between obedience to an incomprehensible and abhorrent command and his love for his child (v. 2). There is a terrible dramatic irony here: God did not intend that his command should be carried out; but Abraham had no means of knowing that. He passed the test. On a different level, this is yet another example of the theme of the endangerment of God's promise: with Isaac's birth the promise of an heir has apparently been miraculously fulfilled; but now the very life of that heir is—
(21:1—21) This story, although it begins with the birth of Isaac, is really about Abraham's two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. w. 8— 21 are a variant of the earlier story of the banishment of Hagar and Ishmael because of Sarah's jealousy (ch. 16). While it is emphasized that it is Isaac who is Abraham's promised heir, the author stresses God's concern for Ishmael, contrasting it with the harsh attitude and action of Sarah. According to the chronology given in 16:16 and v. 5, Ishmael would have been about 14 years old when Isaac was born, yet the story used here by the narrator assumes that he was a small child whom his mother put on her shoulder and carried away (v. 14). In v. 6 there is yet another explanation of the name Isaac (see on 17:17
GENESIS 54
short story (in the modern sense of that term). It is divided into distinct scenes, and is told with great sensitivity and with acute psychological insight. An unusual feature is the extent to which dialogue is used to portray character and to move the action along: more than half the verses consist of or contain reported speech. Apart from its intrinsic interest as literature, the story marks a new and positive stage in the theme of the promise: Abraham's heir has not only survived; he is now provided with an eminently suitable wife, who is destined in turn to produce an heir, the inheritor of the promise in the third generation. The narrative speaks of the continued guidance of God at every stage.
as far as the reader knows—to be prematurely brought to an end.
The location of the land of Moriah' is unknown. A later tradition identified Moriah with the mountain on which Solomon later built the Jerusalem temple (2 Chr 3:1); but there is no indication in the text of Gen 22 that this is what the author had in mind. Every particular of the journey and of the preparations for the sacrifice (w. 3-9) is meticulously recorded in order to retard the pace of the action and so increase the tension to an almost unbearable degree; it reaches its greatest intensity with 22:10 and is then suddenly released in v. n. Abraham's reply to Isaac's question (w. 7, 8) is understandably evasive, but he speaks more than he knows. The angel of YHWH is here clearly identified with YHWH himself. The name given to the place by Abraham (YHWH yir'eh, 'Yahweh provides'—lit. sees, or looks out) echoes his reply to Isaac in 22:8; it expresses his joy that YHWH has now done so in a miraculous way. The note in v. 14/7 is a later addition to the story, perhaps linking the place with Jerusalem, w. 15—18 are also probably an addition to the story: by its repetition of the promise of blessing this makes explicit its place in the wider context of Abraham's life—by his obedience Abraham has confirmed that he is worthy of the blessing.
Abraham, who is evidently too old to undertake a long journey (but note his second marriage in 25:1!), sends his trusted and confidential servant or steward, whom he has entrusted with all his possessions, to seek a wife for Isaac from among those of his kindred who have remained in Mesopotamia (Aram-naharaim, lit. Aram of the two rivers): marriage with an alien Canaanite is ruled out as unthinkable, and it is equally out of the question that Isaac should return to fetch his bride from the country from which his father had departed at God's command. If the girl chosen should refuse the match, the messenger is to return alone to Abraham.
The rite of touching the genitals of the other party while swearing an oath, mentioned in the OTonly here (w. 2, 9) and Gen 47:29, is attested in a Babylonian document and is also known from Arabic usage (TWATy, 984). Its significance is not clear; but it may be related to the more common practice of swearing by a person's life. The messenger sets out with an impressive retinue and carries valuable gifts appropriate to his master's great wealth and high status (v. 10). On arrival at his destination he takes no action but kneels down at a well that he knows will be frequented by the young girls of the town when they come to draw water, and prays that YHWH will signify his choice of a bride for Isaac in a particular way
(22:20—4) This genealogy defines Abraham's kinship with the Arameans (Aram) and points forward to Isaac's marriage with Rebekah (ch. 24).
(23:1-20) Full possession of the land of Canaan was a crucial matter for a people that had lost it with the Babylonian conquest in the sixth century BCE and were, even under the milder policy of the Persian empire, like Abraham, only 'strangers and aliens' (v. 4) in it, subject to foreign rule. Abraham's legal purchase from the 'Hittite'—that is, Canaanite—owner of a single field containing the cave where he could bury Sarah (w. 17, 20) was a hopeful sign to these readers, even though it was no more than symbolic—the first fruits, as it were, of the promise that Abraham's descendants would possess the whole land.
(w. 13-14); he is miraculously rewarded when the first girl who comes to draw water proves to be not only beautiful, a virgin, and of a kindly disposition but also Abraham's own niece, so confirming that YHWH has made his mission unexpectedly and completely successful (w. 15-27; cf 11:29; 22:22, 23). The reason why it is Rebekah's brother Laban rather than her father who plays the principal role in the remainder of the story (from v. 29) is not clear, though he is to be a principal character in later chapters (29-31). The reference to Rebekah's mother's house rather than that of her father (v. 28) might lead the reader to suppose that her father Bethuel was dead; but he appears in a minor role in v. 50.
The name Kiriath-arba, here identified with Hebron (v. 2), means 'city of four'—probably referring to its consisting of four districts or 'quarters' or to its position at the intersection of four roads. The name 'Hittite' here and elsewhere in the Pentateuch does not designate the great Hittite empire of Asia Minor, long extinct when this chapter was written, but is used as a general designation of the Canaanites. Abraham, having no settled home, is obliged to seek a place of burial for Sarah from the local inhabitants. The cave in question belongs to one Ephron (v. 8); but the decision to convey it to Abraham's use evidently rests with the people of Hebron as a whole—the 'people of the land' (w. 10—13). The negotiation is carried on with great courtesy; it is a legal transaction, and the terminology resembles that used in extant neo-Babylonian legal contracts. Abraham, who is regarded by the Hebronites as a 'mighty prince' (v. 6), is first offered a choice of burial places, but not legal ownership. He insists that the latter is what he seeks; and he finally succeeds in buying the entire field, though at what is known to have been a very high price (v. 15).
Although it is not specifically stated that Rebekah's consent to the marriage was sought, this seems to be implied in her acceptance of the valuable jewellery and the ring (v. 22) and by her running home to tell the news (v. 28). It is also strongly implied by the fact that, when consulted, she agreed to leave her family immediately and accompany the servant home to meet her designated husband (v. 58). There is some difficulty about the Hebrew text of v. 62 and about Isaac's place of residence. According to 25:20 Isaac was 40 years old when he married, and had a separate establishment. The absence of any reference to Abraham in the last part of the story is strange: one would have expected that the servant would
(24:1—67) This is by far the longest story in this part of the book, and has with some justification been called a novella, or
55 G E N E S I S
have first conducted Rebekah to Abraham and have made his report to him. The story concludes with the rare statement that Isaac loved his wife, paralleled in Genesis only by the love of Jacob for Rachel (29:18) and of Shechem the Hivite for Dinah (34:3). (25:1-18) With these verses the story of Abraham comes to an end. They are a somewhat miscellaneous collection consisting mainly of genealogies but including a brief statement of Abraham's death and burial (w. 7-10). They contain no real continuous narrative. The point of the genealogies is to continue the theme of Abraham as the 'father of many nations'
womb (v. 26) and another on Esau, the ancestor of the Edomites (v. 30; 36:1) who 'came out red' ('admoni) from the womb. There is yet another pun on the name Edom in the second story, where Esau calls the dish that Jacob has prepared 'that red stuff ('adorn, v. 30). The two brothers are also caricatured as two contrasting types: the ruddy, hairy hunter
(w. 25, 27) who is an easy prey to the cunning 'quiet man' who stays at home (v. 27; Jacob is later to become a shepherd, ch. 29). w. 27-34 especially have been seen as based on an earlier civilization story which reflected problems that arose when the sedentary way of life began to supersede the hunting stage
(see Westermann 1985: 414-15). The motif is of crucial importance later in ch. 27; but the point of the present story is to show that E sau already forfeited the privileges of the elder son.
(cf 17:5, 20; 21:13). These lists contain the names of several nations and tribes known from elsewhere, notably Midian (v. i) andtheIshmaelites(w.i2-i6).ThenoteaboutAbraham's life in v. 8 reflects the Israelite attitude towards both life and death. Death was not regarded as tragic if it closed a long and fulfilled, honourable life. The statement that Abraham was 'gathered to his people' (v. 8) obviously does not mean that his body was placed in an ancestral tomb, since only Sarah had yet been buried in the cave of Machpelah (v. 10): it was a conventional expression testifying a strong sense of family solidarity.
(26:1—35) This chapter is given a unity by the theme of Isaac's relations with Abimelech the 'Philistine' (i.e. Canaanite) king of Gerar. w. 6-n are a variant of 12:10-20 and 20:1-18 (on which see the commentary above), the main difference from both the other stories being that it concerns Isaac and Rebekah, not Abraham and Sarah. It contains motifs from both the other versions; and it is commonly held that its author was familiar with, and intended to make certain changes with regard to, both. In particular, the lie told by Isaac (v. 7) is the same as that told by Abraham in the other two versions, but the consequences are less critical, since Rebekah is not taken into the royal harem, w. 1-5 introduce the story by accounting for Isaac's move to Gerar. It includes an appearance to Isaac by YHWH in which he repeats the promise of the land and of numerous progeny but couples it with an injunction not to depart from Canaan as Abraham had done in similar circumstances (12:10).
The Story of Jacob (25 .'19-3 7:2)
Of the three 'patriarchs'Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob only Isaac lacks a really independent story. Although as Abraham's heir and Jacob's father he obviously holds an essential place in the family history and is in his turn the recipient of the promise of blessing and of numerous descendants 'for Abraham's sake'
(26:3—5,23~5)> he is the principal character in only one chapter (26). It must be presumed that the author or editor of the book did not possess a wealth of narrative material about Isaac as he did about Abraham and Jacob. A large part of the story of Jacob is concerned with the relations between Jacob and his elder brother Esau. God's choice of Jacob rather than Esau as the heir and recipient of the promise recounted in these chapters introduces a new major theme: God in his sovereignty is not bound by the 'natural' or legal principle of inheritance by primogeniture but inscrutably singles out younger sons to carry out his purpose (cf. the choice of David as king of Israel, i Sam 16:1-13). So not Ishmael but Isaac is chosen, and not Esau but Jacob; and, of Jacob's twelve sons, it is his eleventh son Joseph who is chosen to rule over his brothers (Gen 37:5— n) and to preserve the lives of the embryo people of Israel (Gen 45:5; 50:20). Similarly Ephraim is given precedence over his elder brother Manasseh (Gen 48:8—20).
In w. 12—33 the motif of the dispute with the Canaanites of Gerar over the ownership of the wells that were essential to life and livelihood (21:25-34) recurs. But Isaac, who was the first of the patriarchal family to grow crops (v. 12) as well as owning flocks and herds (v. 14) and who had become wealthy even beyond the wealth accumulated by his father, had aroused the envy of the 'Philistines' (w. 12-14) wh° were making life difficult for him. However, this series of incidents ends with the making of a treaty of peace between Isaac and Abimelech, in which Isaac is credited with taking the initiative (w. 26-31). The aetiologies of the names of the wells (v. Ezek 20, 'contention'; Sitnah, v. 21, 'quarrel, accusation'; Rehoboth, v. 22, 'broad space') probably come from ancient local traditions. The naming of Shibah (v. 33) is attributed, as is Beersheba in 21:31, to an oath, this time between Isaac and Abimelech (v. 31).
(25:19—34) In w. 19—20, which introduce the stories about Isaac's children, the author has inserted a short notice which repeats what the reader already knows, adding the information that Isaac was 40 years old when he married. But the chronology in this chapter is somewhat confused. If Isaac was 60 when Rebekah bore his first children (v. 26), Abraham, who was 175 when he died (25:7), would still have fifteen years to live, since he was 100 when Isaac was born (21:5)! The two stories about the birth of Esau and Jacob (w. 21—6) and the birthright (25:27—34) both point forward to the later antagonism between the two and to the precedence of Jacob over his brother. The former story, which begins with YHWH's decree that the elder is to serve the younger, contains a pun on the name Jacob (ya'aqob) who grasped the heel ('aqeb) in the
The Adventures of Jacob (chs. 27-33)
At one level this is a story of withdrawal and return, a familiar folk-tale motif. It is also a story of hatred between brothers followed by eventual reconciliation; but in the context of the book as a whole it is a continuation of the history of the promise made to the patriarchs. Although Esau has his reward in the end in terms of material wealth (33:9—11), it is made clear that he was deprived not only of his birthright but also of the blessing (27:36). He is to be the ancestor of the Edomites and not of Israel, and accordingly establishes his residence in the region of Seir, later to be part of Edom (32:3; 33:14, 16; cf. 36:9). Later events are clearly reflected here.
GENESIS 56
tamia is called Aram-naharaim in 24:10. w. 6—9 relate how Esau also conformed to Isaac's wish in that he now married a relation in addition to his previous Canaanite wives.
Isaac's blessing of Jacob (27:27-9) and his lesser 'blessing' of Esau (27:39—40) reflect the history of the later relations between the state of Israel and Edom: Israel will rule over Edom, but eventually Edom will 'break his yoke' and achieve its independence (cf. 2 Sam 8:14; i Kings 11:14; 2 Chr 21:8-10). This account of Jacob's adventures is not made of whole cloth: it has incorporated many elements which the final author/ editor has combined. In particular, one major section, ch. 2931, which describes Jacob's extended residence in the house of his uncle Laban, originally belonged to a quite distinct tradition about the relations between two peoples: Israel and the Arameans.
(28:10—22) On his way to Laban, whose home is now specified (as in 27:43) as the city of Haran, Jacob rests for the night at an unnamed place (v. n) and takes a large stone there as a pillow. He has a dream in which he sees a ladder (probably rather a ramp) stretching from earth to heaven on which God's angels—that is, heavenly messengers—are passing up and down to perform tasks assigned to them by God. He recognizes the ladder as 'the gate of heaven' (v. 17), that is, as the means of communication between God in his dwelling in heaven and his manifestations to human beings on earth; and so concludes with awe that the place where he is resting must therefore be 'the house of God', that is, a place where God manifests himself on earth. The imagery of the dream corresponds to Babylonian religious beliefs as expressed in their structures known as ziggurats. In the dream Jacob becomes aware that God is indeed communicating with him: God repeats to him the promise of the land of Canaan, in which he is now resting, and of numerous progeny, and adds a further promise that he will guide and protect him on his journey and wherever he may go (w. 13—15).
(27:1-46) This chapter is another example of narrative skill. It is structured in a number of distinct scenes, in each of which, as in folk-tales, only two characters appear: Isaac and Esau in w. 1—4, Jacob and Rebekah in w. 5—17, Jacob and Isaac in w. 18—29, Esau and Isaac in w. 30—40, Esau alone in v. 41, Rebekah and Jacob in w. 42-5, Rebekah and Isaac, v. 46. The theme is Jacob's trickery by which he obtains the paternal blessing that would normally be given to the elder son and the consequent implacable hatred of Esau for his brother which makes it necessary for Jacob to leave home and set out on his travels. One of the most remarkable features of the story is the portrayal of Rebekah, who plays a crucial role in the story and whose personality is thus displayed in marked contrast to the passivity of Sarah in the previous chapters (but we may compare the enterprising action of Rachel in 31:34-5). Despite Jacob's disgraceful behaviour in deceiving his aged and blind father, the story is presented in a way that arouses the reader's sympathy for such a rogue, though the depiction of Esau's distress (w. 34-8) is intended to elicit some sympathy for him as well. There is also a humorous quality in the tale that should not be missed. The predominance of dialogue helps to give the narrative a particularly lively character. The fact that the action takes place entirely on the human plane, with no mention of God (except for his invocation in Isaac's blessing, v. 28, and Jacob's lying assertion in v. 20) sets the chapter, together with 25:27-34, apart from the surrounding chapters in which the hand of God is prominent.
It is generally agreed that this passage has undergone several accretions, but there is no consensus about the details. Jacob names the place Bethel (lit., 'house of God'), thus naming a place which was later to be one of Israel's most important sanctuaries. The story is thus to be seen as the origin story of the sanctuary of Bethel and will have been used from ancient times by the worshippers at that sanctuary. Its importance to later generations accounts for the fact that it later came to be embellished in various ways (for a recent study of its redactional history which understands it without ascribing it to an interweaving of two major written sources see Rendtorff 1982: 511—23). The stone used by Jacob as a pillow (v. n), which he erected as a pillar and consecrated with oil (v. 18), marked the site as a holy place where God had revealed himself and so might be expected to do so again—that is, as a sanctuary. Such a pillar (masseba) might be no more than a memorial stone or marker, e.g. of a frontier (31:51); but it was often a feature of sanctuaries both Canaanite and Israelite, though later condemned in Israel (e.g. Lev 26:1). In his concluding vow (w. 20—2) Jacob acutely translates God's promise of guidance into concrete, down-to-earth terms, and in turn promises to worship YHWH as his God. He also undertakes to pay a tithe of future produce, in anticipation of the cult that will be established at Bethel. He is clearly speaking as a representative of a future Israel and as the founder of the Bethel sanctuary.
It is noteworthy that it is Rebekah, who evidently loves her 'smooth' son Jacob more than the uncouth, hairy Esau (v. n) and is even prepared to risk her husband's curse, who proposes the deception; but Jacob, in agreeing to her proposal, is equally guilty. The story turns on the belief that blessings and curses possess objective power and cannot be taken back (v. 33). In v. 36 Jacob's name is once more (cf. 25:26) associated with the root '-q-b, here in a verbal form and interpreted as 'supplant'. It is again Rebekah who takes the initiative, overhearing Esau's intention to kill Jacob and warning him to flee to Haran to his uncle Laban (w. 43-5). The chapter ends with her fear that Jacob may marry a 'Hittite' (cf. 26:34-5)—an
(29:1—30) This chapter begins the story of Jacob and Laban which continues to the end of ch. 31. It is set in foreign territory, outside Canaan. As yet another story about an encounter at a well that ends with marriage of the heir to the promise to a member (here two members!) of his Aramean kindred, it has many affinities with ch. 24; but there are significant differences. There is again the apparently fortuitous meeting with the Aramean kindred; but, unlike Isaac, who was forbidden to leave Canaan to seek his wife, Jacob makes precisely that journey. He travels to 'the land of the people of the east' (a rather vague term denoting the land to
echo of the theme of 24:3—4.
(28:1—9) A different account of the circumstances of Jacob's departure to Laban is given in w. 1—5 from that given in ch. 27. Here his father sends him off so that he may marry a girl from his own family as Isaac himself had done, and Isaac prays that he will inherit the promise once given to Abraham. Laban's home is now given as Paddan-aram, which may mean 'country of Aram' (so also in 25:20). This region of north Mesopo-
57 GENESIS
unable to bear children (29:31—2), is found also in the story of the birth of Samuel (i Sam i),butwith significant differences. In both cases the childless wife is enabled to bear a son through divine intervention; but here this happens to the 'hated' wife (i.e. the one who is unwanted by her husband) whereas in i Sam i it happens to the one who is especially beloved; here too God takes the initiative rather than acting in response to prayer as in the case of Hannah. There are other OT parallels to God's initiative in such cases: not only in the case of Sarah but also in the story of the birth of Samson (Judg 13). All these stories differ considerably in detail; but behind them lies the conviction that God alone bestows or withholds life. 30:1-7 is another example ofthe custom of surrogate birth earlier practised by Sarah (so also 30:9—11). The 'birth on the knees' of Rachel (30:3) is a rite which ensures that the child born is to be regarded as Rachel's own. 30:14-18 reflects an ancient belief that the fruit ofthe mandrake plant has aphrodisiac properties, although the birth of Issachar is attributed to divine operation.
the east of Canaan, but here including the more northern territory in the vicinity of Haran); but he does not go specifically to seek a wife, and does not at first realize where he is. Further, in contrast to the religious atmosphere of 28:10-22 and with the pious mission of Abraham's servant in ch. 24, this is a purely secular story in which God does not appear, although no doubt he is invisibly present in the background in the mind of the final editor.
w. 1-14 are an idyllic tale that gives no hint of troubles to come. Jacob is presented as the mighty hero who is able alone to move the stone, which normally required several men to move it, from the mouth of the well to enable the flocks to be watered (cf. 28:18, where also he moves a massive stone); and he does this on perceiving the arrival of Rachel. The kiss which he gives her is no doubt a cousinly kiss (v. n; cf. v. 13); but his weeping (for joy) surely speaks of love at first sight. The continuation of the story in w. 15-30, however, already introduces the reader to the calculating character of Laban, who succeeds in employing Jacob for fourteen years without wages and in tricking him into marrying the unwanted Leah. There are two further motifs in this story: Jacob's marriages are a further example of the younger being preferred to the elder; and, in view of Jacob's earlier behaviour (25:27—34; 27), w. 21-30 may be seen as an example of the motif of the deceiver deceived. Jacob's love for Rachel is again emphasized in w. 20 and 30. In w. 24 and 29 Laban's assignment of the two maids Zilpah and Bilhah respectively to serve Leah and Rachel prepares the reader for the accounts of the birth of Jacob's twelve sons, who are to be the ancestors of the twelve tribes of Israel.
(30:25—43) The details of this story are not clear, and have puzzled the commentators. There are strange contradictions, no doubt due to glossators who themselves did not fully grasp what was happening but attempted to set matters right. The thrust of the story, however, is sufficiently plain. This is a battle of wits between Jacob and Laban from which Jacob emerges victorious. Jacob, who has suffered before from Laban's trickery, repays it in kind. The story begins with an abrupt request by Jacob to Laban for his release from his servitude which puts Laban in an embarrassing situation. Jacob points out that Laban has greatly benefited from his service, but now requests to be allowed to return to his homeland accompanied by his wives and children, who are of course Laban's own daughters and grandchildren (v. 26). This request may not have been within Jacob's rights: Ex 21:2—4 does not permit a freed slave to take his family with him; but Jacob's status is not clear (cf. Laban's action in ch. 31). Laban recognizes the value of Jacob's service to him, and adopts a conciliatory tone. He admits that his prosperity is due to Jacob, perhaps claiming that he has learned by divination (the meaning of this word is uncertain) that this is due to YHWH's having blessed Jacob (v. 27), but complains that the loss of Jacob may damage his own economic status. He makes an offer to reward Jacob, who replies that he is not asking for a reward, but then inconsistently requests to be allowed to keep some of Laban's flocks. He proposes (v. 32) that he should be given those animals that are particoloured (a rarity among sheep and goats) and promises to carry out this operation honestly. Laban pretends to agree, but then himself deceitfully separates the particoloured animals from the rest, and sends them away with his sons to be kept at a distance (w. 35-6).
(29:31-30:24) This section consists mainly of a miscellaneous collection of notices of the births of Jacob's first eleven sons (and one daughter, Dinah), whose names are those of later Israelite tribes. The reasons given for their names, which all refer to the circumstances of the mothers (unlike the tribal blessings in ch. 49) are quite fanciful and hardly genuine popular etymologies. The words attributed to the mothers in naming their sons have been made to fit the names; but they do not fit very well. In some cases they involve the use of very rare words. The name Reuben (re'uben) would naturally be taken to mean 'Behold a son' (29:32), but has been connected with 'oni, 'affliction'. Simeon (29:33) is more reasonably connected with sama', 'to hear'. Levi (29:34) is supposedly derived from Idwd, 'to join'. Judah (29:35) has been associated with the mother's exclamation 'odeh, T will praise'; Dan (30:6) with the verb din, 'to give judgement'; Naphtali (30:8) with a rare verb pdtal, possibly meaning 'to twist', here interpreted as 'wrestle'.
Gad (30:11) is the name of a god of good fortune; Asher (30:13) is explained as related to 'isser, 'to pronounce happy'; Issachar (30:18) as connected with sdkdr, 'hire, wages'. In two cases (and possibly a third, Reuben) two alternative explanations are given: the name Zebulon (30:20) is associated with a verb that occurs nowhere else in the OT but which may refer to exaltation, hence honour, but also with zibcd, 'gift', while Joseph
The account of Jacob's retaliatory action (w. 37—42) is again somewhat muddled and repetitive, but here again its general import is clear. To gain an advantage over Laban Jacob had recourse to a trick based on a superstitious, farmers' belief (taken seriously by the author) that newborn animals (and also human babies) can derive certain characteristics from the visual impressions experienced by their mothers at the moment of conception. Taking advantage of Laban's absence,
(30:24) is related both to 'dsap, 'gather, remove, take away', and to ydsap, 'add, increase'. It was not deemed necessary to offer an explanation of the name of the daughter, Dinah.
Only scraps of narrative and dialogue are attached to these birth notices. The motif of the two wives, one of whom is
G E N E S I S
their manufacture in Judg 17:5, and Hos 3:4 implies that they were in common use in Israel during the period of the monarchy. Later, however, they were condemned as idolatrous (Zech 10:2) together with the practice of divination with which they appear to have been associated (Ezek 21:21). They were obviously very important to Laban, who may have used them for divination. In recent times it was widely supposed, on the basis of purportedly similar practices known from secondmillennium BCE texts discovered at the Mesopotamian city of Nuzi, that possession of such objects could be used to substantiate legal claims to the inheritance of property; but it has now been shown that this view is not tenable, at least as far as this passage in Genesis is concerned (see Thompson 1974: 272—80). There is nothing in the Genesis text that indicates why Laban's teraphim were so important to him.
Jacob arranged that the ewes, which mated while they were drinking, should do so while standing facing some rods which he had taken from appropriate trees that he had partly peeled and set before the drinking troughs, so producing particoloured young, (v. 40 is unfortunately obscure.) In addition (w. 41—2) he selected for this purpose only the more robust animals. As a result he became the owner, following his previous arrangement with Laban, of the choice animals because they were particoloured, while Laban was left only with the feebler ones. By this device he increased his wealth, though the final verse of the chapter (v. 43) about the extraordinary wealth which he acquired in this way seems entirely disproportionate to the preceding account and is probably a later addition made to enhance the impression that the patriarchs, although landless, were nevertheless persons of substance in the world. This is another secular story in which (apart from Laban's remark in v. 27) God does not appear.
Jacob in his defence of his conduct (w. 36-42) attributes his present material success to the ancestral God, whom he here refers as 'The Fear of Isaac' (or possibly 'Kinsman of Isaac', probably an ancient name of a god who was later identified with YHWH). Laban (w. 43-4) still maintains his legal right to all Jacob's possessions, but is forced to admit defeat. The treaty or covenant now made between the two is a non-aggression pact (w. 48-50); but in a different version of the event (v. 52) it also defines a territorial boundary which each partner swears to observe. This is really an agreement not simply between two individuals but between representatives of two nations, as is indicated by the double naming of the boundary cairn that they have set up in two distinct languages: both Jegarsahadutha (Aramaic) and Galeed (Hebrew gal'ld) mean 'cairn of witness'. Behind this incident there undoubtedly lies an ancient tradition of an agreement once made between Israel and the Arameans, who were, however, later to be involved in territorial wars (cf especially 2 Sam 8; 10; i Kings n; 20; 22; 2 Kings 7—16).
(31:1-55) This chapter concludes the Jacob-Laban stories. It is a continuation of ch. 30, but it also marks a return to the theme of the promise. The question of Jacob's departure broached in ch. 30 has remained unresolved. Now he has determined to leave, with his family, without Laban's permission, partly because relations with Laban and his sons have deteriorated, but above all because YHWH has commanded him to do so and has promised to continue to guide and protect him (w. 2-3). Jacob meets his wives secretly and speaks to them of his reasons for departure: Laban's animosity towards him, restrained only by God's protection, and God's command, here represented as mediated by an angel in a dream (w. 11-13). There are inconsistencies again here, e.g. Jacob's claim that Laban has changed his wages ten times does not accord with what has been said in the previous two chapters. In his account of his dream (v. 13) he cites God's command, but with an additional reference to ch. 28. Jacob's proposal to his wives, which involved for them the abandonment of their family and their community, is accepted without demur: they too have a grudge against their father, who has used for himself their bridal price and has thus 'sold' them and in fact treated them as foreigners (w. 14-16). These verses involve legal questions of marriage and inheritance customs which are not completely clear to the modern reader; but what the wives are saying is that owing to their father's actions they no longer belong to their community, and are prepared to put their trust in what Jacob has told them of God's call to him. So the heir of the promise effects his escape from the alien territory of Paddan-aram and returns to the land of promise.