¹ tn The Hebrew construction of the verse as well as the Masoretic accents indicate this should be in the absolute state (as translated) rather than the construct (“in the beginning of,” or “when God created”). In other words, the clause in v. 1 is a main clause, v. 2 has three clauses that are circumstantial, and v. 3 begins the narrative sequence proper. The word “beginning” has to be defined from the context, since there is no beginning or ending with God (see B. K. Waltke’s series of articles on this passage in BSac 132 and 133 [1975, 76]).
sn The verse refers to the beginning of the universe as we know it; it affirms that it is entirely the product of the creation of God. But there are two ways that this verse can be interpreted. First, it may be taken to refer to the original act of creation, with the rest of the events on the days of creation completing it. This would mean that the circumstantial clauses of v. 2 break the sequence of the creative work of the first day. Or, secondly, it may be taken as a summary statement of what the chapter will record, that is, vv. 3-31 are about God’s creating the universe as we know it. If the first view is adopted, then we have a reference here to original creation; if the second view is taken, then Genesis itself does not account for the original creation of matter, but picks up with God’s work of re-creating the universe. To follow this view does not deny that the Bible teaches that God created everything out of nothing—it simply says that Genesis is not making that affirmation. This second view presupposes the existence of chaotic, pre-existent matter, when God said, “Let there be light.” The first view includes the description of the chaotic state as part of the events of day one. The argument for each view must be linked to the analysis of v. 2.
²sn As is well known, the Hebrew word for God is most often written in the plural form. That it refers to the one true God in most of these places can be seen from the fact that the singular verb is used. The word itself stresses His sovereignty and His power, His transcendence and His majesty. He is the One who acts! The plural has been explained as a plural of majesty, or a plural of potentiality, although some suggest that it is merely a plural form.
³tn The word “create” is the only English word that captures the lofty nature of the Hebrew term. The verb bara’ (orB) always describes the divine activity of fashioning something new, fresh, and perfect. The verb itself does not teach creation out of nothing—even though it can be used in sentences that might teach that. Rather, it often stresses forming anew, reforming, renewing (as in Isa. 43:15, 65:17; Ps. 51:10).
⁴tn Heb “the heavens and the earth,” which is a merism, meaning the whole universe, the heavens and the earth and everything in them.
⁵tn The conjunction on the noun at the beginning of the clause signals a disjunctive waw. Here it introduces circumstantial or parenthetical clauses, explaining the state of things when “God said….”
sn This would support the idea that v. 1 is a title to the chapter, v. 2 provides information about the state of things when God spoke, and v. 3 would give the beginning of the Genesis creation with the narrative verb form (the preterite, or, as it is frequently referred to, the imperfect with the waw consecutive). The grammatical construction is paralleled in the second portion of the book: 2:4 provides the title or summary of what follows, 2:5 and 6 record three circumstantial clauses (as with chap. 1, two are negative and one positive), and then 2:7 begins the narrative with the preterite form of the verb.
⁶tn Traditional translations have followed a more literal rendering of “waste and void.” The words describe a condition that is without form and empty—the earth was in chaos. It may be possible to interpret these words to mean that it was merely unshaped and empty, like an untracked desert (Job 6:18); but the two words together elsewhere describe a dreadful situation (Jer. 4:23; Isa. 34:11), something God did not create (Isa. 45:18). This has led to the conclusion that the clause describes a chaos—something dreadful happened to the creation, whenever it is said to have begun.
⁷ sn The word simply means “darkness.” But in the Bible it has come to symbolize everything that is anti-God, such as judgment (Ex. 10:21), death (Ps. 88:13), oppression (Isa. 9:1), the wicked (1 Sam. 2:9) and in general, sin. In Isaiah 45:7 it parallels “evil.” It is a fitting cover for the primeval waste; but it prepares the reader for the fact that God is about to reveal Himself through His works.
⁸ tn The Hebrew term t^ehom (<OhT=) is “deep,” the watery deep, the salty ocean, especially the primeval ocean that surrounds and underlies the earth (see Gen. 7:11). It is often figurative of the abyss.
sn In the Babylonian account of creation the god Marduk slew the goddess Tiamat (salty sea), and used her carcass to create heaven and earth. The form of the Hebrew word for “deep” is distinct enough from the name “Tiamat” to deny direct borrowing; however, it is possible that there is a polemical stress here. It says that the Hebrew does not see the ocean as a powerful deity to be destroyed in creation, only a force of nature that can be controlled by God.
⁹tn The traditional rendering is preserved here (followed by the older commentaries as well as Cassuto and Kidner), as opposed to a translation “Wind from God” or even “Mighty wind,” taking the word “God” to represent the superlative (see Speiser, Westermann, and Wenham—although Wenham sees it as representing the Spirit), or “Breath” (Ridderbos). In the chapter ‘elohim (<yh!l)o$) means “God” and therefore should be retained here in that sense, and not as a superlative. Hebrew ruah (?^Wr) can mean “Spirit, wind, or breath”; but with the participle following it seems best to take this as a reference to the powerful presence of God. And Scripture certainly does attest to the fact that the Holy Spirit provides the power for the many works of God.
¹⁰tn The verb has been translated “hover” or “move” (as a bird over her young in Deut. 32:11). The cognate Syriac means “brood over, incubate.” How much of that sense might be attached here is hard to say; but the verb does depict the presence of the Spirit of God moving about mysteriously over the waters, presumably preparing for the acts of creation to follow.
¹¹tn Heb “face.”
¹²sn The text deliberately changes now from the term for the watery deep to the general word for water—the arena is now the life-giving water and not the chaotic abysslike deep. The change may be merely stylistic, but it may also carry some significance in leaving the word for deep behind. The deep carries with it the sense of the abyss, chaos, darkness—in short, that which is not good for life.
¹³tn The verb form is the preterite with the waw consecutive. It indicates the narrative sequence, although the “and” need not be translated throughout. Ten times in the chapter the decree of God in creation will be so expressed. For the power of the Word in creation, see Ps 33:9, John 1:1-3, 1 Cor 8:6 and Col 1:16.
sn By speaking God brings our universe into existence. Here is the main theological point of the chapter, the efficacious nature of the Word of the LORD, prophetic utterances that guarantee the outcome. In addition to being the natural starting point, it is a fitting theme to use to introduce the Law, the words and commandments from the LORD that must be obeyed. The ten decrees of God in this chapter anticipate the ten words in the Decalogue.
¹⁴tn “Let there be” is the short jussive form of the verb “to be”; and the following expression “and there was” is the short form of the preterit of the same verb. As such, y^ehi (yh!y=) and way^ehi (yh!y=w^) form a profound word play to express both the calling into existence and the complete fulfillment of the divine word. Many have also seen here a play on the divine name Yahweh, also drawn from this same verb (see Exod 3:14).
¹⁵sn The word simply means “light”; but it is used so often in Scripture to convey the ideas of salvation, joy, knowledge, righteousness, and life, that in this context one cannot ignore those connotations when seeing it as the antithesis of the darkness. The first thing God does is correct the darkness; without the light there is only chaotic darkness.
¹⁶tn The traditional translation, and the literal one, is hard to improve. But clearly, the verb “saw” in this passage must carry the meanings of “reflected on it, surveyed it, concluded or noted something.” It is a description of reflection of the mind—it is God’s opinion.
¹⁷tn Heb “And God saw the light, that it was good.” The clause clarifies what it was that God concluded about the light.
¹⁸tn Hebrew tob (bOF) in this context signifies whatever enhances, promotes, produces, or is conducive for life.
sn It is the light that God considers “good,” not the darkness. Whatever is conducive to life in God’s creation is good, for God Himself is good, and that goodness is reflected in all of His works.
¹⁹ tn Heb “And God divided.”
²⁰tn The verb “separate, divide” here explains how God used the light to dispel the darkness. It did not do away with the darkness completely, but made a separation. The light came alongside the darkness, but they are mutually exclusive—a theme that will be developed in the Gospel of John.
sn The idea of separation is critical to this chapter. God separated light from darkness, upper water from lower water, day from night, and so on. The verb is important to the Law in general; in Leviticus God separates between clean and unclean, holy and profane (Lev. 10:10, 11:47 and 20:24); in Exodus God separates the Holy Place from the Most Holy Place (26:33). So there is a preference for the light over the darkness, just as there will be a preference for the upper waters, the rain water which is conducive to life, over the sea water.
²¹tn Here is the naming formula used in Scripture: “He called to” means “He named.” It conveys the sense of calling out a description for the object named.
sn Seven times in this chapter naming or blessing follows some act of creation. There is clearly a point being made beyond the obvious idea of naming. In the Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish, naming is equal to creating. In the Bible, the act of naming, like creating, is an indication of sovereignty (see 2 Kgs. 23:34). In this verse God is sovereign, even over the darkness.
²²tn Heb “and the darkness he called Night.”
²³tn Also possible: “Evening came, and then morning came.” This is the formula that closes the six days of creation. It seems to follow the Jewish order of reckoning time: from evening to morning. Day one started with the dark, continued through the creation of light, and ended with nightfall. Or, there was night and then there was day, one day.
sn All exegetical evidence points to the literal meaning of the word “day” in this chapter, i.e., 24 hours. First, while one can point to a use of the word for a longer period of time (Isa 61:2, or the idiom in 2:4, “when”), there is more to it than that. This chapter uses “day,” “night,” “morning,” “evening,” “years,” and “seasons.” Consistency would require sorting out how all these terms could be used to express ages. Second, when the word yom (<Oy) is used with numbers, it means a literal day. Third, the commandment to keep the sabbath clearly gives this meaning to the chapter—one is to work for six days and then rest on the seventh, just as God did. The writer sees the arrangement of the sequence of creation in six days—whether he meant it as six actual days for creation (or re-creation), or as a literary device. Scholars have debated for some time how this chapter can be related to science; but the uncertainties about science as well as the questions about this chapter make such a study difficult. The point of the chapter is more theological. It is not so much stating how and when God did everything as it is that God did it by His powerful Word.
²⁴tn Heb “And God said.”
²⁵tn The word refers to an expanse of air pressure between the surface of the sea and the clouds, separating water below from water above. In v. 8 it is called “sky.”
sn In the poetic texts the writers envision, among other things, something rather strong and shiny, no doubt influencing the translation “firmament.” Job 37:18 refers to the skies poured out like a molten mirror. Daniel 12:3 and Ezekiel 1:22 portray it as shiny. The sky or atmosphere may have seemed like a glass dome. The theological point, however, again deals with God’s sovereignty over the waters and over heaven, as opposed to the Babylonian mythology which deified these.
²⁶tn Heb “the waters from the waters.”
²⁷tn Heb “the expanse.”
²⁸tn The word ken (/K@),”thus” or “so,” is related to a verb which means “to establish” (kun [/WK]). The statement “and it was so” clearly means that it happened the way God designed it—it underscores the connection between word and event. However, it may carry the force that the expanse, like an established thing, found its fixed place in the order of the universe.
²⁹tn The Hebrew word can mean “heaven, heavens, sky, or skies.” In this context “the sky” is what is intended in the meaning, “heaven” carrying a loftier connotation.
³⁰tn Heb “And God said.”
³¹sn In the beginning the water covered the whole earth, every place; now the water was to be restricted to an area to form the ocean. The picture is one of the dry land as an island with the sea beside it and around. Again the sovereignty of God is revealed. Whereas the pagans saw the sea as a force to be reckoned with, God controls the boundaries of the sea. And in the judgment at the flood he will blur the boundaries so that chaos returns.
³²tn The idea of dry land appearing simply means that when the waters are collected to one place dry land emerges above the surface of the receding water.
³³tn Heb “earth,” but here of the dry ground as opposed to the sea.
³⁴tn Heb “And God said.”
³⁵tn The Hebrew construction employs a cognate accusative: “Let the land vegetate vegetation.” It stresses the abundant productivity that God created.
sn The word for “vegetation” (dese’ [ov#D#]) normally means grass, but here it is probably a general word for vegetation that will include all the plants and the trees. In the verse the plants and the trees are qualified as self-perpetuating with seeds, but not the word vegetation, indicating it is the general term, and the other two sub-categories of it. Moreover, in vv. 29 and 30 the word vegetation/grass does not appear. The Samaritan Pentateuch adds an “and” before the fruit trees, indicating it saw the arrangement as bi-partite (SP tends to eliminate asyndetic constructions).
³⁶sn The word min (/m!) translated “kind,” indicates again that God was concerned with defining and dividing time, space, and species. The point is that creation was with order, as opposed to chaos. And what God created and distinguished with boundaries was not to be confused (see Lev 19:19 and Deut 22:9-11).
³⁷tn “and” has been added to clarify the clause construction.
³⁸tn Heb “And God said.”
³⁹sn Light was created before the light-bearers. The order would not seem strange to the Hebrew mind that does not automatically link daylight with the sun (note dawn and dusk appear to have light without the sun). But God chose to collect and localize light this way.
sn This word for “lights” is usually used for the light in the tabernacle. There seems to be a biblical link between the construction of the place of worship in Exodus and the account of creation in Genesis, a link worth investigating exegetically (see Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture).
⁴⁰tn While the translation “in the expanse” is fine, the language must be interpreted as phenomenal—the language of what appears to be the case. The sun and the moon are not in the sky (below the clouds), but from the viewpoint of standing on the earth, they appear that way. And even today language retains that aspect—”the sun is rising” or “the stars in the sky.”
⁴¹sn The text goes to great length to discuss the creation of these lights, suggesting that the subject was very important to the ancients. Since these “lights” were considered deities in the ancient world, the section serves as a strong polemic (see Gerhard Hasel, “The Polemical Nature of the Genesis Cosmology,” EvQ 46 [1974]:81-102). Genesis is affirming that they are creations, not deities. To underscore this the text does not even given them names—the names Shemesh and Yarih might have given too much away in that world, so they are just described as greater and lesser lights. Moreover, they serve in the capacity that God gives them, which would not be the normal function the pagans ascribed to them. They merely divide, govern and give light in God’s creation. And then, the creation of the stars is mentioned almost as if by afterthought.
⁴²tn The text has “for signs and for seasons and for days and years.” It seems likely from the meanings of the words involved that “signs” is the main idea, followed by two categories, “seasons” and “days and years.” This is the simplest explanation, and one that matches vv. 11-13. It could even be rendered “signs for the fixed seasons, that is [explicative waw] days and years.”
sn The point is that the sun and the moon were important to fix the days for the seasonal celebrations for the worshipping community. Accordingly, the interpretation grew up in Qumran and in Jubilees that Wednesday was the important feast day.
⁴³sn The implication is that the stars appeared in the sky from this time forward—if the language is phenomenal. It would not have to mean that they were created out of nothing on the fourth day, especially if the chapter were recording a re-creation of our universe.
⁴⁴sn In each of the creative events of days 1-3 there is a naming by God; in each of the events of days 5 and 6 there is a blessing by God. But on day 4 there is neither. It could be a stylistic variation. But it could also be a deliberate design to avoid naming Sun and Moon or promoting them beyond what they are, things that God created to serve in His creation.
⁴⁵tn Heb “And God said.”
⁴⁶tn The Hebrew text again uses a cognate construction to emphasize the abundant fertility. The idea of the verb is one of swift movement back and forth, literally swarming. This theme of swarming is picked up in Exodus 1:7 to describe the rapid growth of the Israelite population in bondage.
⁴⁷tn The text literally has “the breath of life.” The expression is in apposition to the swarming creatures, specifying that it means all creatures that breathe.
⁴⁸tn The Hebrew uses the Polel form of the verb instead of the simple Qal; it stress a swarming flight again to underscore the abundant fruitfulness.
⁴⁹sn This is the first time in the chapter (apart from v. 1 which may well be the summary statement) that the verb “create” (bara’ [orB]) has been used. The text wishes to underscore that these creatures—even the great ones—are part of God’s perfect creation. The great sea creatures (Hebrew tanninim [<n!yN!T^h^]) were venerated in the ancient world as forces or deities of the deep. The term was used for snakes (Exod. 7:9), crocodiles (Ezek. 29:3) or other powerful animals (Jer. 51:34). But in Isaiah 27:1 the word is used to describe Egypt and Babylon in a mythological way. There God controls the spiritual and/or natural forces of the pagans; here God created them, a mark of His sovereignty over them. They are not God’s rivals.
⁵⁰tn Heb “And God blessed them.” While the translation “blessed” has been retained here for the sake of simplicity, it would be most helpful to paraphrase it as “And God endowed them with fruitfulness” or the like. The expression “blessed” needs clarification in its different contexts, for it is one of the unifying themes of the book. The divine blessing occurs after works of creation and is intended to continue that work—the word of blessing guarantees success. The word means “to enrich, endow”; and the most visible evidence of that enrichment is productivity or fruitfulness. See Claus Westermann, Blessing in the Bible and the Life of the Church (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1968).
⁵¹sn The instruction God gives to creation is properly a fuller expression of the statement just made that he enriched them with the ability to reproduce. It is not saying that they were rational creatures who heard and obeyed the word; rather, it stresses that fruitfulness in the animal world is a result of the divine decree, and not some pagan cultic ritual for fruitfulness. The repeated emphasis of “be fruitful, multiply, fill” adds to this abundance God has given to life. And the meaning is underscored by the similar sounds: barak (ErB) with bara’ (orB), and parah (hrP) with rabah (hbr).
⁵²tn Heb “And God said.”
⁵³tn Here again the Hebrew text has “[everything that has] the breath of life” (nepesh hayyah [hY?^ vp#n#]).
⁵⁴tn There are three groups of land animals here: the cattle or livestock (mostly domesticated), things that creep or move close to the ground (such as reptiles or rodents) and the wild animals (all animals of the field). The three terms are general classifications without specific details.
⁵⁵sn The plural form of the verb has been the subject of much discussion through the years, and not surprisingly, several suggestions have been put forward. One view is that the verb is an indication of a polytheistic form of the tradition. This is highly unlikely given the strong anti-mythical polemic of the chapter. If this referred to gods, it would have hardly been left untouched. Another view is that it indicates God speaking to the heavenly court of angels. Angels do often appear in human form on earth, and do serve God as ministering spirits. But whether they share in the work of creation and serve as the pattern for mankind may be too hard to defend. Mankind is created in the image of God—so “us” here must refer to ‘elohim (<yh!l)o$) and there is no indication in the context that this word means other than God. So third, the plural must refer to God in some pregnant way. Some have suggested it is a plural of majesty, indicating the fullness of the divine nature. But the plural of majesty used with verbs would have to be demonstrated. Others have simply taken it as an expression of self-exhortation (Cassuto). Most Christian commentaries interpret it as a reference to the plurality within the Godhead, to one degree or another. Wenham follows the view that the writer meant angels, but that God meant more (sensus plenior). Whatever the Hebrews intended or understood, the language certainly allows and prepares for the full revelation of the triune God. See among many resources, G. Hasel, “The Meaning of `Let Us’ in Gen. 1:26,” AUSS 13 (1975):58-66.
<sup>56</sup>tn The Hebrew is ‘adam (<do). In view of the qualification to follow, that this category includes male and female, a translation of “mankind” or “humankind” is preferable. A translation of “man” gives the wrong connotation, even though defensible.
<sup>57</sup>tn The interpretation behind this translation requires an analysis of the prepositions as well as the meanings of the words. The two prepositions, “in” and “according to” do have overlapping fields of meaning, and in this context seem to be virtually equivalent. In 5:3 they are reversed with the two words. The word “image” (selem [<l#X#]) is used frequently of statues, models, and images—replicas (see D. J. A. Clines, “The Etymology of Hebrew selem,” JNWSL 3 [1974]:19-25). The word “likeness” (d<sup>e</sup>mut [tWmD=]) is an abstract noun; its verb means “to be like, to resemble.” In Genesis the two describe human beings who in some way reflect the form and the function of the Creator. The form is more likely stressing the spiritual rather than the physical. The “image of God” would be the God-given mental and spiritual capacities enabling people to relate to God and to serve Him. The function is defined as ruling and having dominion over creation. The point is that this idea of the image means that humans are God’s vice-regents on earth.
sn There is a parallel between this construction and the instruction for building the tabernacle. Moses was told to make it “according to the pattern” he was shown on the mount (Exod. 25:9,10). Was he shown a form, a replica, of the spiritual sanctuary in the heavenlies? In any case, what was produced on earth functioned as the heavenly sanctuary does, but with limitations.
<sup>58</sup>sn The distinction of “man” as “male” and “female” is another point of separation in God’s creation. There is no possibility that the verse is teaching that humans were first bisexual and afterwards separated. The mention of male and female prepares for the blessing to follow.
<sup>59</sup>tn Heb “And God blessed.”
<sup>60</sup>tn Heb “and rule over.”
<sup>61</sup>tn Heb “creeps.”
<sup>62</sup>sn The several imperatives addressed to both males and females together (plural imperative forms) actually form two commands: reproduce and rule. God’s address now is not merely a form of blessing, but it is addressed to them personally; this is a distinct emphasis with the creation of human beings. But with the blessing comes the ability to be fruitful, and to rule. In procreation they will share in the divine work of creating human life—the image of God (see 5:1-3); in ruling they will serve as God’s vice-regents on earth. They together, the human race collectively, have the responsibility of seeing to the welfare of that which is put under them.
<sup>63</sup>tn The text uses hinneh (hN@h!), archaically translated “behold.” It is often used to express the dramatic present, the immediateness of an event—”Look, this is what I am doing!”
<sup>64</sup>sn Wenham in his commentary on Genesis suggests that there is nothing in the passage that prohibits them from eating meat, but that eating meat came after the fall. Gen 9:3 would then ratify the post-fall practice of eating meat rather than inaugurate it. And in the eschaton there will be a return to the pattern (see Isa 11:7).
<sup>65</sup>tn “I give” has been supplied.
<sup>66</sup>tn Heb “And God saw.”
<sup>67</sup>tn The Hebrew text again uses hinneh (hN@h!) to capture the vividness and the openness. It is a particle that goes with the gesture of pointing, calling attention to something.
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “and all the host of them.” The idea of the “host” is that of the innumerable particulars about and within the heavens and the earth. It describes the vast array of details in God’s creation.
<sup>2</sup>tn Heb “on/in the seventh day.”
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “His work which he did/made.”
<sup>4</sup>tn The Hebrew term sabat (tbv) can be translated “rested” but it basically means “cease.” This is not a rest from exhaustion; it is the cessation of the work of creation.
<sup>5</sup>tn The verb is usually translated “and sanctified it.” The Piel verb qiddes (vD@q!) means “to make something holy, to set something apart, to distinguish it.” On the literal level the phrase means essentially that God made this day different. But within the context of the Law, it means that the day belonged to God; it was for rest from ordinary labor, worship, and spiritual service. The day belonged to God.
<sup>6</sup>tn Heb “for on it he ceased from all His work which God created to make.” The last infinitive construct and the verb before it form a verbal hendiadys, the infinitive becoming the modifier—”which God creatively made,” or “which God made in His creating.”
<sup>7</sup>tn The Hebrew phrase ‘elleh tol<sup>e</sup>dot (tOdl=OT hL#o@) was traditionally translated as “these are the generations of,” because the noun was derived from the verb “beget.” Its usage, however, shows that it introduces more than genealogies; it traces the narrative from one point to the text, showing what became of such and such. In fact, a good paraphrase of this heading would be: “This is what became of the heavens and the earth,” for what follows is not another account of creation but a tracing from creation through the fall and judgment (the section goes from 2:4 through 4:26). See M. H. Woudstra, “The Tol<sup>e</sup>dot of the Book of Genesis and Their Redemptive-Historical Significance,” CTJ 5 (1970).
sn The expression is the important title used throughout Genesis, serving as the organizing principle of the book. It is always a heading, introducing the subject matter that is to come. From the starting point of the title, the narrative will trace the genealogy or the records or the particulars involved. Although some would make the heading in 2:4 a summary of creation (1:1—2:3), that goes against the usage in the book. It is a heading; and it introduces the theme of the next section, the particulars about this creation that God made. Gen 2 is not a simple, parallel account of creation; rather, beginning with the account of the creation of man and women, the text will tell what became of that creation. As a beginning, the construction of 2:4-7 forms a fine parallel to the construction of 1:1-3 (see above). The subject matter of each tol<sup>e</sup>dot (tOdl=OT) section of the book traces a decline or a deterioration through to the next beginning point; and each is thereby a microcosm of the book, which begins with divine blessing in the garden, and ends with a coffin in Egypt. So, what became of the creation? Gen 2:4—4:26 will explain that sin entered the world and all but destroyed God’s perfect creation.
<sup>8</sup>tn This translation will use the traditional four letters LORD to translate the tetragrammaton (“four letters” of the holy name—hwhy), the personal name Yahweh.
sn Critical scholarship argues that the introduction of the name Yahweh here indicates that a new source, a parallel account of creation, is being included. It is not impossible to make a good case for the idea that Gen 1 was a prologue written later (easily by Moses) to introduce the traditional records that had been compiled. But it also makes very good sense to say that names were deliberately chosen for the subject matter (see U. Cassuto, The Documentary Hypothesis). Gen 1:1—2:3 is the grand prologue of the book, showing the sovereign God creating by decree. The narrative before us is the account of what this God invested in His creation. Since it deals with the close, personal involvement of the covenant God, the narrative uses the combination Yahweh God. For further information, see the standard Introductions (such as R. K. Harrison’s), or the commentaries that deal with the suggestions.
<sup>9</sup>sn This is the only use of the noun tol<sup>e</sup>dot (tOdl=OT) in the book that is not followed by a personal name (e.g., “this is the account of Isaac”). But the poetic parallelism reveals that even though the account may be about the creation, it is the creation the LORD God made.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “Now every sprig of the field before it was.” The verb forms, although appearing to be imperfects, are technically preterites coming after the adverb terem (<r#F#). The word order is designed to introduce the disjunctive clause (as in 1:2). Two negative clauses are given (“before any sprig…”, and “before any cultivated grain” existed), followed by two causal clauses explaining them, and then a positive circumstantial clause is given—again dealing with water as in 1:2 (water would well up).
<sup>11</sup>tn The first term (siah [?^yC!]) probably refers to the wild, uncultivated plants (see Gen. 21:15; Job 30:4,7); whereas the second (`eseb [bC#u@]) refers to cultivated grains. It is a way of saying: “back before anything was growing.”
¹²tn The two causal clauses explain the first two circumstantial clauses: there was no uncultivated, general growth because there was no rain, and there were no grains because there was no man to work the soil.
sn The last clause, “and there was no man to work the ground,” anticipates the curse and the expulsion from the garden (3:23).
¹³tn The waw introduces a third circumstantial clause; but since it is more positive in subject matter, a contrastive “but” serves best.
¹⁴tn The Hebrew word ‘ed (do@) traditionally was translated “mist” because of its (rare) use in poetry. However, a cognate idu appears in Babylonian texts with the meaning of subterranean springs or waterways. That idea does fit this context, since this water “goes up” and waters the ground—but then a mist goes up also.
¹⁵tn Heb “went up.” The form is an imperfect tense, but in this past time narrative context it will have the nuance of a customary imperfect, continual action in past time: “it would go up, it used to go up.”
¹⁶tn The form is the Hiphil perfect with the waw consecutive; it takes the same nuance as the preceding verb. Whenever it would well up, it would water the ground.
¹⁷tn The word ‘adamah (hmdo&) actually means “ground, fertile soil.”
sn Here is an indication of fertility—the water would well up from the earth (‘eres [Jr#o#]) and water all the surface of the fertile soil (‘adamah [hmdo&]). It is from that soil that the man (‘adam [<do]) will be taken in 2:7.
¹⁸tn Heb “And Yahweh God formed.” The initial verb is a preterite with the waw consecutive, the normal verb for narrative sequence. The word yasar (rXy) means “form, fashion” and that usually by plan or design (see the related noun yeser [rX#y@] in 6:5). It is the term for an artist’s work—Hebrew yoser (rX@Oy) is the potter (see Jer 18:2-4).
sn Traditions in the ancient Near East reflect this idea of creation. Egyptian drawings show a deity turning little people off of the potter’s wheel, with another deity giving them the life. In the Bible humans are related to the dust, and return to it (see 3:19; see also Job 4:19, 20:9; and Isa. 29:16).
¹⁹tr/ The line literally reads “And Yahweh God formed the man—dust—from the ground.” “Dust” is an adverbial accusative, telling the material from which the man was made.
²⁰tn The expression translated here “breath of life” is different from what was used earlier and given the same rendering. There it was nepes hayyah (hY?^ vp#n#), “life-breath”; here it is nismat hayyim (<yY!?^ tm^v=n!). The word n^esamah (hmvn=)is used for God and for the life imparted to humans, not animals (see T. C. Mitchell, “The Old Testament Usage of N^eshama,” VT 11 [1961]:177-87). Its usage in the Bible conveys more than a breathing living organism (nepes hayyah [hY?^ vp#n#]). Whatever is given this breath of life becomes animated with the life from God, has spiritual understanding (Job 32:8) and has a functioning conscience (Prov. 20:28).
sn It is interesting to note that human life is described here as body (dust from the ground) + breath (breathed in by God) = living being (nepes hayyah [hY?^ vp#n#]). So both animals and humans are called nepes hayyah (hY?^ vp#n#)—but mankind became that in a different and more significant way. In all probability, it is this that constitutes humans as the image of God.
²¹tn The Hebrew nepes (vp#n#) is often translated “soul.” But the word really means the whole person, body and soul, or human being. The Hebrews would not say one has a “soul,” but that one is a soul.
²²tn Heb “And the LORD God planted.”
sn Nothing is said of how the planting of this garden took place, although a harmonization with chap. 1 would lead to the conclusion that it was by decree, and it was prior to the creation of human life.
²³tn Heb “from the east” or “off east.”
sn One would assume this is east from the perspective of the land of Israel, particularly since the rivers in the area will be identified as the rivers in those eastern regions.
²⁴tn The word “Eden” means “pleasure.”
²⁵tn The particular verb used here for “place, put, set” is the verb sim (<yC!).
²⁶tn The Qal perfect here requires the past perfect translation.
²⁷tn Heb “And Yahweh God caused to grow.”
²⁸tn Heb “ground,” but meaning the fertile soil.
²⁹tn The expression is “desirable of sight/appearance”; it describes the kinds of trees that are pleasing, not just visually pleasing, but desirable.
³⁰tn The verse ends with a disjunctive clause providing a parenthetical bit of information about the existence of two trees in the garden.
³¹tn The construction “tree of life” should be interpreted to mean a tree that produces life (objective) rather than a living tree (attributive genitive) in view of the statement in 3:22. See E. D. James, The Tree of Life: An Archaeological Study (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1966); and R. Marcus, “The Tree of Life in Proverbs,” JBL 62 (1943):117-120.
³²tn Likewise the “tree of knowledge” must be interpreted to mean that the tree would produce knowledge, or, eating of it would. And that knowledge would be characterized by “good and evil.” By good the text means that which enhances, promotes, and produces life; by evil it means anything that hinders, interrupts or destroys life. Cassuto translates them “care and pain.” So eating from this tree would change human nature—people would be able to alter life for better (in their thinking) or for worse. See D. J. A. Clines, “The Tree of Knowledge and the Law of Yahweh,” VT 24 (1974):8-14; and Ivan Engnell, “`Knowledge’ and `Life’ in the Creation Story,” VT Supp 3 (1955):103-119.
³³tn The waw disjunctive introduces another parenthetical section, this time an entire paragraph about the richness of the region in the east.
³⁴tn The imperfect tense here also has the nuance of the customary imperfect: it describes continuous action in the past.
³⁵tn Heb “heads.”
³⁶tn Heb “good.”
³⁷tn Possibly a reference to resin, or another precious stone.
³⁸tn Or “onyx.”
³⁹tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”
⁴⁰tn In the Bible the Hebrew word Kush can mean Ethiopia or it can mean the southern part of Mesopotamia, the region of the later Cassite dynasty of Babylon. The rivers here suggest the latter meaning.
⁴¹sn That is, Assyria.
⁴²tn Heb “And the LORD God took.”
⁴³tn The Hebrew verb used in this verse is different than the one used in 2:8. Here it is nuah (?^Wn) a verb that means “to rest,” but in the Hiphil “cause to rest, place, put.” While translations of “placed” or “put” would be correct, they do not convey the overtones of rest, i.e., setting at rest. The choice of the verb here is designed to harmonize with the bliss of time and place.
⁴⁴tn Traditionally translated “the Garden of Eden,” the context makes it clear that the garden was in Eden (and so a genitive of location).
⁴⁵tn Heb “to work it and to keep it.” The choice of words for the two infinitives is significant in the Law. The first is the verb `abad (dbu) which means “to serve, work.” In this context it can apply to working the ground, especially in view of the usage in 2:5. But in the Pentateuch it primarily refers to spiritual service—serving the LORD. The other word is samar (rmv) which means “guard, keep.” In the Law its primary meaning i to keep the commandments. If the use of these two words refers to taking care of and keeping the garden, their connotations are to serving the LORD and keeping His commands.
sn There is good support for taking the primary meaning of the infinitives to be this spiritual service (see Cassuto’s commentary for the full discussion). According to Gen 3:23, it is only after the fall that the man is to work the ground. If that is a result of the fall, how could it be the design of the Creator? There would be no point to 3:23. The choice of significant religious words in this passage suggests a higher meaning of service; with the fall that service is focused on the ground and becomes common work, not spiritual service per se.
<sup>46</sup>sn In line with the suggested interpretation of the preceding verse, there now appears the first use in the Bible of the verb siwwah (hWX!) “command.” Whatever the man had to do in the garden, the main focus of the narrative is on keeping God’s commandments. And this emphasis flows through these chapters. In chap. 1 everything came into existence through obedience to God’s word. In chap. 2 God created humans with the capacity to obey Him, and then tested them with commands.
<sup>47</sup>tn The construction is an imperfect tense with an infinitive absolute. The imperfect tense probably carries the nuance of permission—”you may eat”—since he is not being commanded to eat from every tree. The infinitive then emphasizes that permission—”you may freely eat,” or, “you may eat to your heart’s content.”
<sup>48</sup>tn The disjunctive waw with its word order provides the strongest contrast: “but from the tree of the knowledge….”
<sup>49</sup>tn The imperfect tense with the negative is the language of prohibition, equal to “you shall not eat from it.” The man must not disobey the command of God.
<sup>50</sup>tn Again the construction is the imperfect tense with the infinitive absolute. Here the imperfect has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause: “when you eat…you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive: “you will surely die.”
sn There are a number of interpretations given to this last expression that cannot be justified by the exegesis of the text. To obtain the proper meaning one must define the word “die” and then simply stress the certainty of it. Death is essentially separation. So to die physically means separation from the land of the living, this world, this life—but not extinction. To die spiritually means to be separated from God. Both occur with sin, although the physical alienation is more gradual than instant, and the spiritual is immediate, although the effects of it continue the separation.
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “And the LORD God said.”
<sup>52</sup>tn The Hebrew construction has “The being of man by himself is not good.” The meaning of “good” must be defined contextually. Within the context of creation, in which God would instruct mankind to be fruitful and multiply, the man alone cannot comply. Being alone prevents the man from fulfilling the design of creation, and therefore is not good.
<sup>53</sup>tn It is difficult to improve on the translation of “helper” for the Hebrew word rz#u@, although the modern connotation gives it a negative sense. In the Bible God is frequently described as the helper, the one who does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, the one who meets our needs. Thus, the woman would supply what the man was lacking in the design of creation—and logically it would follow that the man would supply what she was lacking, although that is not stated here. See further Michael L. Rosenzweig, “A Helper Equal to Him,” Judaica 139 (1986):277-280.
<sup>54</sup>tn The Hebrew expression k<sup>e</sup>negdo (ODg=n#K=) is literally “according to the opposite of him.” Translations such as “suitable, matching, corresponding to” all capture the idea generally. His nature is matched by hers—she reflects him and complements him. Together they correspond. In short, this prepositional phrase indicates that she has everything that God had invested in him.
<sup>55</sup>tn Heb “And Yahweh God formed.” The preterite in this place should be given the nuance of the past perfect, because the creation of the animals preceded the creation of man, but a normal sequential translation here would convey the opposite.
<sup>56</sup>tn The imperfect is future from the perspective of a past time narrative.
<sup>57</sup>tn The text is a bit more cryptic: “and whatever the man called it [them], breath of life, that was its name.” The expression “breath of life” is meant to qualify by apposition the suffix on the preposition: whatever he would call them, that is, those animals that have the breath of life, that was their name.
<sup>58</sup>tn Here for the first time the Hebrew word appears without the article, suggesting that it might now be the name “Adam” rather than “man.” Translations of the Bible differ as to where they make the change from “man” to “Adam.”
<sup>59</sup>tn The 3msg verb without a formally expressed subject is to be translated as a passive voice: “one did not find = there was not found.”
<sup>60</sup>tn Heb “And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall on the man.”
<sup>61</sup>tn The verbal form is actually the preterite with the waw consecutive, “and he slept.” But in the sequence this form may be subordinated to the following verb of the same form to indicate a temporal clause.
<sup>62</sup>tn Traditionally translated as “rib,” the Hebrew word actually means “side.” The construction reads, “and he took one from his sides,” which could be rendered “part of his sides.” That idea may fit better the explanation by the man that she is his flesh and bone.
<sup>63</sup>tn Heb “closed up the flesh under it.”
<sup>64</sup>tn The verb is actually banah (hnB) “to make, build, construct.” The text says that he built the rib into a woman. Again, the passage gives no indication of how this was done.
<sup>65</sup>tn The word happa`am (<u^P^h^) means “the [this] time, this place,” or “now, finally, at last.” The expression conveys the futility of the man while naming the animals and finding no one who corresponded to him.
⁶⁶tn The text is very precise; it says, “of this one it will be said, `woman’.” In wording it this way the text is not saying that the man named his wife—that comes after the fall (3:20).
<sup>67</sup>sn The poetic section expresses the correspondence between the man and the woman—bone of his bones, flesh of his flesh, leading up to the final wordplay (paronomasia) of “woman” (‘issah [hVo!]) and “man” (‘is [vyo!]). On the surface it appears that the word for woman is the feminine form of the word for man. But the two words are not etymologically related. The sound and the sense give that impression and make for a more effective wordplay.
<sup>68</sup>tn Here is the frequent `al ken (/K@-lu^) formula found in Genesis: “therefore, that is why”; it offers an explanation of the significance of the events described.
sn The logical understanding of this expression is that it is an editorial comment and not additional words of Adam. That is why the verbs should be put in the present tense rather than future (both are possible from the forms). It is saying “This is why we do things the way we do.”
⁶⁹tn The word “leave” (`abad [dbu]) is a strong word, meaning “abandon, forsake.” The Law does not mean by this that a man should turn his back on family relationships and the responsibilities they involve. Rather, it is stressing that the break from home should be complete.
<sup>70</sup>tn The verb was traditionally translated “cleaves”; it has the basic idea of “stick with/to.” For example, it is used of Ruth resolutely staying with her mother-in-law (Ruth 1:14). In this passage it describes the inseparable relationship between the man and the woman in marriage as God intended it.
<sup>71</sup>tn Heb “and they become one flesh.” The retention of the word “flesh” (rCB) in the translation often leads to improper or incomplete interpretations. The Hebrew word “flesh” in this context means the whole life together, and not just a sexual union. When they unite in marriage, they begin a process (hayah + lamed [l= + hyh] preposition means “become”) of growing together in every aspect of their life. The translation “become a new family” may be very interpretive, but it conveys more of the sense that the formal equivalent “one flesh.”
<sup>72</sup>tn Heb “And the two of them were naked, the man and his wife.”
sn The motif of nakedness is introduced here and will play an important role in the next chapter. In the Bible nakedness conveys different things. In this context it signifies either innocence or integrity, depending on how those terms are defined. There is no fear of exploitation, no sense of vulnerability. But after the entrance of sin into the race, nakedness takes on a negative sense. It is then usually connected with the sense of vulnerability, shame, exploitation, and exposure (such as the idea of “uncovering nakedness” either in sexual exploitation or in captivity in war).
<sup>73</sup>tn The meaning of Hebrew bos (vOB) is “be ashamed, put to shame”; but its meaning is stronger than being embarrassed. The word conveys the fear of exploitation or evil—enemies are put to shame through military victory. It indicates the feeling of shame that approximates a fear of evil.
<sup>1</sup>tn The chapter begins with a disjunctive waw introducing a parenthetical clause that actually begins a new section. In the structure of the section, this clause is parallel to the circumstantial clauses in 2:5,6 that came under the heading of the section. But here it signals the beginning of a new section.
<sup>2</sup>sn The serpent is presented in these passages as a reptile. Only in the Book of Revelation is the identification of Satan made (Rev 12:9). One would conclude then that Satan used the reptile for the temptation, to come in disguise as a subordinate over whom they were to have dominion. The curse which affects all creation, has an especially strong connection to the serpent because of this compliance with the tempter. But in the eschaton the stigma will be changed, and the serpent will be harmless enough for children to be around (Isa 11).
<sup>3</sup>tn The word `arum (<Wru) means “shrewd, crafty.” The word itself is not necessarily negative; for example, Prov 1:4 states that one purpose of the book is to make the naive youth more shrewd. It means to be wary, to know where the traps and dangers are. All the creatures have a measure of this—the serpent more. What one does with this knowledge determines whether it is a good or bad thing to have. Jesus wanted people to be as shrewd as serpents but as harmless as doves.
sn Note the word play between “naked” (`arummim [<yM!Wru&]) in 2:25 and “shrewd” (`arum [<Wru]) in 3:1. The point seems to be that their integrity is the focus of the serpent’s craftiness. At the beginning they are naked and he is shrewd; afterward, they will be covered and he will be cursed with defeat.
⁴tn Heb “And he said.”
⁵tn The beginning of the quotation is elliptical and therefore difficult to translate. Literally it says, “Indeed that God said.” One must supply something like “is it true”—”Indeed, [is it true] that God said . . . .” The smoother renderings simply have, “Yea, has God said” or “Did God actually say.”
⁶sn Cassuto in his commentary notes that the serpent does not use the expression “Yahweh God” because there is no covenant relationship involved. He only speaks of “God.” And in the process the serpent draws the woman into his language, so that she too only speaks of “God.”
⁷tn There is a notable change between what the LORD God had said and what the woman says, and that must be reflected in the translation: “you may freely eat” (the imperfect with the infinitive absolute) is interpreted as “we may eat” (only the imperfect tense). Her words do not reflect the sense of eating to their heart’s content.
⁸sn The interpreter must also note here that something has been added to the prohibition. In focusing on the prohibition, the woman adds to it, making it say more than it did. Gerhard von Rad says that it is as though she wanted to set a law for herself by means of this exaggeration (Genesis, p. 86).
⁹tn The Hebrew construction is pen (/P#) with the imperfect tense, which conveys a negative purpose—”lest you die” = “in order that you not die.” It introduces a sense of uncertainty that was not there in the LORD God’s “you shall surely die.”
¹⁰tn Heb “And the serpent said.”
¹¹tn The response of the serpent includes the infinitive absolute with a blatant negation equal to saying: “Not—you shall surely die” (/Wtm%T= tOm ol)). The construction makes this emphatic because normally the negative will precede the finite verb.
sn This indicates that the woman’s change to “lest you die” is indeed an unsatisfactory and dangerous change, lessening the penalty for sin. It also indicates that the tempter is more aware of what the LORD God said than she was. An interesting comparison is the account of the temptation of Jesus in which Jesus is victorious because he knew the Scripture better than Satan (Matt 4:1-11). At any rate, here is the liar from the beginning, denying that there is a penalty for sin.
¹²tn The construction of clauses is important to the rendering of the verse. The clause is essentially a causal clause, giving the tempter’s reason why God made the prohibition. But within the causal clause there is a noun clause, beginning with “that,” supplying what God knows. And that noun clause includes a temporal clause, “when you eat from it.”
¹³tn Or “you will realize.”
¹⁴sn The serpent is essentially raising doubts about the integrity of God. He is saying that the only reason for the prohibition was that God was protecting His power. If they were to eat, they would share that power over life. Of course, the temptation is to hubris, that overstepping of boundaries in pride (See Donald E. Gowan, When Man Becomes God, Humanism and Hybris in the Old Testament [Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1975]).
¹⁵tn The clause beginning literally “And the woman saw” can be rendered as a subordinate temporal clause to the following verb in the sequence.
¹⁶tn The word rendered “pleasant” here actually means “desirable.” Ta’awah (hwo&T^), and the later nehmad (dm?=n#), “desirable,” are synonyms.
sn The verbal roots for both of these forms appear in the Ten Commandments for the prohibition against coveting, both of them in Deut 5:21, and the first in Exod 20:17. Strong desires usually lead to taking.
¹⁷tn “To make one wise” is l^ehaskil (lyK!C=h^l=), the Hiphil infinitive from the verb sakal (lkC). The desire to be like God is now expressed in the idea of obtaining wisdom or prudence.
sn The quest for wisdom can follow the wrong course, as indeed it does here. No one can become like God by disobeying God. It is that simple. The Book of Proverbs will stress that obtaining wisdom begins with the fear of God that is evidenced through obedience to His word. Here, in seeking wisdom, Eve disobeys God—and they end up afraid of God.
¹⁸sn The critical word now discloses the disobedience: “she ate.” Since the LORD God had said, “You shall not eat,” the main point of the divine inquisition will be, “Did you eat,” meaning, did you disobey the word? She ate, being beguiled by the serpent (1 Tim 2:14); but then the man ate, apparently willingly when the woman gave him the fruit (see Rom 5:12, 17-19).
¹⁹sn This section provides us with an example of Hebrew narrative structure that will be repeated. It begins with circumstantial clauses setting the stage, is followed with the development of the tension through dialogue especially, and leads to the action of the story, here the eating. But once the dialogue is over, the action is told in a rapid sequence of verbs—she took, she ate, she gave, and he ate.
²⁰tn The verb is the Hithpael participle of halak (Elh), “walk, go,” and so translated here “moving” or “going about.” While a translation of “walking about” also works, it assumes a theophany, the presence of the LORD God in a human form.
²¹tn The expression is traditionally rendered “cool of the day,” because the word ruah (?^Wr) can mean “breath, wind.” Cassuto has a lengthy discussion of the expression in his Commentary on the Book of Genesis, From Adam to Noah (pp. 152-154); he concludes that it refers to the afternoon, when the day became hot and the sun was beginning to decline.
²²tn The verb used here is the Hithpael, giving the reflexive idea. In v. 10 when Adam answers the LORD, the Niphal is used with the same sense— “I hid.”
²³tn The verb “call” (qara’ [orq]) followed by the preposition “to, unto” (-lo# or l=) often carries the connotation of “summon.”
²⁴sn The question is surely rhetorical (the figure of speech is erotesis)rather than literal, because it was spoken to the man, and it was answered with an explanation of why he was hiding rather than a location. The question has more of the meaning of “Why are you there?”
²⁵tn “LORD God” has been added for clarification.
²⁶sn Another rhetorical question is recorded here, asking more than what it appears to ask. The second question in the verse explains what the LORD God was really interested in.
²⁷sn The word order is arranged to emphasize that their eating was an act of disobedience. It literally reads: “Did you from the tree—which I commanded you not to eat from it—eat?” The relative clause inserted immediately after the reference to the tree brings out this point very well.
²⁸tn Heb “And the man said.”
²⁹tn The Hebrew construction in this sentence uses an independent nominative absolute (formerly known as a casus pendens). “The woman” is the independent nominative absolute; it is picked up by the formal subject, the pronoun “she” written with the verb “she gave.” The point of the construction is to throw the emphasis on “the woman.” But what makes this so striking is that a relative clause has been inserted to explain what is meant by the reference to the woman—”whom you gave to me.” Ultimately, the man is blaming God.
³⁰tn Heb “And the LORD God said.”
³¹tn The use of the demonstrative pronoun is enclitic, serving as an undeclined particle for emphasis. It gives the sense of “What in the world have you done?” (R. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, par. 118).
³²sn The word order puts the subject before the verb, giving prominence to it.
³³sn Note that there is no question asked of the serpent, no call for confession, as there was for the man and the woman, only the announcement of the curse. The order in this section is chiastic: the man is questioned. the woman is questioned, the serpent is cursed, the oracle is given for the woman, the oracle is given for the man. In the central part, the curse on the serpent, the words at first attach themselves to the reptile as the symbol of the temptation (especially in the ancient Near East where the serpent was venerated) but then focus on the spiritual force behind it all. And it is in this central part that we have the protevangelium (see W. Witfall, “Genesis 3:15—a Protevangelium?” CBQ 36 [1974]:361-365; and R. A. Martin, “The Earliest Messianic Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” JBL 84 [1965]:425-427).
³⁴tn The word “cursed” a passive participle from ‘arar (rro) basically means to be banished from the place of blessing. As Cain would later say, “You are driving me out of the land.” The word “cursed” is used only of the serpent in this chapter.
³⁵tn The comparative preposition reflects the earlier comparison: the serpent was more shrewd than all, and so more cursed than all. But all will share in the curse that ruins the blessing that God had given.
³⁶tn Heb “go, walk,” but for a serpent the idea is more of crawling, slithering.
³⁷sn Being restricted to crawling on the ground would necessarily involve “eating dust”—although that is not the diet of the serpent. But there are a couple of significant emphases here. The idea of being brought low, of eating dust as it were, is a symbol of defeat (the figure is a metonymy of adjunct). But even in defeat there is a victory of sorts. The word “dust” will be used in 3:19—”dust you are, and to dust you shall return.” Dust, this returning to dust in death, is part of the serpent’s prey. Death, then, will appear to be a victory for Satan, but will be overcome by Christ.
³⁸tn The word “enmity” is from the root byo meaning “be hostile, be an adversary or enemy.” The curse announces that there will be continuing hostility between the forces of good and evil. Indeed, the Hebrew word Satan (not used in Genesis) itself also means adversary.
³⁹tn The word “seed” is figurative (a metonymy of cause) for descendants or offspring. It is retained here because it is such a significant expression in the promises to the fathers, especially concerning the promised seed.
sn The enmity will surface at different levels, first between the serpent and the woman, then their immediate descendants. For the woman the seed will be Cain, then the whole human race, and then as the NT explains, Jesus Christ the Seed of the woman (Gal 4:4). For the seed of the serpent the interpretation would involve both the spirit world of evil powers and demons (see Gen 4:7) as well as those in that kingdom of darkness—one thinks of Jesus’ accusation to his enemies that they are of their father the devil (John 8:44).
⁴⁰tn The verb means “bruise”; it is metonymical for a crushing blow, the marks of the blow being put for the blow itself.
⁴¹tn “Head” is an adverbial accusative, locating the blow: he will bruise you in the head. A crushing blow to the head is perceived as fatal.
sn This passage has been interpreted as the first hint of the gospel in which Satan delivers a crippling blow to the Seed of the woman (Jesus), but he delivers a fatal blow to the Serpent (first defeating him through the death and resurrection [1 Cor 15:55-57] and then destroying him in the judgment [Rev 12:7-9; 20:7-10]). While Genesis does not clarify this, and the passage is not quoted per se in the NT, the connection of Jesus with the “seed” of the woman and the apostolic teachings on the crucifixion and the judgment on Satan clearly support it.
⁴²tn “Heel” is also an adverbial accusative, identifying this bruising as crippling but not fatal. The imagery of a serpent biting the heel is the natural background for this.
⁴³tn The imperfect tense is intensified by the infinitive absolute from the same verb.
⁴⁴tn The word “pain,” `iss<sup>e</sup>bon (/ObX=u!), an abstract noun related to the verb `asab (bXu), includes more than physical pain. It is emotional distress as well as physical pain. The same word is used in v. 17 for the man’s painful toil in the field.
⁴⁵tn The text literally has “and your conception,” leading some to interpret that having a lot of children was a result of the curse (probably to make up for the loss through death). But the parallelism of the verse shows that the pain is in the conception. So the two words form a nominal hendiadys, the second explaining the first. “Conception” here must be figurative since there is no pain in conception; it is a synecdoche, representing the entire process of childbirth and child rearing from the very start.
⁴⁶tn The Hebrew word means “desire.” But as with the English word “desire” that could mean a number of things. Many have concluded that it means sexual desire in this passage, probably because the passage is talking about the relationship between a wife and her husband, and because the word is used in the Song of Songs with that meaning. But that does not work very well here in Genesis. First, it makes little sense in the line with the contrast “he shall have the mastery over you.” Second, it implies that sexual desire was not part of the original creation, even though they were told to multiply. And third, it ignores the usage of the word in Gen 4:7 where it clearly has the idea of desire to control, or prompting to obey. Exegesis requires that the way a word is used by the same writer in the same context would take precedence over a usage by a different writer, in a different genre, at a different time. Here, then, the line is announcing a struggle, a conflict between the man and the woman—she will desire to control, but he will have the mastery. The same conflict is found in 4:7—sin wants to control Cain, but he can have the mastery over it. This fits the tone of the passage, which is a judgment oracle. It also fits the form of the oracles which bases the announcement on what happened. Because she desired to control, he will have the mastery—and this conflict will continue along with the struggle between good and evil. See further Susan T. Foh, “What is the Woman’s Desire?” WTJ 37 (1975):376-383.
⁴⁷tn Heb “Your desire to your husband;” “will be” is supplied. The sentence does not have a verb; it is a nominal sentence. Therefore, the verb supplied could be a past, present, or future tense, depending on the context. Here it is difficult because it is both past and future. “Your desire was to your husband” would fit the setting in the garden which is the basis for the announcement; but the focus of the oracle is that that struggle will be continued: “Your desire will be for your husband.”
⁴⁸tn The verb means “rule over” but in a way that emphasizes powerful control, domination, or mastery. This also is part of the baser human nature.
sn The interpreter of the passage must remember that this passage is the announcement of the oracle for sin. This is not the loving leading of the husband for a wife who physically desires her husband. This is what sin produces, a conflict or power struggle between the man and the woman, and the man gains the mastery by his strength. In Christian teaching about marriage, the sting of the curse must be removed by the filling of the Spirit (Eph 5:18-32).
⁴⁹tn Since there is no article on the word, the better rendering is that of the personal name in this place.
⁵⁰tn The idiom “listen to the voice of” means “obey.” This emphasis immediately in 3:17 follows logically from the point of 3:16b.
⁵¹sn For the ground to be cursed means that it will no longer yield its bounty, as the blessing from God had promised. The whole creation, Paul writes to the Romans, is still groaning under this curse, waiting for the day of redemption (Rom 8:22).
⁵²tn The Hebrew ba`abureka (;r#Wbu&B^) is more literally translated “on your account” or “because of you.” The idiomatic “thanks to you” tries to capture the point of this expression.
<sup>53</sup>sn The theme of eating is prominent throughout Gen 3. The prohibition was against eating from the tree of knowledge. The sin was in eating. The interrogation was concerning their eating. And so the curse focuses on eating in a “measure for measure” justice. Because they sinned by eating the forbidden fruit, God will forbid the ground to cooperate, and so it will be through painful toil that they will eat.
<sup>54</sup>tn The expression is a metonymy of adjunct, the sweat being connected to painful toil in the fields.
<sup>55</sup>tn “You shall eat” is also a metonymy of effect; the intended cause is the labor with sweat that will obtain the food to eat.
<sup>56</sup>sn The theme of mankind’s mortality is critical here in view of the temptation to be like God. Man will labor painfully to provide food, obviously not enjoying the bounty that creation promised. In place of the abundance of the garden, fruit trees especially, thorns and thistles will grow, but he will work the soil and produce the grain to make bread. This will continue until he returns to the soil from which he was taken (recalling the creation in 2:7 with the word play on Adam and ground). In spite of the dreams of immortality and divinity, man is but dust (2:7), and will return to dust. So much for hubris.
<sup>57</sup>sn In general, the themes of the curse oracles are important in the NT teaching that Jesus became the cursed one hanging on the tree. In his suffering and death, all the motifs are drawn together, the tree, the sweat, the thorns, and the dust of death (see Ps. 22:15). Jesus experienced it all to have victory over it through the resurrection.
<sup>58</sup>tn “Living one” or “Life-giver” (if related to Piel).
<sup>59</sup>tn The causal clause introduces the sentiment that explains the name. Where the one naming gives the explanation, the text normally uses “saying”; where the narrator explains it, the causal clause is used.
<sup>60</sup>sn The explanation of the name forms a paronomasia with the name: “Eve” is hawwah (hW?^) and “living” is hay (y?^). The name preserves the archaic form of the verb hayah (hw? for hy?), “to live,” with the middle waw; hay (y?^) is derived from the normal form hayah (hy?). (Compare the name Yahweh [hwhy] explained from hayah [hyh] “to be”). The Biblical account stands in strong contrast to the pagan material that presents a serpent goddess hawwat who is the mother of life, clearly showing corruption of the tradition (see Jan Heller, “Der Name Eva,” Archiv Orientalni 26 [1958]:636-656; and A. F. Key, “The Giving of Proper Names in the OT,” JBL 83 [1964]:55-59).
<sup>61</sup>tn Heb “And the LORD God made.”
<sup>62</sup>sn The text gives no indication of how this was done, or how they came by the skins. However, in chap. 4 Abel knows how to make an animal sacrifice, which suggests the family killed animals. The text is written using terms and expressions that assume that the readers were familiar with the Law of Moses (which is why some of the material is classified as P by critical scholars); the skins of the sacrifices went to the priests for clothing. The point one can reasonably conclude is that God deprived an animal of its life to clothe the sinners, something more significant than the leaves snatched from a tree that would never be missed.
<sup>63</sup>tn The particle hen (/h@) introduces a foundational clause, usually beginning with “since, because, now.”
<sup>64</sup>tn The infinitive serves epexegetically, explaining in what way the man had become like God—knowing good and evil.
<sup>65</sup>tn Heb “and now, lest he stretch forth.” Following the foundational clause, this clause forms the main point. But it is introduced with pen (/P#), which normally introduces a negative purpose, “lest….” The construction is elliptical: something must be done lest he stretch forth his hand. So the translation must interpret the point intended.
<sup>66</sup>tn The verb is the Piel preterite of salah (?lv), forming a word play with the previous use: to prevent the man’s sending out his hand, the LORD sends him out. But the Piel intensifies it: he expelled or banished him.
<sup>67</sup>tn The verb with the waw consecutive is made subordinate to the next verb, forming a temporal clause. This avoids any tautology with the previous verse that already stated that the LORD expelled him.
<sup>68</sup>tn Or “guarding angels.”
sn The Cherubim in the Bible seem to be a class of angels that are composite in appearance. Their main task seems to be to guard, here guarding the way to the tree of life. The curtain in the Tabernacle was to be embroidered with cherubim as well, symbolically guarding the way to God (see additionally, A. S. Kapelrud, “The Gates of Hell and the Guardian Angels of Paradise,” JAOS 70 <sup>33</sup>:151-156).
<sup>69</sup>tn The key word in the construction is the “flame”; it is qualified by the genitive of specification, “the sword”; and the bound construction is modified by the adjectival use of the participle, “which was flashing back and forth.” Was it lightning flashes that worked like a sword, or were there swords that gleamed and flashed like fire? No details are provided, other than that this is a supernatural—angels—means of preventing access to the tree.
<sup>1</sup>tn The disjunctive clause introduces a new beginning in contrast to the spectacular scene with which chap. 3 ended.
<sup>2</sup>tn Heb “knew,” a frequent euphemism for sexual relations.
<sup>3</sup>sn Here is another paronomasia on a name. The saying uses the Qal perfect of qanah (hnq). There are two verbs with this spelling, the one meaning “obtain, get” (so the AV translation assumed that), and the other meaning “create.” The latter fits this context very well. She has created a man! But the sound of the verb qaniti (yt!yn!q) reflects the sound of the name Qayin (/y!q^ and gives meaning to it.
<sup>4</sup>tn The particle -to# is clearly the preposition “with” as the versions attest. She has produced a child with the help of the LORD.
sn Any attempts to make this the sign of the accusative instead of the particle in order to obtain an interpretation that the woman thought she had given birth to the incarnate LORD, the Messiah who would bruise the serpent’s head, is simply reading into the text and most unnatural.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “And she added to bear.” The construction uses a verbal hendiadys to say that she bore another child, she again bore. Some commentators have suggested that because of the way this is expressed, emphasizing another birth but not mentioning another conceiving, the boys might have been twins.
<sup>6</sup>sn The name Abel is not defined here in the text, so it is risky to speculate. But the word lb#h# in Hebrew translates into “breath”; the name might have described him as a living, breathing, being.
<sup>7</sup>tn The designations of the two occupations are expressed with active participles, ro`eh (hu@r)), “shepherd,” and `obed (db@u)), “server.”
sn It is worth noting in the unfolding nature of this drama that Abel is occupied with sheep, living according to the original instruction of the Creator, whereas Cain is living under the curse, serving the ground. The text is not denigrating one occupation in favor of the other, but it is forming character sketches by making these observations. Moses is laying a foundation in the narration for later Levitical instructions about sacrifices and lives that would be pleasing to God.
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “And it happened at the end of days.”
sn The reader would conclude that the clause indicates the passing of a set period of time leading up to offering sacrifices. Chap. 1 had already included the “days” in the marking of set times for worship.
<sup>9</sup>tn “Offering” is Hebrew minhah (h?n=m!), the general word for a tribute, gift, or offering. However, it is the main word used in Lev 2 for the dedication offering. That type of offering could be vegetable. So one would conclude here that the content of the offering was not the critical issue, but the lack of faith by the offerer—something that gradually unfolds in the narrative.
<sup>10</sup>tn The text has “But Abel brought, also he….” Not only does the disjunctive waw stress the contrast, but so does the additional pronoun with “also”—oWh-<G^.
<sup>11</sup>tn Two prepositional phrases are used to qualify the kind of sacrifice that Abel brought: “from the first born” and “from the fattest of them.” These also could be interpreted as a hendiadys: “from the fattest of the firstborn of the flock.”
sn Cassuto’s discussion is to the point: here are two types of worshipers, the one who merely discharges a duty in the season, and the other who goes out of his way to please God with the first and the best.
<sup>12</sup>sn The verb huv simply means “gaze at, have regard for, look on with favor or devotion.” The text does not indicate how this was communicated, but it indicates that they knew immediately. Either there was some manifestation of divine pleasure given to Abel and withheld from Cain (fire consuming the sacrifice?), or there was an inner awareness of divine response.
<sup>13</sup>sn The Book of Hebrews explains the difference between the brothers as one of faith—Abel by faith offered a better sacrifice. Cain’s offering as well as his reaction to God’s displeasure is not a response of faith. See further, B. K. Waltke, “Cain and His Offering,” WTJ 48 (1986):363-372.
<sup>14</sup>tn The Hebrew idiom for anger used here is “and it was hot to Cain.” He burned with anger.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “And his face fell.” The idiom is meant to say that the inner anger is reflected on his expression. The fallen or downcast face (a metonymy of adjunct) expresses anger, dejection, or depression. Conversely, in Numbers 6 the High Priestly blessing speaks of the LORD lifting up His face and giving peace.
<sup>16</sup>tn The introduction of the conditional clause with an interrogative particle prods the answer from Cain, as if he should have known this. It is not a condemnation, but an encouragement to do what is right.
<sup>17</sup>tn The text is difficult, because only one word occurs, s<sup>e</sup>’et (to@C=), which appears to be the infinitive construct from the verb “lift up” (ovn). The sentence reads: “If you do well, uplift.” On the surface it seems to be the antithesis of the fallen face. Everything will be changed if he does well—God will show him favor, he will not be angry, and his face will reflect that. But more may be intended since the second half of the verse forms the contrast: “If you do not do well, sin is crouching….” Not doing well leads to sinful attack; doing well leads to victory and God’s blessing.
<sup>18</sup>tn “Crouching” (Jb@r)) is an active participle. Sin is portrayed with animal imagery here as a beast crouching and ready to pounce (zoomorphism). There is also an Akkadian cognate that is a type of demon. The JPS translation of Genesis in its first edition translated this, “Sin is the demon at the door.”
<sup>19</sup>sn The exegete will note the similarity of this last part of the verb with 3:16. Here the desire is that which sin has for Cain, a desire to control for the sake of evil; but Cain can have the mastery over it (a potential imperfect works well here, although the NIV’s obligatory imperfect does too— “you must master it”). It will be a struggle, but sin can be defeated by righteousness. In addition to this connection to chap. 3, see Alan J. Hauser, “Linguistic and Thematic Links Between Genesis 4:1-6 and Genesis 2—3,” JETS 23 (1980):297-306.
<sup>20</sup>tn The Hebrew text seems to be elliptical here. It is as if in the midst of starting to tell something that the narrator breaks it off and gets to when they were in the field, to the murder (the figure is aposiopesis, a sudden silence). A translation “Cain told his brother” does not fit well with this verb. And the reading supplied by the versions is transparently secondary: “Let us go into the field.”
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “Cain rose up against.” The verb indicates this was a willful attack by Cain when they were in the field; hence the translation “attacked.”
<sup>22</sup>sn The reader will note the repetition of “his brother” throughout the narrative. In the chapter “Cain” is mentioned 14 times, “Abel” 7 times, and “his brother” referring to Abel, 7 times. This stresses that it is a sin against a brother, a point John picks up in his epistle (1 John 3:12).
<sup>23</sup>tn The question is again rhetorical, asking for an explanation of what has happened.
<sup>24</sup>sn Two key verbs from these chapters are used here. The verb “to know” is used first. Cain lies in saying he does not know—such is the knowledge of good and evil. The second is the verb “keep”; in a defiant denial (another rhetorical question) he repudiates the responsibility. But he is responsible for his brother’s welfare—especially if he wanted to kill him. See Paul A. Riemann, “Am I My Brother’s Keeper?” Interp 24 (1970):482-491.
<sup>25</sup>tn The question is rhetorical, condemning Cain for the murder.
<sup>26</sup>tn The word “voice” is a personification; the evidence of blood shed speaks condemnation to Cain, just as a witness would cry out of the deed. For helpful insights, see Gerhard von Rad, Biblical Interpretations in Preaching (Nashville: Abingdon, 1977); and L. Morris, “The Biblical Use of the Term `Blood’.” JThS, n.s. 6 (1955-56):77-82.
²⁷sn The curse is attached both to Cain and the ground, which are seen here to have been in collusion. Cain is cursed in that he is banished from the fertile soil or ground and will be a fugitive out in the earth; the ground is cursed in that it will not produce as it had been.
²⁸tn Heb “it will not add ([s@t)) to give (tT@),” a verbal hendiadys expressing that the ground will no longer give. The infinitive becomes the main verb, and the imperfect tense becomes adverbial.
²⁹tn Heb “its strength.”
³⁰tn Two (Hollow verb) participles forming a hendiadys are used here to express this thought: na` wanad (dnw un). One serves as the main description, and the other modifies it. Since they are synonymous, several translations are possible. Literally “a wanderer and a fugitive”; but better would be “a wandering fugitive” or a “ceaseless wanderer.”
sn The two words are similar in meaning and in sound, and therefore form a paronomasia as well. The ancient versions attempted to capture this: Latin has vagus et profugus, and Greek has stenon kai tremon.
<sup>31</sup>tn The Hebrew word means “iniquity.” But by metonymy it has added the meanings of guilt for the iniquity, and punishment for the iniquity—which is the use here. Cain is nowhere in the Bible presented as repenting for his sin.
<sup>32</sup>tn The form is the infinitive construct with the preposition min (/m!), which serves here to express the comparative degree.
<sup>33</sup>sn The motifs of hiding from the LORD and being driven out of the fertile soil reflect the account in Gen 3.
<sup>34</sup>tn The text has laken (/k@l), “therefore.” In this context it carries the sense of “okay,” or “in that case then I will do this.”
<sup>35</sup>sn The text does not identify what the sign is. Von Rad’s suggestion that this is the beginning of tattoos is probably wide of the mark. What the text is saying is that God becomes Cain’s protector. Here is common grace—Cain and his community will live on under God’s care, but without salvation. The passage also serves to show the LORD’s desire to control the avenging of blood.
<sup>36</sup>tn Heb “And Cain knew his wife,” a frequent euphemism for sexual relations.
<sup>37</sup>tn Heb “he begot.”
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “And Lamech took.”
<sup>39</sup>sn The use of the word “father” in this passage means founder, the first to establish such lifestyles and occupations.
<sup>40</sup>tn “keep” is supplied in the verse.
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “And the sister.”
<sup>42</sup>tn Heb “give ear” (a denominative verb).
<sup>43</sup>tn The word yeled (dl#y#) here probably refers to a youthful warrior, not a child.
<sup>44</sup>sn Matt 18:22 may very well be alluding to this passage when it records Jesus’ advice to forgive seventy times seven.
<sup>45</sup>tn Heb “And Adam knew his wife,” a frequent euphemism for sexual relations.
<sup>46</sup>sn The name Seth probably means something like “placed, appointed, set, granted”—a new beginning or foundation, assuming it is actually related to the verb that is used in the sentiment. At any rate, the name set (tv@ ) and the verb sat (tv) (Qal perfect) form a paronomasia.
<sup>47</sup>tn “people” is supplied. The construction uses a passive verb without an expressed subject. “To call was begun” can be interpreted to mean that people began to call.
<sup>48</sup>tn The verb qara’ (orq) can be translated in different ways in different contexts. In this passage, normally rendered “call on” the name of the LORD, the idea is probably more that of proclamation than of prayer. Exodus 34:6 shows such a meaning clearly, using expressions similar to this and to Gen. 12:8. So there were those who made proclamation of Yahweh by name (His nature). See further Benno Jacob, First Book of the Bible, p. 39.
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “book, roll.”
<sup>2</sup>tn The text has ‘adam (<do).
<sup>3</sup>tn The text has ‘adam (<do).
<sup>4</sup>tn The first verb with its waw consecutive is subordinated to the second, forming a temporal clause.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “he begot.”
<sup>6</sup>tn Heb “days of.”
<sup>7</sup>tn Heb “he begot.”
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “all the days of Adam which he lived”
<sup>9</sup>sn The genealogy follows a set pattern, tracing the line from Adam to Noah, forming a bridge between the early accounts and the flood story. Its constant theme of the reign of death in the race is broken once with the account of Enoch; but the genealogy ends with hope for the future through Noah. See further G. F. Hasel, “The Genealogies of Gen. 5 and 11 and their Alleged Babylonian Background,” AUSS 16 (1978):361-374; and “Genesis 5 and 11,” Origins 7 (1980):23-37.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “he begot.”
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “he begot.”
<sup>12</sup>sn With the seventh panel we have a digression from the pattern. Instead of saying that Enoch lived, the text says that he walked with God. The verb, a Hithpael preterite, stresses a life of close fellowship with God, a life of devotion and piety. Jude 14 says that Enoch preached about the coming judgment. See F. S. Parnham, “Walking with God,” EvQ 46 (1974):117,118.
<sup>13</sup>tn The Hebrew form is the negative particle ‘en (/yo@), “there is not, there was not” with a pronominal suffix: “he was not.” Instead of saying that he died, the text says he no longer was present.
<sup>14</sup>sn The text simply states that God took him. The language is similar to that of the translation of Elijah to glory when the LORD took him. So here we may conclude that God overruled death for this man who walked with him.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “and he begot.”
<sup>16</sup>sn The name Noah appears to be related to the word nuah (?^Wn), “to rest.” There will be several word plays on the name in the story of the flood.
<sup>17</sup>sn The verb Wnm@?&n^y= is from the root naham (<?n), “to comfort” in the Piel. The letters nun and heth pick up the sounds in the name Noah, forming a paronomasia on the name. They are not from the same verbal root, and so the connection is only by sound. However, in an effort to make the play one of meaning as well, some have suggested the man’s name was originally something like Menahem, a word related to this verb. But that is gratuitous. Lamech’s sentiment expresses the oppression of living under the curse, with the hope for relief in some way through the birth of Noah. His words proved to be prophetic—ironic but prophetic. The relief would come with a new beginning after the flood. See E. G. Kraeling, “The Interpretations of the Name Noah in Genesis 5:29,” JBL 48 (1929):138-143.
<sup>1</sup>tn The word used is literally “the man”; but the article here is indicating the generic use of the word: “mankind, humankind.”
<sup>2</sup>tn This disjunctive clause is circumstantial to the initial temporal clause: it could be rendered, “with daughters being born to them.” The births of daughters is singled out because of the point of the main clause in v. 2.
<sup>3</sup>tn The text has been translated literally here, leaving the interpretation to another discussion.
sn In the OT the title “sons of God” refers to angels; but in this passage we are dealing with cohabitation, which requires physical bodies. So the language portrays them as supernatural beings, but the experience requires that they be human. Cassuto’s discussion of this material has proven most helpful. He sees the passage as a polemic against pagan mythology in which divine beings (the pantheon in Ugaritic) cohabit with mortal women to produce giants or demigods in the earth (see in Biblical and Oriental Studies, Vol 1, pp. 17-28). One could argue then that in the biblical record we have an account of powerful despots, perhaps demon-possessed, who viewed themselves as divine, who began harims and in the process produced some other super human people, the giants of old. Their idea was that that was the way to immortality. But God judged it with the flood because they were just flesh. There is much literature on this passage, but perhaps see M. Kline, “Divine Kingship and Genesis 6:1-4,” WTJ 24 (1961-2):187-204; Willem A. VanGemeren, “The Sons of God in Gen. 6:1-4 [An Example of Evangelical Demythologization?],” WTJ 43 (1981):320-348; and A. Bustanoby, “The Giants and the Sons of God,” Eternity 15 (1964):19-20.
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “the daughters of men/mankind.”
<sup>5</sup>tn The difficulty is that yadon (/Ody) only occurs in this place. It has been translated “strive” or “contend with” because the form resembles the word that would mean that—but this is not exactly the same as that (yadin [/yd!y]). The old Greek had “remain with” mankind. Speiser rather convincingly has argued that the term matches very well an Akkadian cognate that means “protect” or “shield.” This fits the passage well: The LORD’s Spirit will not always protect the race, for the race will suddenly be destroyed (E. A. Speiser, “YDWN, Gen. 6:3,” JBL 75 [1956]:126-29).
<sup>6</sup>sn The meaning of the last clause should not be interpreted to mean that the age expectancy of people from now on would be 120—that does not hold true. Rather, if “man” in this passage does indeed refer to humankind, then this would be the time set before the judgment.
<sup>7</sup>tn This is parenthetical, explaining that there were Nephilim, giants, even after the flood.
<sup>8</sup>tn Whereas the Hebrew expression “so and so knew his wife” conveys intimacy, and may be translated “slept with,” here the expression “went in to” them simply means they had sexual intercourse. It conveys more of a use than an intimacy.
<sup>9</sup>tn This is the same expression used earlier; “daughters of man” would mean women in the race.
<sup>10</sup>tn The suffix “them” is masculine plural.
<sup>11</sup>tn The explanatory clause uses first the word gibborim (<yr!B)G!h^) to describe these Nephilim. The word means “warriors, mighty men, heroes.” This will be further clarified with the appositional statement that they were “men of renown.” So the reference in the account is to those superhuman beings who held the world in their power, who live in the memory of all ancient lore.
<sup>12</sup>tn Heb “men of name” (i.e., famous men).
<sup>13</sup>sn The verb “to see” (hor) used here in the sense of perceived or understood, is an anthropomorphic expression for God’s evaluation of the race. The expression forms a contrast with the evaluation throughout creation, when God saw that everything was good.
<sup>14</sup>tn The noun rX#y@ is related to the verb, yasar (rXy), “to form, fashion” (with a design). It refers to human plans or intentions. With the connection to 2:7 in mind, the text would be saying that people had taken their God-given capacities and used them to devise evil. The word yeser (rX#y@) became a significant theological term in Rabbinic literature for what might be called the sin nature—the evil inclination (see also R. E. Murphy, “Yeser in the Qumran Literature,” Bib 39 [1958]:334-44).
<sup>15</sup>tn The related verb hasab (bvh) means “to think, devise, reckon.” The noun then would carry the sense of thoughts or considerations.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “his heart” (referring to “man”)
<sup>17</sup>sn There is hardly a stronger statement of the wickedness of the race than this. Here is the result of falling into the “knowledge of good and evil”—evil becomes dominant, and the good is ruined by the evil.
<sup>18</sup>tn The older versions simply translated this word in its normal sense—”repented.” Although that is the meaning of the word naham (<?n) in the Niphal stem, the language here is anthropomorphic—it is as if the LORD were sorry that he had made mankind. The usage expresses the feeling of grief the LORD had over the plight of the race (H. Van Dyke Parunak, “A Semantic Survey of NHM,” Bib 56 [1975]:512-32).
<sup>19</sup>tn The verb bX@u^t=Y!w^, a Hithpael from `asab (bXu), makes a strong allusion to the curse oracles in Gen 3. Because Adam and Eve sinned, their life would be filled with pain; but sin in the human race also brought pain to God.
sn The words in this passage also reflect the ending of Gen 5. Lamech had hoped that Noah would bring them comfort (naham [<?n]) from their work (`asah [hCu]) and their painful toil (`iss^ebon [/ObX=u!]); but now we read that God was sorry (naham [<?n]) that he had made (`asah [hCu]) mankind for it brought Him great pain (`asab [bXu]).
²⁰tn The text simply has “from man to beast, to creatures, and to birds of the air.” The use of the prepositions min . . . `ad (du^ . . . /m!) stresses the extent of the judgment in creation.
<sup>21</sup>tn The disjunctive waw forms a contrastive clause—the race will be destroyed, but Noah will not.
<sup>22</sup>tn The word hen (/?@ [s.v. /n?]) means “unmerited favor” or “grace.” The passage is stressing that Noah escaped the judgment by God’s grace—he did not deserve the favor that was extended to him.
<sup>23</sup>tn “In the eyes of” is an anthropomorphic expression for God’s opinion or decision. The Lord saw that the whole race was corrupt; but he looked in favor on Noah.
<sup>24</sup>sn The description of Noah in this verse has proved perplexing to critical scholarship in view of the conduct of Noah after the Flood, so much so that many have posited separated traditions or even different Noahs. But the words “righteous” and “blameless” describe members of God’s covenant (such as Lot who was sedeq [qd#X#]). The key is the change of sections—one ends with a note that Noah found grace, and the next begins by describing the life of Noah when God called him. Noah is called righteous after he received grace. The two may form a hendiadys, as Cassuto has it: “a wholly righteous man”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “Noah.” The proper name has been replaced with the pronoun for stylistic reasons.
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>27</sup>sn”Earth” is a metonymy of subject, meaning the people in the earth.
<sup>28</sup>tn The verb means “destroy, ruin”; it is used to describe the destruction of Sodom in Gen 13:10. Here the form is Niphal, stressing that it had corrupted itself and therefore was corrupt.
sn The corruption is reported in two stages. First, the narrator describes it in v. 11; and then v. 12 states that God saw (recalling Gen. 1 and Gen 5:5) how corrupt it was. And if this were not enough, a causal clause is added to explain that all flesh had corrupted itself. This emphasis forms a stark contrast to the Babylonian account of the flood which has no note of sin as the cause, only human noise.
<sup>29</sup>tnLiterally, “in the presence of,” “before the face of”
<sup>30</sup>tn This term for violence can mean both physical violence or injury and ethical violence such as social injustice.
<sup>31</sup>tn Or “God saw how corrupt the earth was”
<sup>32</sup>tn “Flesh” is a figure (synecdoche) primarily for people; but in the chapter it will include all living things.
<sup>33</sup>sn See R. Lapointe, “The Divine Monologue as a Channel of Revelation,” CBQ 32 (1970):161-181.
<sup>34</sup>tn The verb form could be either the perfect tense or the participle; but in the context, especially with a participle paralleling it, the participle is preferable. It would carry the nuance of the immediate, imminent future: the end is coming—its about to happen.
<sup>35</sup>tn The participle, especially after hinneh (hN@h!) expresses the imminent future (futur instans): I am about to. It is certain, and could be translated “I will surely destroy.”
sn Note the word play: God uses the same word, sahat (t?v), now in the Hiphil for the destruction. They had ruined themselves with violence, and now he would ruin them with judgment.
<sup>36</sup>sn The verb is an imperative. A motif of this section is that Noah did as the LORD commanded him—he was obedient. That obedience had to come from faith in the Word of the LORD, a point Hebrews makes. So the theme of obedience to God’s word continues in this book, this prologue to the Law. This section is especially significant in that regard, because there are many parallels between this event and the escape of the Israelites from Egypt when God judge the Egyptians by drowning.
<sup>37</sup>tn A transliteration of the Hebrew yields “gopher wood.” But the exact nature of the wood involved is uncertain.
<sup>38</sup>tn Hebrew kapar (rpK) “cover, smear (=caulk),” appears to be a homonym for the better known kipper (rP#K!), “atone, expiate, pacify,” which shows up in Levitical texts especially.
sn It would make no sense to try to use a definition of atonement for what Noah did to the ark—he was caulking it. But it is also difficult to argue the reverse, that the basic idea of kipper (rP#K!, the Piel) means “cover over” sins and not “atone.” The usage shows that it means “remove the punishment for sin, atone, expiate.” The words are homonyms and unrelated. Now, having said that, whether or not Moses is intending by the use of this word to make the reader think of the other would be hard to prove or disprove.
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high.”
<sup>40</sup>tn Heb “a cubit.”
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “to a cubit you shall finish it from above.” The idea of the line is that Noah was to leave an eighteen inch opening from the top for a window for light.
<sup>42</sup>tn The construction uses the independent personal pronoun for a contrasting emphasis, and then the imminent future participle for certainty: “As for me, I am surely going to bring”
<sup>43</sup>tn Or “the floodwaters.”
<sup>44</sup>sn The verb sahat (t?v) is repeated yet again, only now as the infinitive expressing the purpose of the flood.
<sup>45</sup>tn The Hebrew construction here is different from the previous two; here it is ruah hayyim (<yY!?^ ?^Wr), and not nephesh hayyah (hY?^ vp#n#) or nishmat hayyim (<yY!?^ tm^v=n!). It refers to everything that breathes.
<sup>46</sup>tn The verb yt!m)q!h&w^ is the Hiphil perfect with a waw consecutive (picking up the future sense from the participles) from qum (<Wq). This is the language of covenant making; it can in different contexts mean either to make a covenant or to confirm a covenant.
<sup>47</sup>tn The text has “from all life (hay [y?^]) from all flesh (basar [rCB]), two from all you shall bring.” Here the word “flesh” clearly means more than human beings alone.
<sup>48</sup>tn The Piel infinitive construct ty)?&h^l= shows the purpose of the bringing the animals into the ark—saving life. The Piel of this verb here means “preserve alive.”
<sup>49</sup>tn Or “to be kept alive.”
<sup>50</sup>tn The verb is a direct imperative: “And you, take for yourself.” The form stresses the immediate nature of the instruction; the pronoun underscores the directness.
<sup>51</sup>tn The form follows the pattern in the section: “from every food” meaning “some of every kind of food.”
<sup>52</sup>tn Or “will be eaten”
<sup>53</sup>tn Heb “and gather it to you”
<sup>54</sup>sn There is a great deal of literature about the flood story. Some pieces that should be included are: Gordon J. Wenham, “The Coherence of the Flood Narrative,” VT 28 (1978):336-348; A. R. Millard, “A New Babylonian `Genesis Story’,” TynB 18 (1967):3-18; Marin Kessler, “Rhetorical Criticism of Genesis 7,” in Rhetorical Criticism, Essays in Honor of James Muilenberg, edited by Jared Jackson and Martin Kessler, pp. 1-17 (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1974); and Alexander Heidel, The Gilgamesh Epic and the Old Testament Parallels (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1946).
⁵⁵tn The last clause seems redundant: “and thus (ken [/K@]) he did.” It obviously serves to underscore the obedience of Noah to all that God had said. It also alludes to the clause “and it was so” (ken [/K@]) of Gen 1, when God spoke and things came into existence.
¹tn The direct object is placed first in the clause to give it prominence.
²tn The verb “to see” as used here with God as the subject signifies His evaluative discernment.
³sn For a study of the Levitical terminology of “clean” and “unclean” see along with other sources L. E. Toombs, “Clean and Unclean,” IDB, Vol. 1, p. 643.
⁴tn The text literally has “a man and his wife”
⁵sn For a study of what seem to be contradictions in the account, see the above mentioned article by Kessler. He concludes that the account is a single account with variation by design. He also argues that there is no evidence of sources woven together, but only of a single account written in the spirit of Hebrew parallelism.
⁶tn Now the Hebrew has “male and female.”
⁷tn The word “seed” clearly means the descendants or offspring of the various kinds of animals. “Seed” was chosen for the narrative because it captures the principle of having a male and a female of every kind of creature in the ark.
⁸tn Heb “For seven days yet” meaning “after seven days”
⁹tn The Hiphil participle (ryF!m=m^) here also expresses the certainty of the act in the imminent future.
¹⁰tn The text has a waw disjunctive beginning the first clause (Now Noah was) as well as the second (and the flood). The age of Noah receives prominence; the parallel clause is subordinated to be a temporal clause.
¹¹tn The verb is hayah (hyh), usually defined as “to be.” But the verb can mean “happen, come to pass, occur, come” or the like. Here the translation of “came” fits better for the flood that began and continued.
¹²tn The preposition min (/m!) is here causal, explaining why they entered the ark.
¹³tn Heb “two two” meaning “in twos”
¹⁴sn The text uses t^ehom (<OhT=) again here, the word for the watery deep, the great ocean. But more is intended by the word: it seems to picture here subterranean waters from the abyss, something under the earth that would contribute to the rapid rise of water. The significance seems to be, among other things, that in this judgment God was returning the world to its earlier condition of being enveloped with water—a judgment and re-creation motif (see Gerhard Hasel, “The Fountains of the Great Deep,” Origins 1 [1974]:67-72; and “The Biblical View of the Extent of the Flood,” Origins, 2 [1975]:77-95).
¹⁵tn Heb “was.”
¹⁶tn Heb “and” followed by “with him.”
¹⁷tn Heb “the sons of Noah.”
¹⁸tn Heb “and the wife of Noah.”
¹⁹tn Heb “its kind.”
²⁰tn Heb “its kind.”
²¹tn Heb “its kind.”
²²tn Heb “every bird (zippor [rOPX!]) every wing.”
²³tn Heb “flesh.”
²⁴tn The text has “Those that went in, went in male and female.”
²⁵tnThe clause beginning with the waw consecutive and the preterite (WBr=Y!w^) is subordinated to the following parallel verb.
²⁶tn The two verbs “lifted” and “raised” could form a hendiadys: “they lifted the ark high” above the earth.
²⁷tn The text has wayyigb^eru (WrB=g=Y!w^ from rbG), meaning to become great or mighty. It means more than that the waters rose—they became strong.
²⁸tn Heb “went.”
²⁹tn Heb “exceedingly, exceedingly” (repetition).
³⁰tn Heb “and they were covered”
³¹tn The text has “The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward and they covered the mountains.” Obviously, a flood of 20 feet did not cover the mountains; it must mean it covered the mountains by twenty feet. Some, however, suggest that the mountains were formed during this great upheaval.
³²tn The text has “everything which has in its nostrils the breath of the spirit of life”; it joins the two expressions together to cover all the previous listings made.
³³tn Heb “And he wiped.”
³⁴Literally, “from man to animal to creeping…”
³⁵tn Heb “and they were wiped from.”
³⁶tn Heb “And he survived, only Noah and.”
³⁷tn The verb sa’ar (rov) means “be left over, survive” in the Niphal. It is the word used in later biblical texts for the remnant, those who escape judgment. See Gerhard Hasel, “Semantic Values of Derivatives of the Hebrew Root S’R,” AUSS 11 (1973):152-169.
³⁸sn The text clearly means that the flood lasted for this period of time. But the choice of words suggests that the waters were stronger than the earth, that they prevailed. The earth and everything in it was no match for the return of the chaotic deep.
¹tn The word “remember” often carries the sense of acting in accordance with what is remembered, i.e., fulfilling the covenant promises (see B. S. Childs, Memory and Tradition, esp. p. 34).
²tn Heb “And God caused.”
³sn The beginning of the new creation starts to unfold here in a way reminiscent of chap. 1. With the world covered with water, a wind (ruah [?^Wr]) from God blows across it and the waters recede and dry land appears. The difference is that there it was the Spirit (ruah [?^Wr]) of God hovering over the waters, because life would come from the water and the land. Here life is already present in the ark.
⁴tn The Niphal preterite beginning the verse here receives a past perfect translation to reflect the fact that the sources of the water stopped before the waters receded.
⁵tn The construction used is a Qal preterite from sub (bWv) with its infinitive absolute joined with an infinitive absolute from halak (Elh) to add the idea of “continually”: the waters continually kept receding.
⁶tn Heb “the waters.”
⁷tn The waw consecutive on the preterite is here given a sequential translation showing the result; the past perfect nuance reflects the idea that the water had gone down by the end of the days and not at the end of the days.
⁸sn The verb wattanah (?n^Tw^, from ?^Wn) begins a number of occurrences that draw on the words of Lamech (5:29) by playing on the name of Noah. Cassuto’s commentary traces this theme fully.
⁹tn Heb “and the waters.”
¹⁰tn The construction is again emphatic, a perfect tense followed by two infinitives absolute. The perfect tense from hayah (hyh) provides a periphrastic sense with the infinitive hasor (rOs?), “recede,” while the infinitive halok (EOlh) adds the idea of “continually.”
¹¹tn The verb is the Niphal perfect of ra’ah (hor), “see.” Here a potential nuance for the perfect (though rare) makes good sense—they could be seen.
¹²tn The introductory verbal form way^ehi (yh!y=w^), traditionally rendered “and it came to pass,” serves essentially as a temporal indicator for the past time and need not be translated.
¹³tn The perfect tense refers to action preceding the opening of the window, and is therefore given the past perfect nuance.
¹⁴tn Heb “and it went, going and returning.” The verb yasa’ (oXy), given here the translation of flying, is modified by two infinitives absolute giving the meaning of going back and forth.
¹⁵tn The text also has “from him.”
¹⁶tn The word qalal (llq) normally means “to be light,” and then “to treat lightly, curse.” It is unusual in this passage; it means the waters had become slight, abated.
¹⁷/sn The word manoah (?^Onm from ?^Wn) continues the theme of “rest” in the chapter.
¹⁸tn “still covered” is supplied.
¹⁹tn Heb “him;” the referent (Noah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
²⁰tn Heb “it;” the referent (the dove) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
²¹tn The text uses a verbal hendiadys: “and he added to send out,” meaning, “He sent out again.” The Piel infinitive becomes the main verb.
²²tn The clause with the waw consecutive is subordinated to the next clause as a temporal clause.
²³tn The deictic particle hinneh (hN@h!) draws attention to the olive leaf in a vivid way; it sets this point apart from the narrative flow.
²⁴tn Heb “And he waited.”
²⁵tn “again” is supplied.
²⁶tn A verbal hendiadys is again used: “it did not add [to] return” meaning “it did not return again.”
sn For the study of this section of the account, read W. O. E. Oesterley, “The Dove with the Olive Leaf (Gen VIII 8—11),” ExT 18 (1906,7):377-78.
²⁷sn This is the six hundred and first year of Noah’s life of course.
²⁸tn Heb “and saw and behold.”
²⁹tn In v. 13 the ground (ha’adamah [hmdo&h]) was dry; now the earth (ha’ares [Jr#oh]) was dry—the longer the wait, the further the extent of the drying.
³⁰tn The construction has as the main verb the Hiphil imperative, “bring out,” followed by a series of perfect tenses each with waw consecutive, giving each of them either a nuance equal to the imperative or a purpose of it by logical subordination. “Bring out…that they may….”
³¹tn Heb “according to their families.”
³²tn Heb “And Noah built.”
³³sn F. B. Maurice has an entire chapter on the sacrifice of Noah in his book The Doctrine of Sacrifice Deduced from the Scriptures (London: Macmillan, 1893). The whole burnt offering, according to Leviticus 1, represented the worshipper’s complete surrender and dedication to the LORD. After the flood Noah could see that God was not only a God of wrath, but a God of redemption and restoration. How could the one who escaped the catastrophe best express his gratitude and submission? Through sacrificial worship, acknowledging God as the sovereign of the universe, and acknowledging that the race had sinned and was worthy of death.
³⁴tn The LORD smelled (wayyarah [?r^Yw^]) a “soothing smell” (reah hannihoah [?^?)yN!h^ ?^yr@]). The object forms a cognate accusative with the verb to strengthened the idea of God’s response. The language is anthropomorphic: the offering had a sweet aroma that pleased or soothed (from nuah [?^Wn] again) God. The expression in Leviticus 1 signifies that God accepts the offering with pleasure, and in accepting the offering he accepts the worshipper.
³⁵tn Heb “and the LORD said.”
³⁶tn Another verbal hendiadys is used here: “I will not add to curse,” meaning never again curse.
sn Here the verb “curse” is the word qalal (llq) in the Piel. It is as if the use of this root twice before in the chapter has been foreshadowing this use. In using the word to say that the waters gradually abated or became slight, the writer is hinting that the whole flood was a curse; and now the text records that God says he will not curse, i.e., treat lightly, the earth again.
³⁷tn A concessive clause is expected here, but the particle ki (yK!) does not normally express that. If it is a causal clause, then it acknowledges the evil condition of the human race as a reason not to destroy it again.
³⁸tn Heb “the heart of mankind.”
³⁹tn Heb “his.”
⁴⁰tn The first clause is elliptical; it simply has “yet all the days of the earth.” The idea is “[while there are] yet all the days of the earth,” meaning, as long as the earth exists.
¹tn The suffixes on these two nouns are clearly objective genitives—the animals will fear humans.
²tn Or “shall be.”
³sn The hand signifies power. So to say the animals have been given into the hands of the humans is to say that humans have the power over them.
⁴tn Heb this section reads “will be for you for food”; but this is the use of the preposition for possession.
⁵tn “I gave you” is supplied from the line.
⁶tn The classification of this perfect tense is instantaneous perfect, for God is giving the provision now through the declaration.
⁷tn Heb “Only.”
⁸tn Or “flesh.”
⁹tn The text has “its life, its blood.” The second word is in apposition to the first, explaining what is meant by the life remaining in it. Since the life is in the blood, meat that had the lifeblood in it was forbidden.
sn A study of this section will discover the connection between the prohibitions and the recent flood. People might conclude that life is cheap and therefore treat it lightly. But God will not permit them to kill, or even to eat anything still very much alive, or with evidence of life in it.
¹⁰tn “in it” supplied.
¹¹tn Again the text uses apposition to modify what kind of blood is being discussed: “for your blood, [that is] for your life.” See C. L. Dewar, “The Biblical Use of the Term `Blood’.” JThS, NS 4 (1953):204-208.
<sup>12</sup>tn “punishment” is supplied from the context. The verb vrD means “require, seek, ask for, exact”; here it means that God will exact the punishment for the taking of a life, he will require the penalty for the crime. See Ralph Mawdsley, “Capital Punishment in Gen. 9:6,” Central Bible Quarterly 18 (1975):20-25.
<sup>13</sup>tn The expression used here is “from the hand of” which means “out of the hand, out of the power” and is nearly identical to the preposition min (/m!) alone (cf. BDB).
<sup>14</sup>tn The article has the generic use, representing the class—mankind, i.e., people.
<sup>15</sup>tn “punishment” supplied.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “the man.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “his brother. The point is that God will require the blood of someone who kills, especially since the person killed is a relative of the killer.
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “the blood of man.”
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “by man.”
<sup>20</sup>sn For more information on the word “image,” see James Barr, “The Image of God in the Book of Genesis—a Study of Terminology,” BJRL 51 (1968—1969):11-26.
<sup>21</sup>sn The waw disjunctive with the independent pronoun forms a strong contrast to what has preceded. Against the backdrop of the warnings about taking life, God now instructs the people to produce life—in the same language used for Adam and his generation.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “And God said.”
<sup>23</sup>tn The text has “saying.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The particle hin<sup>e</sup>ni (yn!n=h!) with the participle meqim (<yq!m@) give the sense of immediacy or imminence to the act, as if to say, “Here I am establishing.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “your seed.”
<sup>26</sup>tn The verb yt!m)q!h&w^ is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it therefore carries the same time of action as the participle at the beginning of the speech. If that was taken as future, so will this one; if that was immediate, then this should be a present tense (“I establish”).
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “and all flesh will not be cut off again”
<sup>28</sup>sn In studying the making of covenants in Genesis, consider W. F. Albright, “The Hebrew Expression for `Making a Covenant’ in Pre-Israelite Documents,” BASOR 121 (1951):21,22.
²⁹tn “a covenant” supplied
³⁰tn Hebrew `olam (<lOu) means “ever, forever, lasting, perpetual.” The covenant would be for generations in perpetuity, for generations to come.
<sup>31</sup>tn Or “I have set.” The verb yT!t^n is the perfect tense; but since the language in the context is the immediate making of the covenant through the speech, the nuance here should be the instantaneous perfect: I do here and now set my bow.
<sup>32</sup>sn The word tv#q# is the word for “bow,” the weapon. Gerhard von Rad in his commentary sees the imagery of God’s hanging up of his battle bow at the end of the flood, a sign that peace will exist.
<sup>33</sup>tn The temporal indicator, often translated “it shall be,” provides the future time for the temporal clause.
<sup>34</sup>tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; as such it can be subordinated to the following similar tense, forming a temporal clause.
<sup>35</sup>tn The infinitive rK)z=l!, “to remember,” here expresses the result of seeing the rainbow.
<sup>36</sup>sn This last clause is a parenthetical clause, beginning with the disjunctive waw on the noun. It introduces the true motif of the passage, who the Canaanites were and why they were cursed. The passage will make it clear that a person Canaan is not what is meant, but Canaanites. Accordingly, the statement here is saying more than that the Canaanites traced their ancestry to Ham; it is saying that they share the same moral abandonment that their ancestor displayed. See A. van Selms, “The Canaanites in the Book of Genesis,” OTS 12 ((1958):182-213.
<sup>37</sup>tn The verb is actually JWP, “to scatter” (Niphal, “scattered”) a verb that will figure prominently in the dispersion at Babel in chap. 11. It could be rendered, “from these the whole world was scattered (with people).”
<sup>38</sup>tn The verse begins, “And Noah began.”
sn The verb “begin” (halal [ll?]) occurs frequently in these early chapters in significant ways: people began to multiply (6:1), Nimrod was the first hunter (10:8), and the people of Shinar first built the tower (11:6); but also earlier people began to proclaim the name of the LORD (4:26).
<sup>39</sup>sn This epithet is probably designed to say more than that Noah was a farmer. In view of his being the patriarch of the survivors of the flood, he is the master of the earth, or as Rashi has it, the Lord of the earth (Ben Isaiah and Sharfman, The Pentateuch and Rashi’s Commentary, p, 84). This thought harmonizes with the emphasis throughout chap. 9 that he is the new Adam.
<sup>40</sup>tn Again we have parallel preterite forms beginning the clauses, and so the first is subordinated to be a temporal clause. Clearly, the point that he became drunk and uncovered himself is the main one.
<sup>41</sup>tn The verb galah (hlG) in the Hithpael (lG^t=Y!w^) means “uncover oneself,” or “be uncovered.” Noah became overheated because of the wine and uncovered himself in the tent.
sn There are many attempts to read things into this passage that simply are not there. The normal view is to argue that Ham committed a homosexual act on his drunken father and so was cursed. This is derived from the statement that Ham saw his father’s nakedness. But it would be hard to derive that interpretation from this statement. Others connect the passage to Lev 18, but in a forced way. The Piel of galah (hlG) does receive a euphemistic meaning in that context: to uncover the nakedness of someone means to have sex with that person. If this passage said Ham uncovered the nakedness of his father, then there would be a case. But Noah uncovered himself—this is not the euphemism. There really is no reason to see anything more in the text than is stated here. Besides, the corrective is the opposite act by Shem and Japheth—they cover the man up. The point is that Ham has no respect for his father, and rather than cover his father up, tells his brothers. On the basis of that, Noah gives an oracle that Ham’s descendants, who will be characterized by the same moral abandonment, will be cursed. Lev 18 describes that greater evil of the Canaanites, taking the words to another level of significance.
<sup>42</sup>sn Twice now the text has informed the reader of the relationship between Ham and Canaan. Chap. 10 will explain who Canaan is—the Canaanite tribes in the land. The passage is stressing a shared nature as well as physical relation.
<sup>43</sup>sn It is hard for modern people to appreciate the difficulty with seeing the nakedness of someone, because nakedness is so prevalent today. In the ancient world, especially in the patriarch’s family, that was a major breach (read an amazing account in Herodotus, 1.8-13, where a general saw the nakedness of his master’s wife, and one of the two had to be put to death). Besides, Ham is not a little boy wandering into his father’s bedroom—he is over a hundred years old by now. The word “nakedness” appears in Deut 24:1 as a cause for divorce. The text says if a man finds in her `erwat dabar (rbD tw^r=u#) “the nakedness of a thing” (probably meaning any indecent or lewd appearance or activity). It probably did not mean adultery, since that would have brought a death penalty, not just a divorce. This is broader. So “nakedness” was a significant issue in the ancient world. In general, see Allen P. Ross, “The Curse of Canaan,” BSac 137 (1980):223-240.
⁴⁴tn The word “garment” has the definite article on it. It could be just generic, “a garment”; but it could also be a reference to a definite or known object in the writer’s mind, to Noah’s garment. Did Ham bring it out when he told his brothers?
⁴⁵tn Heb “their faces backward.”
⁴⁶tn The final verb could also be given a potential nuance for the perfect tense, and the clause subordinated: “so they could not see.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “And Noah awoke”
⁴⁸tn The verb yada` (udy) basically means “to know”; it could be rendered “he knew” in this passage. But there is more of the sense that he came to know what Ham had done rather than knew instinctively.
<sup>49</sup>sn The verb `asah (hCu), “to do,” is too general a term to draw a conclusion that Ham had to have done more than see and tell his brothers.
⁵⁰tn In a verbal use of the passive participle, some form of the verb “to be” must be supplied. Since this is an oracle, a jussive is the correct form to use. For more on the curse, see Herbert Chanan Brichto, The Problem of “Curse” in the Hebrew Bible (Philadelphia: Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis, 1963); and Josef Scharbert, ‘rr, TDOT, vol. 1, pp. 405-418.
⁵¹tn The text has `ebed `abadim (<yd!bu& db#u#), “a servant of servants,” which is a use of the superlative genitive. It means Canaan will become the most abject of slaves.
sn The major critical point to interpret is that the curse is on Canaan, not Ham. If Ham had done some evil thing, why were his descendants cursed? The answer is that Noah sees a problem in Ham’s character, and on the basis of that he delivers a prophecy about the future descendants who will live in slavery to such things and then be controlled by others (for more on the idea of slavery in general, see Edwin M. Yamauchi, “Slaves of God,” BETS 9 ⁸:6-9). This passage is paralleled by Jacob’s oracles based on the natures of his sons in Gen 49.
⁵²sn There is a word play here in the text. Noah praises the LORD, using the holy name; and the name “Shem” is the word “name” in Hebrew. So on the basis of the name of his son, one who acted responsibly, Noah praises the name of the LORD.
⁵³tn Heb “a slave to him;” the referent (Shem) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁵⁴sn There is a word play (paronomasia) here as well on the name Japheth. The verb yapht (T=p=y^), “may he enlarge,” sounds like the name yephet (tp#y#), “Japheth.” The name itself suggested the motif—a common custom among the Semites. The blessing for Japheth goes beyond the son to the descendants—their numbers and their territories will be enlarged, so much so that they will share in Shem’s territories. Again, in this oracle, Noah is looking beyond his immediate family to future races. Helpful for this and the next chapter is Thomas O. Figart, A Biblical Perspective on the Race Problem (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973), esp. pp. 55-58.
⁵⁵tn This verb form should be parsed as a jussive since all the other verbs in vv. 26 and 27 are jussives. The jussive is not merely expressing a desire or a wish or a prayer; this is an oracle, which, like the blessing of Isaac, cannot be reversed.
⁵⁶tn Heb “And Noah lived.”
¹tn The title `elleh tol<sup>e</sup>dot (tOdl=OT hL#o@) here covers 10:1—11:9, the so-called Table of Nations and then the account of how they came to be dispersed. The translation “account” is retained for the sake of consistency; but it is not actually an account of Shem, Ham and Japheth, but a record of what became of them.
<sup>2</sup>tn The word “sons” in a vertical genealogy such as this encompasses more than sons. The list will have cities, tribes, and nations too. In a loose way, the names on the list will have some derivation or connection to the three ancestors.
<sup>3</sup>sn The essence of the Table (called an “account,” a noun from the verb yalad [dly]), will here be explained by a use of the verb yalad (dly). It appears that the Table is composite: there are sections that begin with “the sons of” (b<sup>e</sup>ne [yn@B=]) and there are sections that have “begot” (yalad [dly]). Critical scholarship would classify the latter as P. It may very well be that the “sons of” list was an old, “bare bones” list that was retained in the family records; and that the “begot” sections were editorial inserts by the writer of Genesis, showing the special interest he had in the use of the material for the Israelites who were about to go into a land filled with Canaanites. There is no reason to deny that this writer was Moses. See Allen P. Ross, “The Table of Nations in Genesis 10—Its Structure,” BSac 137 (1980):340-353; and “The Table of Nations in Genesis 10—Its Content,” BSac 138 (1981):22-34.
<sup>4</sup>tn Iapetos is a name in Greek tradition for the ancestor of the Greeks.
<sup>5</sup>tn The Cimmerians, of Scythian stock.
<sup>6</sup>tn Scythians who lived in the Caucasus.
<sup>7</sup>tn The Medes who lived east of Assyria.
<sup>8</sup>tn The general word for the Hellenic race, the Ionians who lived in western Asia Minor.
<sup>9</sup>tn Northern military tribes north of the Black Sea, or Cappadocians.
<sup>10</sup>tn The Assyrian Musku, possibly near Cilicia of the Greeks.
<sup>11</sup>tn Thracians, possibly Pelasgian pirates of the Aegean.
<sup>12</sup>tn These are all northern tribes of the Upper Euphrates.
<sup>13</sup>tn A northern branch of Indo-Germanic tribes, possibly Scythians.
<sup>14</sup>tn People from the north, a district north of the road from Haran to Carchemish.
<sup>15</sup>tn These are the tribes from the west.
<sup>16</sup>tn The people on Cyprus.
<sup>17</sup>tn The name of several Anatolian locations along the coasts, perhaps Tarsus, possibly Sardinia, perhaps even Spain.
<sup>18</sup>tn A name also connected with Cyprus, as well as coastlands east of Rhodes; used in later texts for the Romans.
<sup>19</sup>tc A textual problem exists here. Genesis has Dodanim; 1 Chr 1:7 has Rodanim. It is usually changed to Rodanim, meaning the island of Rhodes. But the Q<sup>e</sup>re reading in 1 Chronicles suggests Dodanim. Dodona is one of the most ancient and revered spots in ancient Greece. One cannot be certain which it is, but it is Greek.
<sup>20</sup>tn Probably Nubia/Ethiopia.
<sup>21</sup>tn Upper and Lower Egypt.
<sup>22</sup>tn Libya.
<sup>23</sup>tn The people of the region of Phoenecia/Palestine.
<sup>24</sup>tn Upper Egypt on the Nile, a city between Berber and Khartoum.
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “sand-land,” eastern Arabia, the Ethiopian coastland.
<sup>26</sup>tn Near the western shore of the Persian Gulf, ancient Hadhramaut.
<sup>27</sup>tn A location of tribes in south-west Arabia.
<sup>28</sup>tn Samudake, east toward the Persian Gulf.
<sup>29</sup>tn The name of a kingdom in south west Arabia.
<sup>30</sup>tn Associated with ‘Ula in northern Arabia.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “begot.” Out of the line of Cush we have an expanded story about Nimrod, some early tyrant who enslaved people. There have been many attempts to identify him, but they are unconvincing.
<sup>32</sup>tn The word for “hunt” is dy!X^, used also for hunting men (Jer. 16:16; Lam. 3:15; 1 Sam. 24:12).
<sup>33</sup>tn It is also possible to see the use of the divine name here (hwhy yn@p=l!, “before the LORD [YHWH]”) as a means of expressing the superlative degree—Nimrod was the greatest hunter in the world.
<sup>34</sup>tn Babylonia, the first region of political activity.
<sup>35</sup>tn Warka, one of the most ancient civilizations, southeast of Babylonia.
<sup>36</sup>tn Ancient Agade, associated with Sargon, north of Babylon.
<sup>37</sup>tn The place is unknown. So some have translated it “all of them,” referring to the three previous names.
<sup>38</sup>tn The subject is probably still Nimrod. However, it has also been interpreted that “Assur went out,” showing a derivative power.
<sup>39</sup>tn The ancient Assyrian city on the Tigris River.
<sup>40</sup>tn Heb “broad streets of the city”; a suburb of Nineveh?
<sup>41</sup>tn Nimrud, 20 miles north of Nineveh.
<sup>42</sup>tn Risnu, possibly an ancient name for Assur.
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>44</sup>tn African tribes west of the Nile Delta.
<sup>45</sup>tn North Africa, west of Egypt, near Cyrene.
<sup>46</sup>tn Libyans (so descendants of both Japheth and Ham were there).
<sup>47</sup>tn People of the Delta, Lower Egypt.
<sup>48</sup>tn Egyptian P-to-reshi, Upper Egypt.
<sup>49</sup>tn People originally from Crete who settled east of the Delta, between Egypt and Canaan.
<sup>50</sup>tn Several commentators wish to reverse the order of the words to put this clause after the next word, since the Philistines—Greeks—came from Crete and that region. But the table may suggest migration rather than lineage, and the Philistines, like the Israelites, came through that region of Egypt.
<sup>51</sup>tn Cretans, but in Egyptian literature it refers to “the region beyond” the Mediterranean.
<sup>52</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>53</sup>tn The foremost city in Phoenicia; Sidon may be the name of its founder.
<sup>54</sup>tn Either “Hethites” or a pocket of actual Hittites who migrated south to Canaan, but not the classical Hittite empire.
<sup>55</sup>tn Canaanite inhabitants of ancient Jerusalem.
<sup>56</sup>tn Smaller groups of Canaanite inhabitants of the mountainous regions of Palestine, rather than the large waves of Amurru, western Semites, migrating to the region.
<sup>57</sup>tn An otherwise unknown Canaanite tribe.
<sup>58</sup>tn Canaanite tribes of a Hurrian origin.
<sup>59</sup>tn Arqa is a city in Lebanon, north of Sidon.
<sup>60</sup>tn Another town in Lebanon.
<sup>61</sup>tn Inhabitants of a city Arwad on an island near the mainland near the river El Kebir.
<sup>62</sup>tn Inhabitants of the town Sumur, north of Arka.
<sup>63</sup>tn Inhabitants of Hamath on the Orontes.
<sup>64</sup>tn Heb “were.”
<sup>65</sup>tn Heb “as you go.”
<sup>66</sup>tn Heb “as you go.”
<sup>67</sup>tn Heb “And to Shem was born.”
<sup>68</sup>tn”Highland,” Elamites, a non-Semitic people east of Babylon.
<sup>69</sup>tn The kingdom and people of Assyria; the region in which Nimrod expanded his power.
sn When names show up in both sections of a genealogical list, it probably means that there were both Hamites and Shemites living in that region in antiquity, especially if the name is a place.
<sup>70</sup>tn Northeast of Nineveh, uncertain.
<sup>71</sup>tn Ludbu, on the Tigris.
<sup>72</sup>tn The collective name of the northern tribes living in the steppes of Mesopotamia, speaking Aramaic dialects.
<sup>73</sup>tn These four are uncertain; tribes living between Armenia and Mesopotamia.
<sup>74</sup>tn Hulia, near Mt. Masius.
<sup>75</sup>tn Located in the Middle Euphrates region.
<sup>76</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>77</sup>sn Gen 11 and following will connect the line from Shem through Eber (rb#u@) to Abraham the “Hebrew” (yr!b=u!).
<sup>78</sup>tn The reference may be to dividing the land with canals, but more likely it anticipates the division at Babel in Gen 11. The verb palag (glP) is used in Psalm 55:9 for a division of languages.
<sup>79</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>80</sup>tn The article al with modad (“friend”), a South Arabian people.
<sup>81</sup>tn Shilph is a district of Yemen; Shalph is a Yemenite tribe.
<sup>82</sup>tn Hadramaut in Southern Arabia.
<sup>83</sup>tn Uncertain; the name means “moon.”
<sup>84</sup>tn Probably in South Arabia.
<sup>85</sup>tn The designation for the old capital of Yemen.
<sup>86</sup>tn An oasis? The name means “date-palm.”
<sup>87</sup>tn A name used for several localities in Yemen.
<sup>88</sup>tn The name is a genuine Sabaean form (“my father, truly, he is God”)
<sup>89</sup>tn South Arabia; the Joktanites were more powerful than the Hamites here.
<sup>90</sup>tn A territory in South Arabia.
<sup>91</sup>tn Listed with Ham.
<sup>92</sup>tn Yuhaybib in South Arabia.
<sup>93</sup>tn Heb “as you go.”
<sup>94</sup>tn Or “separated.”
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And…had”
<sup>2</sup>sn “Earth” is a metonymy of subject, meaning the people who lived in the earth. Chap. 11 begins with everyone speaking a common language, but chap. 10 had the nations arranged by languages. It is part of the narrative art of Genesis to give the explanation of the event afterward. For a study of this passage, see Allen P. Ross, “The Dispersion of the Nations in Genesis 11:1-9,” BSac 138 (1981):119-138.
<sup>3</sup>tn The text says “one lip and one words.” “Lip” is a metonymy of cause, putting the instrument for the intended effect. They had one language. The word “words” refers to the content of their speech. They had the same vocabulary.
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “they;” the referent (the people) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>5</sup>sn Shinar is the region of Babylonia.
<sup>6</sup>tn The idiom “to each other” or “one to another” is Hebrew “a man to his neighbor.”
<sup>7</sup>tn The speech contains two cohortatives of exhortation followed by their respective cognate accusatives: let us brick bricks (<yn!b@l= hnB=l=n!) and burn for burning (hpr@C=l! hpr=C=n!). This stresses the intensity of the undertaking; it also reflects the Akkadian text which uses similar constructions (see the commentaries on Genesis by Speiser and Cassuot).
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “And they had.”
<sup>9</sup>tn A translation of “heavens” for <y!m^v fits this context because the Babylonian ziggurats had temples at the top, suggesting they reached to the heavens, the dwellings of the gods.
<sup>10</sup>tn The form hC#u&n^w= could be either the imperfect or the cohortative with a waw conjunction; but coming after the previous cohortative, this form can be subordinated logically to express purpose.
<sup>11</sup>tn Hebrew pen (/P#) expresses a negative purpose; it means “that we be not scattered.”
<sup>12</sup>sn This word (JWP) is the key verb for the message of this passage. It means “to scatter, disperse.” So the account is about the dispersion of the nations rather than (as popularly expressed) the Tower of Babel. But the passage also forms a polemic against Babylon, the pride of the east, a cosmopolitan center with its huge ziggurat. To the Hebrew, it was a monument to the judgment of God on pride.
<sup>13</sup>tn The expression “the sons of man” is intended in this polemic to portray the builders as mere mortals, not the lesser deities that the Babylonians claimed built the city.
<sup>14</sup>tn The Hebrew simply has banu (WnB); but since later the text says they left off building, an ingressive idea should be used here.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “and one language to all of them.”
<sup>16</sup>tn The text has “and now.” In this construction we have the two clauses, the foundational clause beginning with hen (/h@) to express the condition, and the second clause expressing the result. It could be rendered “If this…then now.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “all that they purpose to do will not be withheld from them.”
<sup>18</sup>sn The cohortatives are designed to imitate the cohortatives of the people. They build to ascend the heavens; God comes down to destroy their language. The whole story is chiastic; with the LORD’s coming down everything in the first half of the account is reversed.
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “they will not hear, a man the lip of his neighbor.”
<sup>20</sup>tn The infinitive construct here (tn)b=l!) serves as the object of the verb “they ceased, stopped,” answering the question of what they stopped.
<sup>21</sup>tn The verb has no expressed subject and so can be made a passive in the translation.
<sup>22</sup>sn Here is the climax of the account, a parody on the pride of babylon. In the Babylonian literature the name bab-ili meant “the gate of God”—but in Hebrew it sounds like the word for “confusion,” and so retained that connotation. Babel (lb#B) and balal (ll^B) form a paronomasia. For the many word plays and other rhetorical devices, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1975).
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>28</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>30</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>32</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>33</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>35</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>36</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>37</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>40</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>42</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>44</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>45</sup>tn Heb “after his begetting.”
<sup>46</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>47</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>48</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>49</sup>tn Heb “begot.”
<sup>50</sup>tn Heb “against/upon the face of Terah.”
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “and Haran died.”
<sup>52</sup>sn The word “Chaldeans” is a later editorial clarification for the readers, designating where Ur was. From all evidence there would have been no Chaldeans in existence at this early point; they are more in the time of the neo-Babylonian empire, in the first millennium B.C.
<sup>53</sup>sn The name “Sarai,” a variant spelling of “Sarah,” means “princess” (or lady). Sharratu was the name of the wife of the moon god Sin. The original name may reflect the culture out of which the patriarch was called, for the family did worship other gods over there.
<sup>54</sup>sn The name “Milcah” means “Queen,” But more to the point here too is the fact that Malkatu was a title for Ishtar, the daughter of the Moon god. If the women were named after such titles (and there is no evidence that that was the motivation for naming the girls “Princess” or “Queen”), that would say nothing about the faith of the two women themselves.
<sup>55</sup>tn Heb “And Sarai was.”
<sup>56</sup>tn Heb “And Terah took.”
<sup>57</sup>tn Heb “And the days of Terah were.”
<sup>58</sup>tn Heb “Terah.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The past perfect nuance is assigned to this preterite in order to harmonize the context with other Scripture (Gen. 15:7; Acts 7:2). The LORD called Abram while he was in Ur; but the sequence here makes it look like it was after they left to migrate to Canaan. Genesis records the call of Abram at this place in the narrative because it is the formal beginning of the account of Abram. The record of Terah was brought to its end before this beginning.
<sup>2</sup>tn The structure of the call of Abram is developed through the sequence of the volitive moods. There are two imperatives: “go out” (;l=-El# [v. 1] and “be a blessing” (hy@h=w# [v. 2]. But the sequence is like a chain reaction. The first imperative is followed by three cohortatives, showing either temporal (“and then”) or logical (“that I may”) sequence. If Abram leaves, then God will do these three things. And he will do these three things in order that Abram might be a blessing—the second imperative. Even though this imperative is subordinated to the preceding cohortatives, it is still an imperative. In another words, God will bless Abram in order to make him a blessing—but Abram still must be a blessing. This second imperative in turn is followed by three more promises. When Abram is a blessing, God will do three more things: bless those who bless him, curse the one who treats him lightly or with contempt, and bring blessing to all the families of the world.
sn It would be hard to underestimate the value of this call and this divine plan for the theology of the Bible. Here begins God’s plan to bring redemption to the world. The promises to Abram will be turned into a covenant in Gen 15 (here it is a call with promises) and will then lead through the Bible to the work of the Messiah.
<sup>3</sup>tn The initial command is the direct imperative (-El#) from the verb halak (Elh). It is followed by the lamed preposition with a pronominal suffix (;l=) emphasizing the subject of the imperative: “you leave.”
<sup>4</sup>sn The call of Abram is an interesting study in the leading of the LORD. The command is to leave. The LORD’s word is very specific about what he is to leave (the three prepositional phrases narrow to his father’s household), but is not specific at all about where he is to go. That required faith, a point that Heb 11:8 notes.
<sup>5</sup>tn The first three verbs of this are all to be classified as cohortatives. The first two have pronominal suffixes, so the form itself does not indicate a cohortative. The third verb form, as well as the first in the next verse, are clearly cohortatives. So from the context they all are cohortatives of resolve; a translation of “I will” is stronger than the normal “I shall.”
<sup>6</sup>sn The Hebrew goy (yOG) is a nation. When the word is put into the plural, goyyim (<y!OG), it refers to the nations, to Gentiles.
<sup>7</sup>sn The blessing of creation is now carried forward to the patriarch. In the garden God blessed Adam and Eve; in that blessing he gave them (1) a fruitful place, (2) endowed them with fertility to multiply, and (3) made them rulers over creation. That was all ruined at the fall. Now God begins to build His covenant people; and in these chapters he will promise in the blessing of the covenant to give Abram (1) a land flowing with milk and honey, (2) a great nation without number, and (3) kingship.
<sup>8</sup>tn Or “I will make you famous”
<sup>9</sup>tn The verb form hy@h= is the Qal imperative of the verb hayah (hyh). The waw with the imperative after the cohortatives will signal logical subordination, here a purpose clause.
<sup>10</sup>tn The Piel cohortative has as its object a Piel participle, masculine plural. Since the LORD will be binding Himself to Abram by covenant, those who enrich Abram in any way will share in the blessings.
<sup>11</sup>tn In the second part there are two significant changes that often go unnoticed. First, the parallel and contrasting participle ;l=L#q^m= is now singular and not plural. All the versions and a few Masoretic manuscripts have it plural. But if it had been plural, there would be no reason to change it to the singular and alter the parallelism that way. But if it was indeed singular, it is easy to see why the versions would change it to match the first participle. The MT preserves the original reading: “the one who treats you lightly.” The point would be a contrast with the lavish way that God desires to bless many. The second change is in the vocabulary. The English usually says, “I will curse those who curse you.” But there are two different words for curse here. The first is qalal (llq), which means “to be light” in the Qal, and in the Piel “to treat lightly, with contempt, to curse.” The second verb is the main verb for curse used in Genesis so far, ‘arar (rro), which means “to banish, remove from the blessing.” The point is simple: whoever treats Abram and the covenant with contempt, as worthless, God will banish from the blessing. It is important also to note that the verb is not a cohortative, but a simple imperfect. Since God is binding Himself to Abram, this would then be an obligatory imperfect: “but the one who treats you with contempt I must curse.”
<sup>12</sup>sn It would be helpful to keep in mind that the word “all” in the OT has to be defined context by context. It does not necessarily mean “all” in the sense of everyone. Here it will mean people from all the families will be blessed.
<sup>13</sup>tn The Niphal can be translated either as passive (as here) or reflexive or reciprocal. In later records of the Abrahamic covenant the Hithpael replaces this Niphal form, suggesting a translation “will bless themselves.” That makes good sense: depending on how they treat Abraham they will either bring a blessing or a curse on themselves. But the Hithpael can also be passive; that translation could then match this one. The passive is the traditional translation, making the act of blessing more directly God’s.
<sup>14</sup>sn It is important to stress that this is the report of Abram’s obedience to the first imperative, to get out. The rest of the paragraph will show how he was a blessing.
<sup>15</sup>tn The waw disjunctive introduces a parenthetical clause, telling the age of Abram when he left Haran.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “was the son of five years and seventy year[s].”
sn Now we can note some chronological details. Terah was 70 years old when he fathered “Abram, Nahor, and Haran.” Terah was 205 when he died in Haran. Abram left Haran at the age of 75 after his father died. Abram was born when Terah was 130. Abram was not the firstborn—he is placed first in the list of three because of his importance. The same is true of Shem, Ham and Japheth. Ham was the youngest son (9:24). Japheth was the older brother of Shem (10:21). So the order was Japheth, Shem, and Ham.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “the son of his brother.”
<sup>18</sup>tn The text uses a cognate accusative with the verb: the possessions they possessed. It stresses that they took all their moveable property.
<sup>19</sup>tn This clause must be treated very carefully. The Hebrew has hannepes (vp#N#h^) for “the people” (collective) and `asu (WCu), “they made” for the verb. Cassuto has a detailed discussion of this in which he demonstrates that it refers to making proselytes. It is not the language of acquiring servants. And they had no children. They must have gathered to themselves people who wished to share in this new venture of faith.
²⁰sn The word play between the verb `abar (rbu) and the name `abram (<rb=u^) anticipates the later play with the name “Hebrew,” `ibri (yr!b=u!). Does the word “Hebrew” mean the immigrant, the one who passed over into the land?
<sup>21</sup>sn The word Moreh (hr#Om) in Hebrew means “teacher.” It may well be that the place of this great oak tree was a Canaanite shrine where instruction took place.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “as far as the place of Shechem, as far as the oak of Moreh.”
<sup>23</sup>tn The waw disjunctive introduces an important parenthetical clause—the promised land was occupied by Canaanites.
<sup>24</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>25</sup>tn “Abram” has been supplied.
<sup>26</sup>tn The circumstantial clause giving the location is not introduced with a waw disjunctive; it is simply juxtaposed to the main clause.
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “And he built there.”
<sup>28</sup>tn As noted earlier in 4:26, this Hebrew expression means that he made proclamation of Yahweh by name—by reputation. He proclaimed who Yahweh was and what he was doing. The exact expression—wayyiqra’ b<sup>e</sup>shem YHWH (hwhy <v@B= orq=Y!w^)—occurs in Exodus 34:5 where Yahweh is the subject. So it is not prayer there. Moreover, in that passage it tells what the LORD said—one long list of divine attributes, i.e., “the name of the LORD.”
<sup>29</sup>tn The verb nasa` (usn) means “to journey”; more specifically it means to pull up the tent and move to another place. The construction here uses the preterite of this verb with its infinitive absolute to stress the activity of traveling. But it also adds the infinitive absolute of halak (Elh) to stress that it was continually going on. So, “Abram journeyed, journeying and going” becomes “Abram continually journeyed by stages.”
³⁰tn “the South,” Negev is the name for the southern desert region in the land.
³¹tn Heb the text has “and there was…and Abram went”; the first of the parallel verbs is here subordinated to the main point.
³²sn There is an important theme working through the patriarchal narratives that can be pointed out here. These stories foreshadow the events in the life of the nation of Israel. This sojourn in Egypt is typological of the bondage: in both there is a famine that takes the family to Egypt, death is a danger to the males but females preserved alive, they are taken into house of Pharaoh, great plagues are brought to bring about the release, there is a summons to stand before Pharaoh, and there is a return to the land with great wealth.
³³tn Hebrew gur (rWG) traditionally rendered “sojourn,” means to stay for a while. The “stranger” is one who is a temporary resident, a visitor, one who is passing through. Abram had no intention of settling down in Egypt or owning property. He was only there to wait out the famine.
³⁴tn Heb “heavy.”
³⁵tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator, which need not be translated.
³⁶tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) here functions in its deictic sense of pointing something out (the term “deictic” is drawn from a Greek verb that means “to show”); it could also possibly introduce a foundational clause, but the logical sense that yields is weak.
³⁷tn Heb “a woman beautiful of appearance are you.”
³⁸tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator for future time, leading the perfect tense forms with waw consecutives to be put into the future.
³⁹tn The Piel of the verb hayah (hy?), “to live,” means “keep alive, preserve alive, “and in some places “make alive.” See in addition to the lexica, D. Marcus, “The Verb `to Live’in Ugaritic,” JSS 17 (1972):76-82).
<sup>40</sup>tn Heb “Say now.”
<sup>41</sup>sn There is a good deal of literature on this issue: E. A. Speiser, “The Wife-Sister Motif in the Patriarchal Narratives,” in Oriental and Biblical Studies, edited by J. J. Finkelstein and Moshe Greenberg (Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia Press, 1967), pp. 62-81; C. J. Mullo-Weir, “The Alleged Hurrian Wife-Sister Motif in Genesis,” Glasgow Oriental Transactions 22 (1967-1970):14-25.
<sup>42</sup>tn The particle l<sup>e</sup>ma`an (/u^m^l=) introduces the purpose clause for the imperative. The verb “go well” can mean a number of things in the range of favorable treatment, but the following clause indicates it primarily means that Abram will be spared.
sn Abram is not really being selfish here in this account. He is aware of the danger to the family and to the covenant promises if he is killed and if Sarai is taken into their world. His method of dealing with it is deception, deception with a half truth, for she really was his sister—but they would not know that. His thinking was that as a sister there would be negotiations for a marriage by anyone interested (as later Laban does for his sister Rebekah), giving him time to react. But the plan backfired because Pharaoh does not negotiate.
⁴³tn Heb “and my life will live.”
⁴⁴tn This is a noun clause serving as a second object of the verb “saw.” It serves as an explanation of the sentence proper, what it was that they saw in the woman. The construction is a more deliberate way of making the point.
⁴⁵tn The word ha’issah (hVo!h) is “the woman.” The word also means “wife,” as it does elsewhere in this story. And the article can express the possessive pronoun (Ronald Williams, Hebrew Syntax, par. 86).
⁴⁶tn ?Q^T%w^ is a rare verbal form, an old Qal passive preterite from the verb “take.” It is pointed as a Hophal would be by the Masoretes, but does not have a Hophal meaning.
⁴⁷tn Hebrew simply has “house of Pharaoh.” The word “house is an adverbial accusative of termination. It means the household, the into the palace and among all who were there, probably the harem.
⁴⁸sn The construction of the parenthetical clause, beginning with the waw disjunctive on the prepositional phrase, draws attention to the irony of the story. Abram wanted Sarai to lie “so that it would go well” with him, i.e., that he would live. But he lost Sarai to Pharaoh, and it did go well for him—he received a lavish bride price. In addition, see G. W. Coats, “Despoiling the Egyptians,” VT 18 (1968):450-57.
⁴⁹tn Heb “and he had.”
⁵⁰tn The cognate accusative adds emphasis to the verbal sentence: “he plagued with plagues,” meaning he inflicted numerous plagues, probably diseases (see Exod. 15:26). The adjective “great” further strengthens what the plagues were: they were overwhelming.
⁵¹tn The verb qara’ with the preposition lamed (l + orq) following means “to summon.”
⁵²/tn The demonstrative pronoun serves in an enclitic use for emphasis: “What in the world have you done to me?” (Williams, Hebrew Syntax, par. 118).
⁵³tn The form is the Qal preterite with a waw consecutive, expressing here the result.
⁵⁴tn Heb “to me for a wife.”
⁵⁵tn This is the deictic use of hinneh (hN@h!).
⁵⁶tn Heb “take and go.”
¹tn The disjunctive clause provides parenthetical information necessary to the point of the story.
²tn Heb “heavy.”
³tn Hebrew “on his journeys”; the verb means to pick up the tents and move from camp to camp.
⁴tn Heb “going.”
⁵tn The idiom is “to Lot . . . there was,” the preposition here expressing possession.
⁶sn Both men no doubt had tents. But the motif of tents is introduced here with Lot because it will figure prominently in the stories. Eventually, he will pitch his tent next to Sodom.
⁷tn The potential nuance for the perfect tense is necessary here, and supported by the parallel clause that actually uses “to be able.”
⁸tn The infinitive construct lasebet (tb#v#l, from bvy) explains what it was that the land could not support: “the land could not support them to live together.” For “together,” see J. C. de Moor, “Lexical Remarks Concerning Yahad and Yahdaw,” VT 7 (1957):350-355.
⁹tn The same infinitive occurs here, serving as the object of the verb.
¹⁰tn Hebrew rib (byr!) means “strife, conflict, quarreling.” In later texts it has the meaning of “legal controversy, dispute.” See B. Gemser, “The rib—or Controversy—Pattern in Hebrew Mentality,” VTS 3 (1955):120-137.
¹¹sn Since the strife is between the herdsmen, the issue is no doubt water and vegetation for the animals. This story anticipates the wilderness accounts of the Israelites where they murmured against the LORD because there was no water. The commemorative name there was “Meribah,” from rib (Exod. 17:7).
¹²sn The parenthetical clause, introduced with the waw disjunctive, again provides critical information. It tells in part why the land cannot sustain these two bedouins, and it also hints of the danger of weakening the family by inner strife.
¹³tn Heb “And Abram said.”
¹⁴sn To the Israelite reader, the words of Abram would automatically call to mind the Exodus 17 passage: “Let there be no meribah (hbyr!m=).” Hebrew m^eribah is a noun related to the word rib (byr!), “to strive, quarrel, have a controversy”; it designates a place or occasion of controversy. Of course the lesson of the story is clear: Abram is trusting the LORD’s promises, and so he need not cling to things. But Lot, obviously walking by sight in the passage, chooses for himself, and later finds his choice was not good.
¹⁵tn Heb “we men are brothers.”
¹⁶tn The phrase “you go” has been supplied.
¹⁷tn The word for “right hand” is put into the form of a denominative verb here.
¹⁸tn The phrase “you go” has been supplied.
¹⁹tn The noun “left hand” has become a denominative verb here.
sn Normally Hebrews faced east for orientation. Left hand then could mean north, and right hand south.
²⁰tn The Hebrew idiom “lifted up his eyes and saw” draws attention to the act of looking, indicating that Lot took a good look. It also calls attention to the importance of what was seen.
²¹tn Heb “circle.”
²²tn This little temporal clause (preposition + Piel infinitive construct + subjective genitive + direct object) is strategically place in the middle of the lavish descriptions to sound an ominous note. “This is” has been supplied to strengthen the point.
sn The choice of words like “destroy” (sahet [t?@v^]) and “evil” (ra`im [<yu!r] in v. 13) provides a link with the passage on the judgment at the flood (6:5; 8:21 and 6:12-13). Both at the flood and in Sodom the place was wiped out by catastrophe and only one family survived (see Westermann, Genesis, vol. 2, p. 178).
<sup>23</sup>tn The expression is the infinitive with the suffix, “as you go” meaning on the way, all the way to.
sn The narrative places emphasis on what Lot saw so that the reader can appreciate how it aroused his desire for the best land. It makes allusion to the garden and to Egypt for comparison. Just as the tree in the garden of Eden had awakened Eve’s desire, so the fertile valley attracted Lot. And just as certain memories of Egypt had caused the Israelites to want to turn back and abandon the trek, so Lot will head for the good life.
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “And Lot chose.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “Lot traveled.”
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “a man from his brother.”
sn See Larry R. Helyer, “The Separation of Abram and Lot: Its Significance in the Patriarchal Narratives,” JSOT 26 (1983):77-88.
<sup>27</sup>tn The verb yasab (bvy) means “to dwell, live”; here it is somewhat ingressive, noting that each man went to lived in a region; so “settled down” is the sense.
<sup>28</sup>tn Heb “the circle.”
<sup>29</sup>tn The verb is denominative from the noun for “tent”: he pitched his tents or tented.
<sup>30</sup>tn Here is another significant parenthetical clause in the story, signaled by the waw disjunctive on the noun at the beginning of the clause.
<sup>31</sup>tn The expression “people [lit. men] of Sodom” has strong connotations. The genitive is probably location, “people in Sodom”; but it could also be attributive, “Sodom-type people.”
<sup>32</sup>tn The description of the sinfulness of the Sodomites is very emphatic. First, it uses two nouns to form a hendiadys: “wicked and sinners” means “wicked sinners,” the first word becoming adjectival. It is saying these were no ordinary sinners; they were wicked sinners, the type that cause pain for others. Then, to this construct is added “against the LORD,” stressing their violation of the laws of heaven and their culpability. To this is added m<sup>e</sup>’od (do)m=), “exceedingly.”
<sup>33</sup>tn The text has a disjunctive waw, introducing here a new beginning.
<sup>34</sup>sn The language in this section reflects the descriptions used earlier, or rather, those descriptions were used to anticipate this speech from the LORD. Lot lifted up his eyes and saw; but here Abram is told by God to do that. The reflection is designed to underscore how the LORD will have the last word and actually do for Abram what Abram did for Lot—give him the land. It seems to be one of the ways that God rewards faith.
<sup>35</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>36</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>37</sup>tn “then” has been supplied.
<sup>38</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>39</sup>tn The choice of the nuance of potential imperfect for the final verb is influenced by the use of yukal (lk^Wy) in the preceding clause.
<sup>40</sup>tn The Hithpael EL@h^t=h! means “to walk to and fro”; it also has the ideas of moving about, traversing, going back and forth, or living in an area. It here has the connotation of traversing the land to survey it, to look it over.
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “he came and lived.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator way<sup>e</sup>hi followed by “in the days of.”
<sup>2</sup>sn Hebrew is goyyim (<y!OG); recall that Abram was promised to be head of many nations. The conflict here reflects international warfare in the early and middle bronze periods. The countries operated with overlords and vassals: kings ruled over city states, or sometimes a number of city states (i.e., nations). Due to their treaties, when one went to war, those confederate with him went to war. It appears here that it is Kedorlaomer’s war, because the western city states have rebelled against him (meaning they did not send products as tribute to keep him from invading). See W. F. Albright, “The Historical Background of Genesis XIV,” JSOR 10 (1926):231-169.
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “made.”
<sup>4</sup>sn For help in locations, see J. Penrose Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah,” in The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, Vol. 1, edited by G. Ernest Wright and David Noel Freedman (Garden City: Doubleday, 1961), pp. 41-75; and David Noel Freedman, “The Real Story of the Ebla Tablets, Ebla and the Cities of the Plain,” BA 41 (1978):143-64.
<sup>5</sup>tn The verb here means to join together, unite, be allied. It is a word that stresses close associations, especially of friendships, marriages, or treaties. The etymology may suggest the idea of being tied together.
<sup>6</sup>sn The Salt Sea refers to the Dead Sea.
<sup>7</sup>tn The sentence simply begins with “twelve years”; it serves as an adverbial accusative giving the duration of their bondage.
<sup>8</sup>tn Here too we have an adverbial accusative of time. What keeps us from interpreting it to say that they rebelled for 13 years is the next verse.
sn The story serves as a foreshadowing of the plight of the kingdom of Israel later. Eastern powers came and forced the western kingdoms into submission. Each year, then, they would send tribute east—to keep them away. Here, in the 13th year, they refused to send it (just as later Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria). And so in the 14th year the powers came to put them down again. This account from Abram’s life taught future generations that God can give victory over such threats, that people did not have to live in servitude to tyrants from the east.
<sup>9</sup>tn The verb nakah (hkn) means “to attack, strike, smite.” In this context it appears that the strike was successful, and so a rendering of “defeated” is suitable.
<sup>10</sup>sn The line of attack runs down the eastern side of the Jordan valley into the desert, and then turns and comes up the valley to the cities of the plain.
<sup>11</sup>tn The two verbs together form a verbal hendiadys, the first serving as the adverb: “they returned and came” means “they came again.”
<sup>12</sup>tn Heb “unto.”
<sup>13</sup>tn The verb is singular; it agrees with the first of a compound subject.
<sup>14</sup>tn This is a parenthetical clause introduced with the waw disjunctive on the noun. The idea of the abundance of pits is simply expressed with repetition: “pits, pits of bitumen.”
sn The word for “bitumen (or pitch, tar, asphalt)” occurred earlier in the story of the building of the tower in babylon. It may be that some of this material was taken from the area of the Dead Sea back east for mortar.
<sup>15</sup>tn Or “they were defeated.”
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “the survivors,” “the rest.”
<sup>17</sup>sn The reference to the two kings must mean the kings with their armies. Most of them were defeated in the valley, but some of them escaped to the hills.
<sup>18</sup>tn “The conquerors” has been supplied.
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “the son of his brother.”
<sup>20</sup>tn This disjunctive clause serves well as a circumstantial clause giving the cause: he was captured because he was living there.
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “The Hebrew”
<sup>22</sup>sn Speiser suggests that part of this chapter came from an outside source since it refers to Abram the Hebrew. That is not impossible, given the fact that the traditions and genealogies had to have been collected. Apart from that, the meaning of “the Hebrew” has proved elusive. It may be related to the verb “cross over,” with perhaps have a meaning like “immigrant.” Or it might be related to the ancestor Eber with a gentilic ending.
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “possessors of a treaty with.”
<sup>24</sup>sn The parenthetical clause explains how Abram came to be living in their territory, but it also explains why they must go to war with Abram.
<sup>25</sup>tn The first clause beginning with the preterite is subordinated to the next as a temporal clause.
<sup>26</sup>tn The past perfect usage is required here because the taking captive preceded Abram’s hearing of it.
<sup>27</sup>tn The verb qr#Yw^ is a rare form, probably related to the word req (qyr@), “empty.” If so, it would be a very figurative use: “he emptied out” (perhaps unsheathed) his men. The Greek has “mustered.” Speiser has suggested reading with the SP a verb diq instead of riq (qyr), cognate with an Akkadian deku which means “mobilize” troops. This suggestion is pleasing, except it requires a slight change for both letters. We know essentially what Abram did; it is just difficult to know which word was the original description.
<sup>28</sup>tn “the invaders” has been supplied.
<sup>29</sup>sn “Dan” in the text is clearly a modernization in the MT. Not only had the Danites not migrated to the northern territory when the Law was written (assuming an early date for Genesis), but neither had Dan been born when Abram was there. By inserting this name a later scribe has clarified the location.
<sup>30</sup>tn The text simply has “night” as an adverbial accusative.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “he divided himself…he and his servants.”
<sup>32</sup>tn Heb “left.”
<sup>33</sup>tn The phrase “rest of the” has been supplied.
<sup>34</sup>tn Possibly a reference to the Kidron Valley.
<sup>35</sup>sn Salem is traditionally identified as the Jebusite stronghold of old Jerusalem. Accordingly, there has been much speculation about its king. Some have tried to make him a pre-incarnate appearance of Christ. Some have suggested that it was Shem. But Melchizedek was most likely a king and a priest from Canaanite background that God used to renew the promise of the blessing to Abram. Melchizedek was the only man on earth that he considered to be his spiritual superior. But he remains a mystery; in a book of genealogies he appears on the scene without father and without mother, and then disappears from our awareness—until David sits on his ancient throne and declares his descendant will be a priest after the order of Melchizedek (Ps. 110).
<sup>36</sup>tn The parenthetical clause significantly identifies him as a High Priest as well as being King.
sn It is this that makes him such a perfect type of Christ: he was identified with Jerusalem, superior to the ancestor of Israel, and both a king and a priest. Unlike the normal Canaanites, this man served “God Most High”—’El `Elyon (/Oyl=u#-lo@)—one sovereign God, who was the creator of all the universe. Abram had in him a spiritual brother.
³⁷tn Heb “And he blessed.”
³⁸tn In a priestly blessing the verb supplied should be a jussive. It has the force of an oracle.
³⁹tn The preposition expresses the agent after the passive participle.
⁴⁰tn Older translations had “possessor of heaven and earth.” But with the discovery of Ugaritic scholars have the evidence that there were two roots qanah (hnq), one meaning “create” (as in Gen. 4:1). While “possessor” fits here, “creator” works better with “heaven and earth.”
⁴¹tn “Heaven and earth” are both objective genitives after the participle in construct.
⁴²sn In this line the word “blessed” takes on a slightly different nuance than before. In v. 19 for Abram to be blessed means to be enriched by God in a number of ways. For God to be blessed means to be praised, i.e., His reputation is enriched in the world as His name is praised.
⁴³sn The verb miggen (/G@m!), “delivered,” foreshadows the statement by God in 15:1, “I am your shield” (magen [/g@m]). The whole story so far has been told as a normal bit of secular history might have been. But now the divine commentary is given to the victory.
⁴⁴tn Heb “And he gave”
⁴⁵tn Since Abram here takes the oath, he probably raised his hand when he did so. Therefore, the perfect tense is given an instantaneous nuance: “Here and now I raise my hand.”
⁴⁶tn The phrase “and swear” is added for clarification.
⁴⁷tn The expressing of the oath formula is elliptical. This line reads: “ . . . if I take.” It is a negative oath; it is as if he says, “[May the LORD deal with me] if I take,” meaning, I will surely not take.” The positive oath would add the negative adverb and be the reverse: “[God will deal with me] if I do not take,” meaning, I certainly will.
⁴⁸tn The text adds the independent pronoun to the verb form for a distinct emphasis.
⁴⁹tn “I will take nothing” has been supplied.
¹tn The form is ‘al (lo^) with the jussive, suggesting that Abram was afraid now that he had stepped into warfare, but that God’s word said “Don’t fear,” i.e., stop fearing.
²sn The noun “shield” recalls the words of the priest in v. 20. If God is the shield, then God will deliver. Abram need not fear reprisals from those he has fought.
³tn This has been translated “and [I am] your very great reward.” But Abram responds by asking “What will you give me,” which would suggest the understanding, “your reward will be very great.” Abram has just turned away all the spoils of war, and the LORD promises Him great reward. In walking by faith and living with integrity he cannot lose.
⁴sn The Hebrew text has ‘adonay YHWH (hw!hy$ ynd)o&). Since the tetragrammaton usually is pointed with the vowels for ‘adonay to avoid saying the holy name, that would lead in this place to a repetition of ‘adonay ‘adonay. So the tetragrammaton is here pointed with the vowels for ‘elohim (<yh!l)o$). That would give the reading of the Hebrew as “Lord God” in the Jewish tradition of the text. But the presence of “Lord” before the holy name is rather compelling evidence that the original would have been “O my Lord Yahweh.”
⁵tn The waw disjunctive at the beginning of the clause introduces a circumstantial clause expressing the cause or reason.
⁶tn Heb “I am going,” the independent pronoun with the verbal use of the active participle.
⁷tn Heb “the son of acquisition of my house.”
sn See on this custom Cyrus H. Gordon, “Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets,” in Biblical Archaeologist Reader, Vol. 2, edited by David Noel Freedman and Edward F. Campbell, Jr. (Garden City: Doubleday, 1964), pp. 21-33.
⁸tn The pronoun has the anaphoric use here, equivalent to the verb “to be” (Williams, Hebrew Syntax, par. 115).
⁹sn The sentence in the Hebrew text employs a very effective word play on the name “Damascus.” “The son of acquisition (ben mesheq of my house is Eliezer of Damascus [dammeseq].” The words are not the same; they have different sibilants. But the sound play gives the impression that “in the nomen is the omen”—Eliezer the Damascene will be his heir if he dies childless, because “Damascus” seems to mean that. See Merrill F. Unger, “Some Comments on the Text of Genesis 15:2-3,” JBL 72 (1953):49-50; H. L. Ginsberg, “Abram’s `Damascene’ Steward,” BASOR 200 (1970):31-32.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “And Abram said.”
<sup>11</sup>tn The construction uses hen to introduce the foundational clause (“since…”), and w<sup>e</sup>hinneh to introduce the main clause (“then indeed…”).
<sup>12</sup>tn Or “seed.”
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “is inheriting me.”
<sup>14</sup>tn The Hebrew uses the waw disjunctive with the particle hinneh, almost with the sense of “now here was the word of the LORD.”
<sup>15</sup>sn The subject of the verb is the demonstrative pronoun. “This one” or “This man.” That the LORD does not name him is significant; often in those cultures the use of the name would bring legitimacy to inheritance and adoption cases.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “inherit you.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Hebrew ki ‘im forms a very strong adversative.
<sup>18</sup>tn The pronoun could also be an emphatic subject: “whoever comes out of your body, he will inherit you.”
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “will inherit you.”
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “your seed.”
<sup>21</sup>tn The Hebrew text has “And Abram believed.” But the waw is on a perfect tense, which means it cannot possibly be a waw consecutive, for if it were it would have to be future, and that would make no sense at all here. So the narrative is deliberately choosing not to use a sequential verb; if it had wanted to show sequence, it would have used the waw consecutive on the preterite, “and then he believed.” The text is not saying that Abram believed after the LORD showed him the stars. In fact, Scripture says that he believed in Ur when he received the call. That was his “conversion.” Here the statement is inserted prior to the cutting of the covenant, to stress the covenant was made with a believer. One could translate the perfect tense as “Abram had believed” (as was done in 12:1, “the LORD had said”), or “Abram was a believer.” But leaving the “and” off and making it a separate sentence at least prevents it from being completely linked to the previous verse. It simply says “Abram believed in the LORD.”
sn The Hebrew word ‘aman, means “confirm, support” in the Qal. It is used for words like “pillar” or “nurse” or “guardian, trustee,” that which is looked to as a support. In the Niphal it comes to mean “be faithful, reliable, dependable,” or, “firm, sure”—something that is that is reliable. Then, in the Hiphil it takes on a declarative sense, “to consider something reliable, dependable,” and act on it. So the word for “believe” here is a word that encompasses a faith that acts.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “and he reckoned.”
sn The verb hashab means “credit, reckon, account.” (In modern Hebrew a related noun is the word for “computer”). The word is basic to the NT teaching of Paul on justification (Rom. 4). Paul weaves this passage and Psalm 32 together, for both use this word. He explains that for the one who believes in the LORD, like Abram, God credits him with righteousness but does not credit his sins against him because he is forgiven. Justification does not mean that the believer is righteous; it means that God credits him with righteousness, so that in the records of heaven (as it were) he is declared righteous. See Meredith G. Kline, “Abram’s Amen,” WTJ 31 (1968):1-11.
<sup>23</sup>tn The line is usually translated “and he reckoned it to him for righteousness,” which assumes a referent for “it” and makes the noun “righteousness” an adverbial accusative. It may be better to take the suffix on the verb, which is feminine in form, as a proleptic suffix anticipating “righteousness,” a feminine noun: “and he reckoned it to him—[namely] righteousness.” See also O. Palmer Robertson, “Genesis 15:6: A New Covenant Exposition of an Old Covenant Text,” WTJ 42 (1980):259-289.
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “And he said.”
<sup>25</sup>sn The language of this covenant cutting ceremony deliberately mirrors the beginning of the covenant made at Sinai, “I am the LORD your God who brought you out from the land of bondage.”
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “And he said.”
<sup>27</sup>tn See note on Gen 15:2.
<sup>28</sup>tn Or “How.”
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “in the middle.”
<sup>30</sup>tn Heb “facing [to meet] its fellow.”
sn Gerhard F. Hasel, “The Meaning of the Animal Rite in Genesis 15,” JSOT 19 (1981):61-78.
<sup>31</sup>tn The clause begins with the preterite, and therefore can be subordinated to the next, parallel clause.
<sup>32</sup>tn Heb “great.”
<sup>33</sup>tn All three words, “ dread, darkness, great,” are feminine. The first term receives the prominence, “dread” fell upon him. The other two words qualify it: “a deep dark dread,” or “dread [like] a deep darkness.” A sense of overwhelming terror gripped him at night.
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “And he said.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The construction is the Qal infinitive absolute followed by the imperfect from yada`.
³⁶tn Or “seed.”
³⁷tn Ger, “stranger,” is related to the word gur, “sojourn.” They will stay in a land without rights of citizenship.
³⁸sn This same verb “oppressed”, `innu (from `anah in the Piel) is used in Exodus 1:11 to describe the oppression in Egypt. It is a strong word, meaning “afflict, oppress, treat harshly.”
³⁹tn The participle dan (from din) is used here for the future: I am judging = I will surely judge. The judgment in this case will be condemnation and punishment.
⁴⁰tn The waw with the pronoun before the verb calls special attention to the subject in contrast to the preceding subject.
⁴¹sn This is one of the expressions used in the OT to portray death. For a detailed discussion of the subject, see the chapter on death and afterlife in Alexander Heidel’s The Gilgamesh Epic and the Old Testament Parallels.
⁴²sn The term “generation” is being used here in its widest sense, that is, a full life span, because when the chronological factors are considered, and the genealogies tabulated, there are 400 years of bondage. This must mean that in this context the four hundred years and the four generations are equivalent.
⁴³tn Heb “they will return”; “your descendants” the phrase has been supplied.
⁴⁴sn There is a word play here between “complete, full,” Hebrew shalem, and Abram’s death in “peace,” Hebrew shalom, allowing the reader to make the strong contrast between their destinies. Here we something of the justice of God: he will wait until the Amorites are fully deserving of judgment before he gives the land to Israel.
⁴⁵tn Heb “And it was.”
⁴⁶sn Speiser shows the same implements being used in incantation texts in Akkadian for sacrificial ritual against evil (Genesis, pp. 113-114).
⁴⁷tn Heb “cut a covenant.”
⁴⁸tn The verb is the perfect tense; it could either be classified as instantaneous perfect due to this being a covenant promise (“I here and now give”) or prophetic perfect (“I have given” meaning it is as good as done, i.e., “I will surely give”).
⁴⁹sn The reference is to a wadi on the border, and not to the river Nile.
⁵⁰tn Each of the names in the list has the definite article, the generic use for the class of people identified.
¹tn The disjunctive waw introduces a new beginning by giving circumstantial information necessary to the story.
²sn J. Van Seters, “The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel,” JBL 87 (1968):401-408.
³sn The passage records the birth of Ishmael to Abram through an Egyptian. There are several themes that need to be studied here. First, it is the account of the weakness of the faith of Abram in trying to obtain a son through social custom. Second, the barrenness of Sarai poses a challenge to the faith, just as the famine did in chap. 12—there it concerned the land, here the seed. Third, an Egyptian figures prominently. She was probably obtained in chap. 12, showing this chapter to be part of the fall out of ill-gotten gain in Egypt. But the prophecy just given talks of oppression in another land—Egypt; and here an Egyptian girl plays a significant role in the story of Abram.
⁴tn The particle introduces the foundational clause for the imperative to follow.
⁵tn The expression “go in” refers simply to having sex. This expression does not convey the intimacy of other expressions, such as “so and so knew his wife.” Sarai simply sees this as the social custom of having a child through a surrogate.
sn Charles F. Fensham, “The Son of a Handmaid in Northwest Semitic,” VT 19 (1969):312-321.
⁶tn The text simply has the Niphal imperfect, used here with the nuance of potentiality: “I can be built” [into a family].
⁷tn The Hebrew expression of the verb “hear” followed by “to the voice of” means “obey.”
sn This expression was first used in Gen 3:17 for Adam. In both cases the text is showing that the man, showing weak faith, obeyed the voice of his wife. And in both cases the plan of God was placed in jeopardy through the sin. By using the same expression there already is a hint that the pair had overstepped a boundary.
⁸tn Heb “at the end of ten years/to live/Abram.” The prepositional phrase introduces the temporal clause, the infinitive construct serves as the verb, and the name is the subject.
⁹tn Heb “the Egyptian, her handmaiden.”
¹⁰sn Hagar would become the slave wife, not on equal standing with Sarai. However, if Hagar produced the heir, she would be in the eyes of society the primary wife. This is what happens in the story, explaining her attitude (which is understandable) and Sarai’s anger. But throughout the story God never describes Hagar as the wife; but the text constantly refers to Sarai as the wife.
¹¹sn The verb is qalal (llq) alluding to 12:3; the allusion does not mean Hagar will be cursed, only that here there is a threat to the covenant that God must deal with. The verb means to despise, treat lightly, treat with contempt. In Hagar’s opinion, Sarai had been demoted.
¹²tn Heb “in her eyes.”
¹³tn Heb “my wrong is because of you.”
¹⁴tn Heb “into your bosom.”
¹⁵tn Heb “saw.”
¹⁶tn The verb qalal (llq) means “light, slight, and therefore despised and cursed. Sarai was made to feel supplanted and worthless by the servant girl.
¹⁷sn Sarai has already blamed Abram for Hagar’s attitude, not the pregnancy. Here she expects to be vindicated by the LORD who will prove Abram responsible. An colloquial rendering might be, “God will get you for this.” It may mean that she thought Abram had encouraged the servant in her elevated status.
¹⁸tn The clause is introduced with the particle hinneh (hN@h!), introducing a foundational clause for the coming imperative: “since…do.”
¹⁹tn Heb “in your hand.”
²⁰tn Heb “what is good in your eyes.”
²¹sn The verb is `anah (hnu) in the Piel, meaning “afflict, oppress, treat harshly, mistreat.” Ironically, it is the same word used in 15:13 for the affliction that the Israelites will suffer in bondage—hard labor that is overly demanding and back-breaking.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “And the…”
<sup>23</sup>sn Throughout these passages the Angel of the LORD seems to be more than an angel; he is frequently interchangeable with the LORD when there is dialogue. That could simply be explained by saying he is speaking for the LORD; but the indications throughout the passages are that it is the LORD Himself—they are pre-incarnate appearance of the LORD, i.e., the second person of the trinity, called theophanies. There is much written on this subject in systematic theologies; include, though J. Lindblom, “Theophanies in Holy Places in Hebrew Religion,” HUCA 32 (1961):91-106.
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “from the presence of.”
<sup>25</sup>tn The imperative yN!u^t=h!w= is the Hithpael of `anah (hnu) the same word used for Sarai’s mistreatment of her. Hagar is here being instructed not only to submit to Sarai’s authority, but to whatever mistreatment that involves. God is called for her to humble herself.
²⁶tn The text simply has the waw consecutive, which stresses the sequence. This is an additional word from God, the word of promise.
²⁷tn Heb “said.”
²⁸sn The language is the language of the curse, but with a different object now. There God would multiply pain; here descendants. It reveals how the LORD can turn a curse into a blessing—something Hagar would have to believe if she were to obey the LORD’s voice.
²⁹tn Heb “cannot be numbered because of abundance.”
³⁰tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) focuses on the immediate: “Here you are pregnant.”
³¹tn The active participle provides the imminent future aspect—you are having a son, you are about to give birth to a son.
³²sn The name is a fairly common Semitic name, showing, by the way, how the ancients must have cried out to their gods. The name is made up of the imperfect/jussive form of the verb with the theophoric element added as the subject. It would mean “God hears, may God hear.”
³³sn The next clause gives the explanation of the name, using a paronomasia. The word play need not be exact; in fact, in the scores of names in the OT that have such word plays, only a couple are exact etymologies. Here the verb used is the same verbal root in the name—that is the connection. Call him “God hears” because the LORD “heard” [about] your affliction. The sentiment helps us with the theology of the passage. She did not pray to God, but the LORD heard. It simply means that he responded to her affliction to help her. Here is grace. Hagar has not at all been abandoned by God.
³⁴sn The prophecy is not an insult, as calling someone an ass in our culture would be. The donkey is an important animal in the ancient Near East; it looks like a horse, and lives in the desert an individualistic life not bothered by society. God is saying that Ishmael will be free-roaming, strong, bedouinlike, enjoying the freedom his mother now sought (see Gordon Wenham, Genesis 16-50).
³⁵sn “Hand” represents power, strength. His free-roaming life style will put him in conflict with those who follow social conventions. It does not mean there is open warfare; it means there will be friction because of his antagonism to their way of life, and their way to his. He will see no boundaries in the land; they will.
³⁶sn The text says he will live “opposite, across from” them. This expresses his living apart from them, on the edge of society; it also shows his haughtiness towards them, his defiant attitude (Wenham, Genesis 16-50).
³⁷tn The Hebrew simply has yo!r( lo@, “God of my seeing,” but the suffix must be objective genitive.
³⁸tn Heb “after him that sees me.”
sn The operative word now in this naming of the LORD, as well as in the naming of the well next, is the verb “to see.” She commemorates her amazement and recognition of God’s care. The Hebrew is difficult, but does not need emending to make good sense out of it: yo!r) yr@?&o^ yt!yo!r <l)h& <g^h&, I have seen the one who after the seeing of me, i.e., I have seen the one who looks after me (T. Booij, “Hagar’s Words in Genesis 16:13b,” VT 30 ⁶:1-7).
³⁹tn The verb does not have an expressed subject and so is made passive.
⁴⁰tn The name yo!r) y?^l^ ro@B= means “The well of the Living One who sees me.”
sn From the names of the passage, one given by God in which he announces through the name that “God hears,” and the other given by Hagar through which she expresses that she has seen, i.e., realized, God’s care for her, we can see the theology. God hears. God sees. He is the one who champions those who are afflicted, destitute, oppressed, cast out.
⁴¹tn The phrase “It is located” has been supplied; the text has hinneh (hN@h!).
⁴²sn It is obvious that Hagar has taken the word of the LORD back to Abram and Sarai. It is a word of rebuke to them—they should have known God hears and sees, and should have trusted. The son Isaac will not make this mistake (Gen. 25). But it is also a word of promise.
⁴³tn Heb “the son of eighty six years.”
¹tn The clause beginning with the temporal indicator is subordinated as a temporal clause.
²tn Heb “the son of ninety-nine years.”
³tn The verb is the Niphal preterite of the verb “to see,” ra’ah (hor). It would technically say, “And he was seen,” but has been traditionally rendered “appeared.” The appearances of the LORD were sometimes in human forms and sometimes in angelic form.
⁴tn The name yD^v^ lo@ has often been translated “God Almighty,” primarily because Jerome had translated it omnipotens. There has been much debate over the name. Albright connected it to the idea of the mountain, yielding the idea of mountain god, or High God. From this modern writers have suggested a figurative sense, taking the idea of mountain to represent breast, and so yielding the idea of the God with breasts. The only possibly supportive idea for this came from the context of Gen 49:25 which uses the name Shadday and “breasts and womb” in the same oracle, but does not actually link them. But none of this is very compelling. We simply do not know what the etymology of this ancient name is; but that should not lead us to accept arbitrary and fanciful suggestions that have no support at all, but are part of popular theories. See W. F. Albright, “The Names Shaddai and Abram,” JBL 54 (1935):173-210; and R. Gordis, “The Biblical Root sdy-sd,” JThS 41 (1940):34-43.
⁵tn The verb is the Hithpael; it means walk to and fro, about, live out your life.
⁶tn There are two imperatives here (as there were in 12:1-3): “walk . . . and be blameless/perfect” (in 12:1-3 it was “go/walk . . . and be a blessing”). The imperatives can be interpreted sequentially here: “walk before me in order that you may be perfect.”
sn Abram was to live a righteous and holy life. To walk before someone means to live and move openly before him (1 Sam. 12:2), especially in such a way as to deserve and enjoy his favor. Here the former is predominant: to live in such a way as to please God and deserve his favor (see Driver, Book of Genesis, p. 185).
⁷tn The verb natan (/tn) basically means “give”; but it can also have the idea of place, put, make, appoint, constitute. Here it means “make” a covenant; but since the covenant has already been made, this would have the connotation of confirm or assure a covenant by a sign.
⁸tn Heb “exceedingly, exceedingly.”
⁹sn This expression probably means that he sank to his knees and put his forehead to the ground, although it is possible that he might have completely prostrated himself. In either case it is facedown in humility and reverence.
¹⁰tn Heb “I.”
¹¹tn Heb “here is” (hinneh [hN@h!]).
¹²tn Heb “And no.”
¹³tn The perfect tense here will have the nuance of the prophetic perfect—it is as good as done because the LORD said it was.
¹⁴sn The renaming of Abram is a personal sign of confirmation to the patriarch. Every time the name was used it would be a reminder that the promises of God was sure. “Abram” means “exalted father”; it probably had reference to Terah, for the baby was name Abram by Terah. It speaks of the past—Abram came from royal or noble lineage. The name “Abraham” is merely a dialectical variant of the same. But its significance is drawn from the paronomasia made through the causal clause explaining the name: “the father of a multitude” is ‘ab hamon (/Omh&-bo^) which sounds like ‘ab-raham (<hrb=o^). The “meaning” of the new name would be a father of a multitude,” but only by the word play. From now on the name of the patriarch was a word from God: he would have the promises, even though he was childless. For a general discussion of renaming, see Otto Eissfeldt, “Renaming in the Old Testament, in Words and Meanings, edited by Peter R. Ackroyd and Barnabas Lindars (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), pp. 70-83.
¹⁵tn This verb starts a series of perfect tenses with waw consecutives to express the future.
¹⁶tn Heb “exceedingly, exceedingly.”
¹⁷tn The verb now used is qum (<Wq), “arise, stand up”; but in the Hiphil it has the idea of “confirm, give effect to, carry out” a covenant or oath (BDB, pp. 878,9).
¹⁸tn Or “seed.”
¹⁹tn “God” has been supplied.
²⁰tn The verbal root is gur (rWG), “to sojourn, to reside” as an alien. It is the land in which Abram resides, but does not own.
²¹tn The imperfect tense could be translated “you shall keep” as a binding command; but the obligatory nuance captures the binding sense better.
²²sn M. V. Fox, “The Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision in the Light of the Priestly ‘ot Etiologies,” RB 81 (1974):557-96.
²³tn Heb “And you shall be.”
²⁴tn Heb “and the son of eight days”
²⁵tn The emphatic construction employs the Niphal imperfect tense (collective singular) and the Niphal infinitive.
²⁶tn The disjunctive waw calls attention to the “uncircumcised male” and what will happen to him.
²⁷tn Or “person” (Heb. nepes [vp#n#]).
²⁸sn The meaning of “cut off” has been discussed at great length. In fact, an entire tractate in the Mishnah is devoted to this subject. It could mean separated from the community but still alive, separated from the community by death (either from God or the community), or even separated from God. One of the first two is in mind here, since it is a separation from his people. The Bible makes it clear that one who violates the sign of the covenant is under a death penalty (cf. Exod. 4); but, of course, such was not carried out down through the years.
²⁹tn The verb parar (rrP) means “to nullify, abrogate, break” the covenant. To ignore the sign of the covenant would witness to a disregard for it.
³⁰tn “As for” has been supplied.
³¹sn The change seems also to be a dialectical variation, both spellings meaning “princess, queen.” Sarai would certainly not have a negative connotation (such as strive, twisted, as have been put forth). The Greek text by doubling the r in Sarah but not Sarai may have thought the latter was from the verb “strive” (sarah [hrC]) and that Sarah was from “rule” (sarar [rrC])—but this if a correct reading of their change, would only represent their popular understanding as well. Parents did not give such names to children. Here the change in the form of the name will be explained by the word from the LORD, and as with Abraham the meaning of her name will forever reflect that promise.
³²tn The waw consecutive on the perfect tense continues the nuance of the verb before, but with an obvious significance of result. The text literally says, “she will become nations” to reflect the promise to Abraham.
³³tn “a mother” has been supplied.
³⁴sn The verb used here provides the sentiment for the naming of Isaac. “And he laughed” is way-yishaq (q?X=Y!w^) and “Isaac” is yishaq (q?X=y!). In this passage the laughter of Abraham, albeit internal, is in disbelief—he believes God, but it is so incredible. Sarah will laugh in the next chapter. And then when the boy is born, the laughter will become joy, not disbelief. The point as von Rad states it is important and not to be overlooked—a word from the LORD has been laughed at. The double question he asks underscores his disbelief.
³⁵tn Or “he thought to himself.”
³⁶tn The nuance of the imperfect is potential, to express the amazement and wonder of Abraham.
³⁷tn Heb “To the son of a hundred years.”
³⁸sn It is important to observe that even though Abraham staggers at this, finding it almost too incredible, he nonetheless calls his wife Sarah, claiming the promise of God.
³⁹tn Heb “the daughter of ninety years.”
⁴⁰ tn The wish is introduced with the particle lu (Wl), “O that…”
sn Abram’s desire is that Ishmael enjoy God’s favor. To live in God’s presence is the language of blessing; recall that Cain had to flee from God’s presence.
⁴¹tn The active participle suggests future certainty—she is bearing = she is going to bear.
⁴²sn The name Isaac, meaning “he laughs, may he laugh,” was originally intended to express divine approval, perhaps a shortened form of yishaq-’el (lo@-q?X=y!), “God laughs” = approves. There is a Hurrian story that has a father smiling when the newborn son is placed in his lap.
⁴³sn The verb “I have heard you,” using shama` (umv), forms a word play on the name itself (paronomasia). It underscores the meaning of the lad’s name—God continues to hear!
<sup>44</sup>tn Heb “exceedingly, exceedingly.”
<sup>45</sup>sn E. A. Speiser, “Background and Function of the Biblical Nasi’,” CBQ 25 (1963):111-117.
<sup>46</sup>tn The construction is the Piel preterite, “and he finished,” followed by the Piel infinitive construct, which serves as the direct object, stating what he finished.
<sup>47</sup>sn The text draws attention to God’s dramatic exit, and in so doing brings full closure to the speech as well as hinting at the exalted nature of God.
<sup>48</sup>tn Heb “the son of ninety nine years.”
<sup>49</sup>tn Heb “the son of thirteen years.”
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And the LORD appeared.”
<sup>2</sup>tn The disjunctive clause here is circumstantial to the main clause.
<sup>3</sup>tn The noun “opening” is an adverbial accusative of place.
<sup>4</sup>tn I.e., Abraham.
<sup>5</sup>tn The drawn out description of his looking focuses the reader’s attention on his deliberate, fixed gaze, and indicates that what he is seeing is significant.
<sup>6</sup>tn The text introduces the object with the particle hinneh (hN@h!), which also draws attention to what he saw.
<sup>7</sup>tn The preposition `al (lu^) indicates that they were nearby, but not close by, for he had to run to meet them.
⁸tn “them” has been supplied.
⁹tn The form W?T^v=Y!w^ is from the verb hishtahawah (hw?&T^v=h!), the regular verb for “worship, bow low to the ground.” It is probably from a root hawah (hw?), but BDB list it under sahah (h?v).
¹⁰sn The visitation of the three is shrouded in mystery. The reader knows that this is a theophany, that it is probably the LORD and two angels (assuming the two angels in chap. 19 are indeed part of this). What Abraham knew, or when it dawned on him who this was is hard to say. From the language of the text one would conclude that he suspected this was something out of the ordinary; or, his lavish treatment of the visitors was done quite unwittingly, but most appropriately for the nature of the visitors. Bowing down to the ground would be reserved for obeisance of kings or worship of the LORD. Here he bows to the ground. Whether he knew it or not, it was proper.
¹¹sn The Masoretic Text has the form ‘adonay (ynd)o&), which is reserved for God. This may reflect later scribal activity—the scribes, knowing it was the LORD, put the proper pointing with the word instead of the more common ‘adoni (yn!d)o&). Abraham probably said “my Lord,” as if these visitors were truly important; but his words were unwittingly spoken, for this was the LORD.
¹²sn “If I have found favor” would mean something like, “If you would be pleased to stop here”; but again, the words say more than he probably thought at the time.
¹³tn The imperative after the jussive may be subordinated to show purpose of result.
¹⁴tn The Qal cohortative here probably has the nuance of polite request in view of their answer.
¹⁵tn Heb “strengthen your heart.”
¹⁶tn Heb “for therefore.”
¹⁷tn The Hebrew `abar (rbu) means “to pass over, cross over,” or simply “come.”
<sup>18</sup>tn The nuance of the perfect tense is instantaneous perfect—as you say (now).
<sup>19</sup>tn The first part of the sentence lacks a verb other than the imperative “hurry.” Abraham now is moving very quickly to get things ready, and the cryptic instructions to Sarah reflect that.
<sup>20</sup>sn This is about 20 quarts, which would make a lot of bread. And the animal prepared for the meal was far more than needed for three visitors. This is a banquet for royalty! Either it has been a lonely spell and the visitors have made his day, or he senses that this is a momentous visit—from someone.
<sup>21</sup>sn The bread being made here would be the simple, round bedouin type bread that is normally prepared quickly for visitors.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “the young man.”
<sup>23</sup>tn The construction uses the Piel preterite, “he hurried,” followed by the infinitive construct; the two probably form a verbal hendiadys: “he hurried to prepare” becomes “he quickly prepared.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The clause is introduced with the disjunctive waw marking a temporal clause circumstantial to the main verb to follow.
<sup>25</sup>tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) often goes with the gesture of pointing, or the focused look.
<sup>26</sup>tn I.e., the LORD.
<sup>27</sup>tn The Hebrew is emphatic, using the Qal infinitive absolute with the imperfect tense.
sn If Abraham had not yet figured out who this was, this interchange would have made it clear. Otherwise, how would a return visit from this man mean Sarah would have a son?
<sup>28</sup>tn The Hebrew says, “as/when the time lives” or “revives,” possibly meaning the spring time, but certainly when the time comes around again.
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “and there will be (hinneh [hN@h!]) a son for Sarah.
<sup>30</sup>tn The first of two circumstantial clause preparing the reader for Sarah’s response.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “days.”
<sup>32</sup>tn The Hebrew simply says, “it had ceased to be for Sarah after the manner of women.”
<sup>33</sup>tn Heb “saying.”
<sup>34</sup>sn A. A. McIntosh suggests that this word should be translated “conception” and not “pleasure” (“A Third Root `adah in Biblical Hebrew,” VT 24 [1974]:454-73).
³⁵tn “too” has been added here.
³⁶tn The pronoun is enclitic, emphasizing the amazement in the question: “Why ever did Sarah laugh?”
³⁷tn The construction uses both ‘ap and ‘umnam (<nm=o% [o^h^): “indeed, truly, will I have a child”
³⁸tn The verb pale’ (olP) means “to be wonderful, extraordinary, surpassing, amazing.” The traditional rendering, “Is anything too hard for the LORD?” satisfies the idea but does not quite capture the magnitude of the word.
³⁹sn The passage brings the promise into clear focus. As long as it was a promise for the future, it really could be believed without much involvement. But now, when it seemed so impossible from the human standpoint, when the LORD fixes an exact date for the birth of the child, the promise became rather overwhelming to them. But then this was the LORD of creation, the one they had come to trust. The point of these narratives is that the creation of the seed, that is eventually Israel, is no less a miraculous work of creation than the creation itself. Likewise in the building of the Church, Christ will do the impossible—and many will laugh in their hearts, staggering at the promises.
⁴⁰tn Heb “No, but you did laugh.”
⁴¹tn Heb “toward the face of.”
⁴²sn As Wenham notes in his commentary, their interest in Sodom is the first hint that something more ominous is afoot.
⁴³tn The parenthetical clause introduced with the waw disjunctive sets the stage for the dialogue to follow.
⁴⁴tn The Piel of salah (?lv) means “lead out, send out, expel”; here it is in the friendly sense of seeing them on their way.
⁴⁵tn Heb “I am doing.”
⁴⁶tn Heb “And Abraham.”
⁴⁷tn Literally, “For I have known.” The verb yada` (udy) has salvific connotations. It means that Abraham stood in a special relationship with the LORD within a covenant, and that when he received further revelation he would instill it in the way of his descendants. For the idea of “chose,” see Amos 3:2, Exod. 33:12, etc.
<sup>48</sup>tn The perfect with the waw consecutive carries the same nuance as “command.”
<sup>49</sup>tn The infinitive explains how they will keep the way of the LORD; the usage is epexegetical.
<sup>50</sup>tn The infinitive after l<sup>e</sup>ma`an (/u^m^l=) indicates result.
⁵¹tn The “outcry of Sodom” means the cry about Sodom.
⁵²tn Subjective genitive: the sin they commit.
⁵³tn Heb “heavy.”
⁵⁴tn Cohortative of resolve.
sn The descent to see Sodom is a bold anthropomorphism, stressing the careful judgment of God. The language reminds the reader of Gen 11:1-9.
⁵⁵tn The text says “if they have done completely according to the outcry”; but in the context this means: if they have done as wickedly as the outcry implies. “Wickedly” is supplied.
⁵⁶sn This little “if not” provides one ray of hope, and inspires the intercession. As Jacob says in his commentary on Genesis, “It is God himself who wants intercession made, and Abraham must be the intercessor” (pp. 448, 9).
⁵⁷tn Heb “And the men.”
⁵⁸tn Heb “went.”
⁵⁹tn One ancient scribal emendation as “but the LORD remained standing before Abraham.” But the “standing before” is an indication of intercession.
⁶⁰sn The words “righteous” and “wicked” must be understood in the passage. That which is righteous conforms to God’s standard, and that which does not is wicked or guilty. The text has already established that God grants righteousness for faith, and so the assumption is that members of the covenant, believers, have righteousness and can be called the righteous—Lot, for example. The wicked (also means guilty, criminal) are outside the covenant and assumed to do wickedly, especially here.
⁶¹tn The Hebrew word is nasa’ (oCn) which means “lift up, bear, carry” in its normal usage, is the key word in the plea. It has the idea of lifting up the face (19:21) in the sense of showing favor. When followed by the word for sin it means “forgive” (see the same language in Moses’ intercession in Exod. 32:32).
⁶²tn The word halilah (hll!?) is related to halal (ll?), “common, profane, polluted, defiled—that which is outside the sacred! BDB list it as an exclamation, lit, ad profanum, that is, “far be it.”
⁶³sn See J. L. Crenshaw, “Popular Questioning of the Justice of God in Ancient Israel,” ZAW 82 (1970):380-395; and C. S. Rodd, “Shall Not the Judge of All the Earth Do What Is Just?” ExT 83 (1972):137-139.
⁶⁴tn The disjunctive clause is a concessive clause here, drawing out the humility as a contrast to the LORD.
⁶⁵sn The verb sahat (t?v) is now introduced, the same verb that was used in the judgment at the flood.
⁶⁶tn The construction is a verbal hendiadys, the preterite “he added” with an adverb “yet” with the infinitive “to speak”: “he spoke again.”
⁶⁷sn The idiom is “let it not be hot to the Lord.”
⁶⁸tn The cohortative is subordinated as a result of the jussive.
⁶⁹tn Heb “and he said.”
⁷⁰tn Heb “went.”
⁷¹tn The infinitive serves as the direct object of the verb “finished.”
¹tn Heb “And the two angels came.”
²sn The disjunctive clause, here circumstantial to the events, indicates more than where Lot was. To sit in the gates in the ancient world usually meant to serve as a judge (i.e, more of a juror today). And this is a point the passage will make.
³tn The imperatives have the force of invitation.
⁴tn These two verbs form a verbal hendiadys, “you can rise up early and go” means you can go early.
⁵tn The “street” refers to the wide street area at the gate complex of the city.
⁶sn The verb pasar (rXP) “pressed” in the sense of insisting, foreshadows where the men of the city press in on them (v. 9). By such devices the narrative begins to contrast Lot and his world.
⁷tn The verb sakab (bkv) means “lie down, recline,” i.e., go to bed. Here what appears to be an imperfect is a preterite after the adverb terem (<r#F#). And the nuance of potential (perfect) fits well.
⁸tn Heb “and the men of the city, the men of Sodom, from the young to the old, all the people from the end [of the city].” The repetition of “men of” stresses all kinds of men; and “all the people” is in apposition to these phrases.
⁹sn The verb “to know” is used here in the sense of “lie with” or “have sex with” (as in 4:1). That this is the case is easily seen from Lot’s warning that they not do so wickedly, and his willingness to give them his daughters instead. Their sin is clearly homosexuality. There is much literature on this passage, and this subject, some of which tries to argue other views, such as inhospitality as the reason for divine judgment! But the text reads very clearly. See Wolfgang Roth, “What of Sodom and Gomorrah? Homosexual Acts in the Old Testament.” Explor 1 (1974):7-14.
¹⁰tn Heb “shadow.”
¹¹sn Lot makes a fascinating study in Scripture. He clearly is portrayed in this chapter as a hypocrite and a buffoon. He is well aware of the way the men live in that city, and is apparently comfortable in the midst of it. But when confronted with these righteous men, the angels, he will finally draw the line. But he is willing to sacrifice his daughters virginity to protect his guests. His opposition to the crowds leads to his rejection as a foreigner by those he had chosen to live with, and he becomes helpless. The one who attempted to rescue his visitors must be rescued by them. For this passage a study of Judg 19 and Gen 19 is a worthy comparison (see Westermann, Genesis; and George Coats, Genesis).
¹²tn The two words are literally, “Approach out there” which could be rendered a number of ways, such as “Get out of the way, stand back.”
¹³tn Or “to sojourn.”
¹⁴tn The construction is the imperfect with the infinitive absolute from the verb sapat (Fpv), “to judge”; “he would indeed judge” fits the nuance.
¹⁵sn The verb “to do wickedly” is repeated here. It appears that whatever “wickedness” they had intended, probably nothing short of homosexual rape, they were now ready to inflict on Lot.
¹⁶tn For the adverb m^e’od (do)m=).
¹⁷tn Heb “and.”
¹⁸tn Heb “from the least to the greatest.”
¹⁹tn The infinitive supplies the direct object of the verb.
²⁰tn Heb “Yet who to you here” has the use of the preposition for possession: “Who do you have yet here?”
²¹tn The article serves here as a demonstrative.
²²tn The participle expresses the certain future: “we are destroying” = we are going to do it.
²³tn Heb “their outcry.”
²⁴sn The expressions here have to be interpreted in the light of the context and the social customs. The men are called “sons-in-law” and (literally) “takers of his daughters”—but the daughters have not had sex with a man. The verb “take” usually means “get married” in this kind of a passage. If they were already married to two daughters, then Lot left some daughters here when he fled with the two virgins. It is better to translate this as “who were about to marry” his daughters. Formal contracts were binding, and so they could be called sons-in-law.
²⁵tn The participle again has the imminent future nuance, he is about to destroy.
²⁶sn This verb “mock” figures prominently in this section of Genesis. It is the motif of “laughing” (Qal) that was used in the Isaac stories. And it is the idea of mocking (Piel, as here) in the expulsion of Ishmael story. Whereas Sarah and Abram laughed within themselves at the word from the LORD, these men thought Lot was mocking them, that is, ridiculing them and their lifestyle—but it was over a warning of death.
²⁷tn Heb “When dawn came up.”
²⁸tn The expression “you have” or “who are here” is literally “are found,” recalling (18:29-32). It might suggest he had other daughters living in the city.
²⁹tn Or “with the iniquity of the city.”
³⁰tn Heb “in the compassion of the LORD to them”; the word means the LORD spared them from death.
³¹tn Or “escape.”
³²sn The verb “look” is nabat (Fbn) which signifies a gaze, a looking intently, not a passing glance. This is the verb in v. 26; Lot’s wife disobeyed these men, and gazed intently (or fondly?) back to see the place.
³³tn Or “my Lords.”
³⁴tn The suffix is singular.
³⁵tn The verb actually means “you made great, magnified.”
³⁶sn The word hesed (ds#?#) is a common word meaning faithful love, loyal love, lovingkindness. It is most often related to covenant loyalty. Whether that is Lot’s emphasis here or not is hard to say. It is certainly the main reason Lot is being rescued.
³⁷tn The infinitive explains how they acted with kindness, and so is the epexegetical use.
³⁸tn Heb “evil.”
sn Lot is hardly a pillar of faith here. First, they have to drag him out of the city. Instead of obeying and fleeing, he says he cannot do it. Moreover, he doubts the LORD’s ability to have him escape before the judgment. And, finally, he wrangles a concession out of the angels as they flee. As Kidner in his commentary says, Not even fire and brimstone will make a pilgrim out of Lot.
³⁹sn The verb is dabaq (qbD) which normally means “stick to, cleave, join.” He is afraid that he cannot outrun the coming calamity, that it will seize him too.
⁴⁰tn The perfect tense has the waw consecutive, and so it carries the nuance of the verb before it.
⁴¹tn Heb “my life.”
⁴²tn The idiom used is “I have lifted up your face (=shown you favor) also concerning this matter.”
⁴³tn The construction is the negated infinitive. It therefore serves either as the result of the preceding sentence (“I have granted this request, so that I will not”) or the explanation of the verb, the epexegetical use (“I have granted your request by not destroying”).
⁴⁴tn Two imperatives together may form a hendiadys, the first becoming adverbial.
⁴⁵tn This is the infinitive construct with a suffix (subjective genitive) forming a temporal clause with the preposition.
⁴⁶sn The name of the place, ru^OX, seems to mean “Little Place,” because of the paronomasia with the word “little, small” (ruX=m!) used twice before.
⁴⁷sn There is a very short time between dawn and sunrise in which Lot could escape.
⁴⁸tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial to the main clause.
⁴⁹tn Or “burning sulfur,” or the traditional “fire and brimstone.”
⁵⁰sn The text clarifies that this was from the LORD. What it was exactly, and how it happened, can only be left to intelligent speculation; but see J. Penrose Harland, “The Destruction of the Cities of the Plain,” BA 6 (1943):41-54.
⁵¹tn Heb “all the circle.”
⁵²tn Heb “vegetation”—any shoot of vegetation.
⁵³tn Heb “his;” the referent (“Lot’s”) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁵⁴tn The verb means to look intently, gaze (cf. 15:5).
sn The idea in the passage is that she identified with the damned town, and thereby disobeyed God’s provision for salvation. She, like her daughters later, reflected how much Sodom had become a part of their thinking.
⁵⁵tn “went” has been added.
⁵⁶tn Heb “to the face of.”
⁵⁷sn It is hard to imagine what was going on in Abraham’s mind, but this little section enables the reader to think about the human response to the judgment. He had family in that area. He had rescued those people from the invasion. That was why he interceded. But he surely knew how wicked they were—that was why he got the number down to ten. But he must have wondered now, What was the point? Yet the reader knows that God delivered the “righteous” before destroying their world—which is what he will do again at the end of the age.
⁵⁸tn The construction is a temporal clause: the temporal indicator followed by an infinitive construct with a preposition, followed by the subjective genitive.
⁵⁹sn Here again the verb “remember” means more than mental recollection: God acted on what he had promised Abraham.
⁶⁰tn Heb “And Lot.”
⁶¹tn Heb “and” (and then).
⁶²tn The plural cohortative is best subordinated to the preceding cohortative with the sense of purpose or result.
⁶³tn Or “that we may.”
⁶⁴sn The word is “seed.” It means descendants in general, but here the specific members of this family that is all but extinct in their thinking. See F. C. Fensham, “The Obliteration of the Family as Motif in the Near Eastern Literature,” AION, n.s. 10 (1969):191-99.
⁶⁵sn The name Moab has been studied at great length, and it is very difficult to give it a definition, since it is Moabite. But in the story it is given an interpretation by association with the statement of the girl that uses “from our father”—me’abinu (Wnyb!om@), me’ab (bom@) sounds like moab (boOm). The name seems innocent enough in her mind; to tell people that a child is “from the father” is harmless. But which father! The Israelites used this account to portray the true nature of the Moabite people.
⁶⁶sn The paronomasia here also gives an interpretation to the name. Hebrew `am (<u^) can mean people, nation, kinsman.” A name “son of my kinsman” (yM!u^-/B#) would also convey a proper sense to people, but for those who knew who the relative was, it would carry another meaning. The accounts of these births show how much influence the Canaanitish people in Sodom had over Lot and his family; but they also serve as a polemic against the Moabites and Ammonites, perennial enemies of Israel.
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And Abraham.”
<sup>2</sup>tn The verb is gur (rWG) originally rendered “sojourned.” It means he had a temporary stay in Gerar, for the land was not his.
<sup>3</sup>sn “On occasion” is added to the text for clarification; the chapter will say that it was their custom to say this wherever they went.
<sup>4</sup>tn The construction is the particle hinneh (;N=h!, suffixed) with the active participle; it expresses imminent future. He may as well have said, “You’re dead.”
<sup>5</sup>tn The word used is ba`al (lu^B^); “she is owned by an owner.”
⁶tn Heb “And he said.”
⁷sn The plea of Abimelech echoes the prayer of Abraham in chap. 18. If the king is killed, then the nation the king rules will be destroyed.
⁸sn The word is tam (<T) “blameless, perfect.” To do something with a blameless heart means to act with a good conscience.
⁹tn Heb “give”
¹⁰sn N. Walker, “What is a Nabhi?” ZAW 73 (1961):99-100.
¹¹tn The form is a Qal imperative; but with the waw on it after the imperfect, it is subordinated to a purpose/result nuance.
sn So Abraham was known as a man of God whose prayer would be effectual. Ironically, and sadly, he was also known as a liar.
¹²tn Heb “if there is not you returning”; the suffix on the particle becomes the subject of the negated clause: if you do not restore.”
¹³sn The language is as strong as the warning in the garden; the imperfect is joined with the infinitive absolute. The point is that if anyone takes another man’s wife, it is an absolute death penalty. Read J. J. Rabinowitz, “The Great Sin in Ancient Egyptian Marriage Contracts,” JNES 18 (1959):73; and W. L. Moran, “The Scandal of the `Great Sin’ at Ugarit,” JNES 18 (1959):280-281.
<sup>14</sup>tn The verb “rise early” often serves in a verbal hendiadys with a following verb, here “summoned. Literally, “he rose early . . . and he summoned.”
<sup>15</sup>tn The verb qara’ followed by the preposition lamed (l= + orq) means “to summon.”
<sup>16</sup>tn The clause is subordinated to the next as a temporal clause.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “in their ears.”
<sup>18</sup>sn The verb is literally, “you have brought.” It means that Abraham caused him to fall into what could have been a great sin—adultery, and would have been if the wife was not returned. The expression “great sin” is the normal terminology for adultery in the ancient world.
<sup>19</sup>tn The nuance of the Niphal imperfect is obligatory.
sn The verb “to do” appears three times in this one clause. There is no doubt that the “deed” was Abraham’s.
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “said to.”
<sup>21</sup>sn The meaning of this expression must be that Abraham had some intention in deceiving the king.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “I said.”
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “over the matter of.”
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “but also.”
<sup>25</sup>tn The form has the waw consecutive on the preterite; it is the main clause following the temporal clause.
<sup>26</sup>sn He was telling her how she could demonstrate her faithful love for him. It was, of course, a lack of faith to try to deceive their way out of danger with a half truth. Twice now they have been caught. The passage suggests they did this more often than not. The Scriptures select two times, one out of the land and one in the land, to show how a lack of faith can jeopardize the promise. But God will not let them ruin the plan—he steps in to deliver his people, and gives the pagan a chance to escape punishment for posing the threat.
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “do.”
<sup>28</sup>tn Heb “what is good in your eyes.”
<sup>29</sup>sn Note the way that the king refers to Abraham. Was he being sarcastic in following up on the lie? It was surely a rebuke to Sarah. What is amazing is how patient this king has been. It is proof the fear of God was in that place.
<sup>30</sup>sn The exact meaning of the phrase is unclear. It says, “this is for you a covering for the eyes.” The gift of money makes one blind to what has happened. But is it her eyes, or other people’s eyes. The next clause favors the latter view: people will not look on her as compromised (Wenham, Genesis, p. 74).
<sup>31</sup>tn The verb is a preterite; but it may have the nuance of the potential perfect.
<sup>32</sup>tn The construction uses the infinitive absolute with the perfect tense.
sn This fact indicates that Sarah was in his household for weeks or months before the dream revelation was given, for he would have to have realized that there was no conception in his household. No one in his household could have children. And that idea reminds the reader of Sarah’s problem, and the concern of these narratives.
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And the LORD.”
<sup>2</sup>sn The verb “visit” (paqad [dqP]) can be translated “appoint, number, visit” as well as a number of other ways. The word describes divine intervention for blessing or cursing; it indicates His special attention to an individual or a matter, always with respect to His people’s destiny. He may visit the Amalekites, i.e., destroy them; he may visit His people in Egypt, i.e., deliver them; and here he visits Sarah, to allow her to have the promised child. One’s destiny is changed when the LORD visits. See G. Andre, Determining the Destiny: PQD in the Old Testament (Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1980).
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “spoken.”
<sup>4</sup>sn These two relative clauses, the first introduced with an article and the second with the pronoun, are placed in the middle of the sentence, before the name Isaac is stated. They are meant to underscore that this was indeed an actual birth to Abraham and Sarah in fulfillment of the promise.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “the son of eight days.”
<sup>6</sup>sn With the birth of the child of promise Abraham obeys the LORD in both the naming (17:19) and the circumcision (17:12).
<sup>7</sup>sn The parenthetical clause underscores how miraculous this birth was—100 years old. The fact that the genealogies give the ages of the fathers when their first is born shows that this was a major milestone in one’s life (Wenham, Genesis 16-50, p. 80).
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “made.”
<sup>9</sup>sn The name “Isaac” is now finally and triumphantly played upon in the verse. God prepared “laughter” (s<sup>e</sup>hoq [q?)X=]) for her, and everyone who hears about this “will laugh” (yishaq [q?^X=y!]) with her. The laughter is now of great joy and fulfillment, delight and pleasure—not unbelief.
<sup>10</sup>tn The perfect tense is used in unreal conditions or hypothetical conditions.
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “and the child grew.”
<sup>12</sup>tn Heb “made.”
<sup>13</sup>sn Children were weaned closer to the age of two or three in the ancient world, because infant mortality was high. If a child grew to this stage, it was fairly certain he would live—and be the heir. So such an event called for a celebration, especially for those who waited so long.
<sup>14</sup>tn Heb “saw.”
<sup>15</sup>sn The participle used here is the Piel from the same root as the name “Isaac”; it must have a stronger meaning than “laugh,” which is the Qal. What exactly Ishmael was doing is not clear. The commentaries either conclude that the boy was mocking Isaac, or merely playing with Isaac as if on equal footing. In either case Sarah saw it as a threat. The same participial form was used in Gen 19:14 to describe Lot as he attempted to warn his family; it also appears in 39:14 and 17 in Potipher’s accusation of Joseph as one who mocked them. In each case the activity is misinterpreted. So here in the joking/trifling/playing, another attitude, more sinister, is apparent to Sarah. Ishmael probably did not take the child or the promise seriously. Paul in Galatians 4:29 uses a word that can mean “put to flight, chase away, pursue.” He may be drawing on a Rabbinic interpretation of the passage, which focused on the intent more than the activity. In other words, if it was permitted to continue, Ishmael’s real intent of supplanting Isaac would have manifested itself.
<sup>16</sup>sn The verb “drive out” or “cast out” is a harsh term to use here. But then Sarah’s maternal instincts have sensed a real danger in that Ishmael was treating Isaac with some disdain. The passage, of course, is used by Paul in a wonderful midrashic exposition (a midrash is merely an analogical application of the Scripture). Once the promised child Isaac has come, there is no room for the slave woman and her son, or, since Christ has come as the fulfillment of the promise there should not be a return to the Law.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “and the matter.”
<sup>18</sup>tn The verb ra`a` (uur) basically means “to be evil, act wickedly” in a way that causes pain; here it essentially says that the whole affair distressed him greatly (it was evil in his sight).
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “Let it not be evil in your sight.”
<sup>20</sup>sn The idiom of “listen to/in the voice” has the idea of obey, comply.” Here her advice, though harsh, is necessary. It is to be obeyed because it fits with the will of God. Earlier it should not have been obeyed because it did not. Later, in chap. 25, when Abraham has other sons, he will send them all away as well.
<sup>21</sup>tn The nuance of the imperfect is progressive.
<sup>22</sup>sn The exact meaning of the last clause is not very clear, other than that it must say Isaac’s is the chosen line.
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The two verbs form a verbal hendiadys: “he rose up early…and he took,” meaning, “early in the morning he took.”
<sup>25</sup>sn This rendering takes “the boy” as a second (delayed) direct object of “he gave”; to clarify that the verb has been supplied. Its delay might indicate Abraham’s hesitation to send the boy away (see 43:13).
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “she went and wandered”; but the two can be related as a hendiadys.
<sup>27</sup>sn The verb is “cast,” but the child, being thirteen, would not have been carried let alone thrown under a bush. The implication is that he is limp from dehydration and being abandoned to die. See Wenham, Genesis 16-50, p. 85.
<sup>28</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>29</sup>sn The deliberate description, “lifted up her voice and wept,” indicates this was crying out loud, probably uncontrollably.
<sup>30</sup>sn The text has not to this point indicated that Ishmael was crying out, either in pain, or in prayer. But the text here makes it clear that God heard him. Ishmael is clearly central to the story: both the mother and the LORD are focused on the child’s imminent death.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “What to you?”
<sup>32</sup>sn Here the verb “heard” picks up the main motif of the name Ishmael, introduced back in chap. 16. Here the LORD heard the boys cry, no matter how slight; and for the LORD to hear means deliverance.
<sup>33</sup>tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is subordinated to the first and more important clause.
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “and he lived.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator for past time.
<sup>36</sup>tn Heb “saying.”
<sup>37</sup>sn The expression of God’s being with someone indicates divine intervention for provision and protection.
<sup>38</sup>sn Here is the first hint for the main motif of this story, the oath at Beersheba. The verb “swear” is connected to the word “seven,” sh<sup>e</sup>ba` (ub^v#) seven being a holy number. But the connection is not readily known. BDB suggest, “seven oneself” (whatever that means) or “bind oneself by seven things” (but that cannot be supported).
³⁹sn The oath formula is again used; it literally says “if you will deal falsely,” which means “you will not.
⁴⁰tn Heb “deal with me in kindness.”
⁴¹tn The word refers to the people in the land, so a metonymy of subject.
⁴²tn The verb is gur (rWG), “to stay, live, sojourn” as a temporary resident without ownership rights.
⁴³tn The word yakah (?ky) essentially means “to argue, dispute”; it can focus on the beginning of the dispute (here), the dispute itself, or the resolution of a dispute (Isa. 1:18). The complaint is lodged before the actual oath is taken.
⁴⁴tn The verb gazal (lzG) means “to steal, rob, take violently.” The event referred to must have been a difficult one.
⁴⁵tn Heb “and also.”
⁴⁶tn Or “made a treaty.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “And Abraham.”
⁴⁸tn Heb “What are these…”
⁴⁹tn Heb “that it be for me for a witness.”
⁵⁰sn Since the king wanted a treaty to share in some way with Abraham’s good fortune, Abraham would use the treaty to secure ownership of and protection for the well he dug. It would be worthless to make a treaty to lived in this territory if he had no rights to the water. It was as if Abraham consented to the treaty, but added his rider to it.
⁵¹tn The verb has no expressed subject; it is given a passive voice translation.
⁵²sn The name means “well of the oath” or “well of the seven.” Both the verb “swear” and the number “seven” have been used throughout the account. Now they are drawn in as part of the explanation of the significance of the name.
⁵³sn The verb forms the paronomasia with the name: nishb^e`u (WuB=v=n!) with b<sup>e</sup>’er sheba` (ub^v# ro@B=).
⁵⁴tn Or “made a treaty.”
⁵⁵sn The reference to the Philistines calls for further study. The name is a designation for the people who lived on the coastal plains of the land. However, the Philistines of Abraham’s day are a different race than those in the time of Judges and Samuel. The earlier ones are Semitic; the later ones are Greeks.
⁵⁶tn Heb “And Abraham.”
⁵⁷sn The planting of the tree is more a sign of his intent to stay there for a long time than a religious act. A growing tree in the Negev would be a lasting witness to God’s provision of water.
¹tn The text uses the temporal indicator way^ehi (yh!y=w^).
sn This beginning invites comparison between the two chapters. If it was difficult for Abraham to send Ishmael away, how much more difficult will this requirement be. He was finally willing to lose Ishmael; will he be willing to obey God concerning Isaac?
²sn The verb nasah (hsn) means “to test, try, prove.” The idea in this verse is that God was putting Abraham to a test to prove his faith. When this verb is used of people testing God, i.e., a bad sense, such as the Israelites testing God, the people involved are acting without faith; when God tests people, he is seeing how much faith is there. That the reader is told this is a test indicates that God was not going to let him slay Isaac—but Abraham did not know that. It was a test to see if he would obey God. See further, James L. Crenshaw, “A Monstrous Test: Genesis 22,” in A Whirlpool of Torment (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, pp. 9-30; and John I. Lawlor, “The Test of Abraham,” GTJ 1 (1980):19-35.
³tn Heb “and he said.”
⁴tn Heb “and he said.”
⁵tn I.e., God.
⁶sn The instructions are very clear, but the details are deliberate. With every additional description the commandment becomes more painful. They are repeated in vv. 12 and 16, forming a major motif in the story.
⁷tn The text uses the imperative of halak (Elh) with the so-called ethical dative, the suffix on the preposition to focus the command: “get you out.”
sn By deliberately using this instruction, as well as the general description of a mountain God would show him, recalls the instruction of 12:1. That would probably be an encouragement for Abraham to trust the one who fulfilled his former call.
⁸sn There has been much debate over the region of the sacrifice. 2 Chronicles 3:1 identifies it with the temple site in Jerusalem. Skeptical criticism, of course, rejects that as contrived, since there is no other support. But if we accept the Scripture, then Abraham will offer Isaac where Israel later will make their sacrifices. The sound of the name also forms part of a whole series of word plays based on ra’ah (hor) “see,” words that play on both the sounds and the sense. “Moriah” has been interpreted to mean something like the land of vision—the place God will provide.
⁹tn The verb is the Hiphil from `alah (hlu), “to offer up,” and the noun is the cognate word `olah (hlOu), “whole burnt offering”—everything goes up in smoke.
sn The call was for a whole burnt offering. In Lev 1 this sacrifice is later prescribed. It signified the complete surrender of the worshipper by making such an offering—he would be sacrificing his own heart in giving up Isaac. And it signified the complete acceptance by God. What made this a test is that pagans may have had child sacrifice, but it seemed out of character for God. Abraham would have to obey without fully understanding what God was about. But the chapter is actually a polemic against pagan ritual: now that this chapter is written, and the Scriptures complete, the believer knows that God would not have people sacrifice children.
¹⁰tn The form is the Qal imperfect of ‘amar (rmo), “to say.” Here it means “indicate, point out.”
¹¹tn The verb sakam (<kv), “to do s. early,” is again used with the following verbal form as a verbal hendiadys; it becomes adverbial. “Abraham rose up early in the morning and saddled” becomes “Early in the morning Abraham saddled.”
¹²tn This clause beginning with a preterite is best subordinated to the next clause; it seems to intrude on the main sequence of events of “took and went.”
¹³tn The text literally has “he arose and he went”; but the context indicates that this is simply the start of the journey. The two verbs indicate the gearing up for and the beginning of the trip.
¹⁴tn The idiom “lifted up his eyes” once again draws attention to the act of looking; it signifies here a focusing in on the distant sight.
¹⁵tn The text uses the imperative followed by the so-called ethical dative, the preposition with the suffix: “you remain here.”
¹⁶tn Beginning with this verb there are three plural cohortatives in a row, expressing the resolve of Abraham.
sn It is impossible to know what Abraham was thinking when he said, “we will return to you.” When he went he knew (1) that he was to sacrifice Isaac, and (2) that the future was with Isaac. How he reconciled that is not clear in the text. Hebrews says he had the kind of faith that believes in life after death—resurrection. To appreciate that requires a more detailed study of the way the Letter to the Hebrews uses the OT.
¹⁷tn This is the word hishtahawah (hw?&T^v=h!), “to bow oneself close to the ground.” It often carries the general meaning of “worship.”
¹⁸sn The details of the verse anticipate the sacrifice that lies ahead; it would have made this part of the journey even more difficult.
¹⁹tn Heb adds “and said.”
²⁰tn Heb “and he said.”
²¹tn The text has “here I am”; the idea is that Isaac has gotten his attention and he is responding to see what his son wants.
²²tn The construction has “will provide for himself”; ra’ah + lamed (l= + hor) preposition carrying the idea of “look out for, see to it, provide.”
sn This is the central theme of the passage, and the turning point in the story. At the end of the account the verb will be drawn into the proverb that captures the point of the story—the LORD will provide. And this is the point that Paul makes when he alludes to this story in Romans 8:32: “how shall he not freely give us all things?” See further Hans Joachim Schoeps, “The Sacrifice of Isaac in Paul’s Theology,” JBL 65 (1946):385-392.
²³tn The clause beginning with the preterite is subordinated to the main idea of the verse: “and they came . . . and he built,” becoming “when they came, he built.”
²⁴sn Now the motif of Abraham’s building an altar that has appeared frequently in the narratives comes into full focus. He has been a faithful worshipper; will he continue to worship when things seem so contrary?
²⁵sn The verb used is wayya`aqod (dq)u&Y^w^) from `aqad (dqu), “to bind.” This word in noun form—Aqedah—has become an important theme in Judaism. When sacrifices were made in the sanctuary, God remember the binding of Isaac, for which a substitute was offered (D. Polish, “The Binding of Isaac,” Judaica 6 (1957):17-21).
²⁶tn Heb “and Abraham.”
²⁷tn Heb “and do.”
²⁸sn The idea of fearing God is an important one in the OT. The word “fear” means both awe and dread, awe in the sense of adoration and admiration and worship, but dread in the sense of shrinking back from the Judge of all the earth. The result of the fear of the LORD is seen in a number of things, including obedience to the LORD.
²⁹tn The particle has its deictic force, drawing attention to what Abraham just saw.
³⁰tn Heb “And Abraham.”
³¹sn The name means either “the LORD sees” or “the LORD provides”; it is drawn from the word of faith given in v. 8 by the patriarch. The act of naming preserved in the memory of the people the amazing event that took place there.
³²sn Brevard Childs, “A Study of the Formula `Until this Day’,” JBL 82 (1963):279-292.
<sup>33</sup>sn The little saying that grew up here has some ambiguity, which was probably intended. The Niphal verb could be translated “in the mountain of the LORD it will be seen/provided” or “in the mountain the LORD will appear.” The fact that later the Temple stood here adds support for the latter interpretation: the people went to appear (Niphal of ra’ah [hor]) before the LORD, who appeared to them. But how did the LORD appear? In what he provided for His people—His power and His grace. So the idea of “the LORD will provide” fits the theology, and certainly fits the motivation for the name in v. 8. As Driver says, the LORD sees the needs of those who appear before Him, and he is seen by them in how he provides (The Book of Genesis, p. 219).
<sup>34</sup>tn The word is n<sup>e</sup>’um (<o%n=) which is “an oracle, a revelation”; the line is an oracle from the LORD, but it gets translated often as “says the LORD.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The text uses the Piel infinitive absolute and the Piel cohortative (most likely) to express the certainty of the blessing.
<sup>36</sup>tn Here too the text uses the Hiphil infinitive absolute and the Hiphil cohortative (probably, although the form itself does not indicate this).
<sup>37</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “the edge of the sea.”
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>40</sup>tn Or “inherit.”
<sup>41</sup>tn The word “gate” is a figure for the city, the part for the whole. To break through the gate complex would be to conquer the city, for that is the main area of defense.
<sup>42</sup>tn Heb “And all the nations.”
<sup>43</sup>tn The verb here is the Hithpael form, which might normally be given a reflexive nuance. But in view of the parallel passages the passive is preferable.
<sup>44</sup>sn The text has “in your seed.” On one level the world will be blessed through Israel. Paul in writing to the Romans lists how this happened—through the Law and the prophets, the covenant, the promises, and the Messiah. But on the highest level, the world would find blessing through the Seed of Abraham, Jesus the Messiah, who would bring spiritual and eternal blessings.
<sup>45</sup>sn Abraham’s obedience brought God’s confirmation of the covenant promises. Even though the promises had been stated before, they are said here in a particular way, with some additional material. The promise of God is reworded now so that instead of being grounded only in the plan of God it is grounded in both God’s will and man’s obedience (see R. W. Moberly, “The Earliest Commentary on the Aqedah,” VT 38 [1988]:302-323).
<sup>46</sup>tn Heb “they arose and went together.”
<sup>47</sup>tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator.
<sup>48</sup>tn The line begins with hinneh (hN@h!).
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And the lifetime.”
<sup>2</sup>sn The same double construction is found for Jacob in 47:28.
<sup>3</sup>sn The description here is of standard mourning rites (see “Burial and Mourning,” NBD, 170-172). They would have been carried out in the presence of the corpse, probably in Sarah’s tent. So Abraham came in to mourn; and then he rose up to go and bury his dead.
<sup>4</sup>tn Or “his dead wife” (“wife” has been supplied).
<sup>5</sup>sn The translation of this expression as the “Hittites” gives the impression that these people were the classical Hittites from the northern region; but there is no known connection between this group and the Hittites of Asia Minor. These are a tribe of Canaanitish people. Whether or not a pocket of the northern group had migrated south to this region is hard to say. So to preserve the distinction, this should be left as “sons of Heth” or “Hethites.”
<sup>6</sup>tn The two words used are ger, the “sojourner,” the one with no permanent residency, the stranger, and toshab, the “settler” (bvOtw= rG@). The two words form a nominal hendiadys.
<sup>7</sup>tn The verb “give” obviously does not mean “give,” but “sell.” However, this is the polite bartering that was done. They respond that money is not a concern, but of course it is.
<sup>8</sup>tn The word is “possession,” which means a plot of land that will remain his possession.
<sup>9</sup>tn The cohortative with the waw expresses the purpose of the imperative that precedes it.
<sup>10</sup>tn Or “my Lord.”
<sup>11</sup>tn The word for God is probably here used as a means of expressing the superlative: “prince of God” becomes “mighty prince.” The word for “prince” probably means “tribal chief” (see M. H. Gottstein, “Nasi’ ‘elohim (Gen 23:6),” VT 3 [1953]:298,299; and D. W. Thomas, VT 3 [1953]:215-216).
<sup>12</sup>tn The phrase “to prevent you” has been added.
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “he rose up.”
<sup>14</sup>tn The idiom means essentially, “If it is your will.”
<sup>15</sup>tn Or “hear me.”
<sup>16</sup>tn Or “sell.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Or sell.”
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “silver.”
<sup>19</sup>sn Abraham is asking for more than the right to bury his dead; he is asking to buy and own the land where he will bury Sarah. That is not what they offered at first.
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “ears.”
<sup>21</sup>sn See E. A. Speiser, “`Coming’ and `Going’ at tyhe City Gate,” BASOR 144 (1956):20-23; and G. Evans, “`Coming’ and `Going’ at the City Gate: A Discussion of Professor Speiser’s Paper.” BASOR 150 (1958):28-33.
<sup>22</sup>tn Or “sell.” The perfect tense receives here an instantaneous nuance, because he is saying this in court, as it were. Those present witness that he is “giving” Abraham the field, provided Abraham “gives” him something.
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “silver.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The cohortative is subordinated to the imperative “take” for a result clause.
<sup>25</sup>tn “worth” has been added.
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “listened to Ehpron.”
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “Abraham weighed.”
<sup>28</sup>tn Heb “money.”
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “spoken.”
<sup>30</sup>sn The measurement of silver was according to the going rate of weights for the currency.
<sup>31</sup>tn The verb is qum (<Wq) which normally means “rise, stand”; but in covenants and agreements it means “establish, secure, make sure.”
<sup>32</sup>sn See G. M. Tucker, “The Legal Background of Genesis 23,” JBL 85 (1966):77-84; and M. R. Lehmann, “Abraham’s Purchase of Machpelah and Hittite Law,” BASOR 129 (1953):15-18.
<sup>33</sup>tn Heb “possession of a grave.”
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “days.”
<sup>2</sup>sn The taking of this oath had to do with the sanctity of the family and the continuation of the seed, and so the oath was to be taken with that in mind (David R. Freedman, “Put Your Hand Under My Thigh—the Patriarchal Oath,” BAR 2 [1976]:2-4,42).
<sup>3</sup>tn The verb is the Hiphil imperfect or cohortative; placed after the imperative it may be subordinated as the purpose clause.
<sup>4</sup>tn The form is the perfect tense with a waw consecutive; it either receives the same nuance as the verb before it or is subordinated to it.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “to go after me.”
<sup>6</sup>tn The construction uses the Hiphil infinitive absolute with the imperfect; the imperfect stresses the obligation he would then have, and the infinitive adds to the doubt expressed by the servant.
<sup>7</sup>tn The text uses the Niphal of samar (rmv) followed by the preposition and suffix: take heed to yourself, beware. This is a very strong warning for him not to do it.
<sup>8</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>9</sup>tn Perfect tense with a waw consecutive.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “go after you.”
<sup>11</sup>tn The verb means “be free, released, clear”; the oath would no longer be binding.
<sup>12</sup>tn The disjunctive clause reads “and every good thing of his master was in his hand.” The clause is circumstantial, explaining that he took all kinds of gifts to be used at his discretion.
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “and he arose and went.”
<sup>14</sup>tn “Aram of the Two Rivers,” a region in northern Mesopotamia.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “at the time of evening.”
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “make it happen before me today.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “act in loyal love with.”
<sup>18</sup>sn The word hesed (ds#?#) is prominent in this story. It is the word that means “faithful, covenant love.” “Kindness” is an adequate rendering; but in this story it is more of faithful love that is meant. God will fulfill the plan because he is fulfilling the covenant; but the motivation is love (Nelson Glueck, Hesed in the Bible, translated by Alfred Gottschalk [Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1967).
<sup>19</sup>tn This is normally the temporal indicator for the future, “and it shall be”; but since the request to follow is with a jussive, the usage here prepares for that: “let it be.”
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “I will cause to drink.”
sn It would be an enormous test for a young woman to water ten camels. The idea is that such a woman would not only be industrious but hospitable and generous.
<sup>21</sup>tn The verb yakah (?ky) in the Hiphil has this meaning only here and in v. 44.
<sup>22</sup>tn The infinitive is the object of the verb “finished”; the whole clause is a temporal clause introduced with way<sup>e</sup>hi (yh!y=w^).
<sup>23</sup>tn The participle introduced with hinneh (hN@h!) changes the narrative into a more dramatic moment, as if it was suddenly in vision—”Look, here comes Rebekah!”
<sup>24</sup>tn The disjunctive clause is here circumstantial.
<sup>25</sup>tn Or “had sex with.”
<sup>26</sup>tn The two verbs form a hendiadys: “she hastened and she lowered” become “she quickly lowered.”
<sup>27</sup>tn The Piel preterite is followed by the Hiphil infinitive that serves as the direct object.
<sup>28</sup>tn The infinitive here serves as the direct object of the verb killu (WLK!).
<sup>29</sup>tn The construction here too employs a verbal hendiadys between the two words “she hastened and emptied.”
<sup>30</sup>tn Heb “to know.”
<sup>31</sup>sn The term salah (?lX), “make successful” in the Hiphil, is a key term in the story (vv. 40, 42, 56). This in itself would not say if the journey was a success; she still had to be willing to go.
<sup>32</sup>sn I.e., a nose ring.
<sup>33</sup>sn This was about 5 grams.
<sup>34</sup>tn A shekel weighs about 12 grams (0.4 ounces); so these bracelets were about 4 ounces.
<sup>35</sup>tn Heb “his kindness and his faithfulness”; but as a part of the hendiadys, “faithful” becomes adjectival.
<sup>36</sup>sn A major theme in this passage is the providence of God in working through the circumstances to bring about the marriage (Ronald M. Hals, The Theology of the Book of Ruth (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1969).
<sup>37</sup>tn An adverbial accusative of termination.
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “And the young girl ran.”
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “according to.”
<sup>40</sup>tn The disjunctive clause is a parenthesis to prepare the reader for Laban.
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “And Laban ran.”
<sup>42</sup>tn The construction is the temporal indicator with the infinitive construct: “and it was when he saw.”
<sup>43</sup>tn The construction is the preposition with the infinitive with the suffix serving as the subjective genitive; it is another temporal clause.
<sup>44</sup>tn The disjunctive clause, beginning with waw on the particle hinneh (hN@h!), here serves to highlight a circumstantial clause.
<sup>45</sup>sn Laban does not know any of the story yet; so Wenham is correct in noting that this is simply a polite greeting to a rich man (Genesis 16-50, p. 146).
<sup>46</sup>tn The construction has the waw disjunctive on the pronoun prior to the verb; the clause is circumstantial, “when” or “since.”
<sup>47</sup>tn The verb without an expressed subject may be treated as a passive.
<sup>48</sup>tn Heb “he placed before him to eat.”
<sup>49</sup>tn The verb without an expressed subject becomes passive.
<sup>50</sup>tn Heb “my words.”
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “and my master.”
<sup>52</sup>tn The variant reading is the strong adversative.
<sup>53</sup>tn The form is the perfect with waw consecutive, “and you shall get,” or, “in order to get.”
<sup>54</sup>tn The nuance of the imperfect emphasizes the willingness to go.
<sup>55</sup>tn Heb “after me.”
<sup>56</sup>sn The verb is the hithpael of halak (Elh), meaning “live one’s life.
<sup>57</sup>tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive.
<sup>58</sup>tn The verb with the waw consecutive begins a subordinate temporal clause.
<sup>59</sup>tn The construction is the particle yes (vy@) with a suffix and the active particle: if you are granting success.”
<sup>60</sup>tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) introduces a foundational clause for the case that will be presented.
<sup>61</sup>tn The temporal indicator usually announces the future, “and it will be”; but since jussives will be used here, this introduces them.
<sup>62</sup>tn Heb “and she says.”
<sup>63</sup>tn The verb is the imperative.
<sup>64</sup>tn The adverb terem (<r#F#) indicates the verb is a preterite; the infinitive that follows it serves as the direct object.
<sup>65</sup>tn The clause begins with the waw conjunction on hinneh (hN@h!), to express the present reality.
<sup>66</sup>tn The verbal hendiadys gives this translation.
<sup>67</sup>tn Heb “from upon her” (the word “shoulder” is implied).
<sup>68</sup>tn Heb “And I blessed.”
<sup>69</sup>tn Heb “brother.”
<sup>70</sup>tn The meaning of the expression is that he will know where he should go if there is no further business here.
<sup>71</sup>tn Heb “The thing.”
<sup>72</sup>sn The expression means that they could not say one way or the other what they wanted, for it was God’s will. But the choice of “bad or good” carries the theme from the beginning of the book forward. When God makes his will known, the knowledge of good and evil is rendered powerless.
<sup>73</sup>tn The construction is a preterite with the waw consecutive, which is here subordinated to the next verb.
<sup>74</sup>tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial, here causal.
<sup>75</sup>tn The cohortative could be rendered “I will go” but is better subordinated here to the imperative.
<sup>76</sup>tn The expression is literally, “and we will inquire at her mouth.”
<sup>77</sup>tn The nuance of the verb here expresses her willingness, her desire to go with the man: I am willing to, I want to go.
<sup>78</sup>tn The expression is actually, “become thousands of ten thousands,” hayah (hyh) being followed by the preposition. It expresses their blessing that she increase, i.e., produce children and start a line that will greatly increase.
<sup>79</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>80</sup>tn Heb “after.”
<sup>81</sup>tn The disjunctive clause introduces a new beginning in this section of the story.
<sup>82</sup>tn Heb “from the way of Beer Lahai Roi.”
<sup>83</sup>tn This disjunctive clause is circumstantial to the first, causal.
<sup>84</sup>tn Heb “at the turning of the evening.”
<sup>85</sup>tn This idiom emphasizes the careful look he had at the approaching caravan.
<sup>86</sup>tn The clause begins with w<sup>e</sup>hinneh (hN@h!w=) drawing the readers attention vividly to what he was seeing.
<sup>87</sup>tn Heb “and she said.”
<sup>88</sup>tn The phrase “the death of” has been added.
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And Abraham.”
<sup>2</sup>tn The construction uses a verbal hendiadys: “he added…and took.”
<sup>3</sup>sn The names Sheba and Dedan appeared in Gen 10 under different developments. Since these two names are usually interpreted to be places, one suggestion that is plausible is that Abraham had descendants who lived in those regions too (and maybe even took names linked with it).
<sup>4</sup>tn Or “descendants.”
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “who were to Abraham.”
<sup>6</sup>sn Literally, “and these are the days of the years of the lifetime of Abraham that he lived.” The normal genealogy form is greatly expanded here due to the importance of the life of Abraham.
<sup>7</sup>tn “years” has been added.
<sup>8</sup>sn This language is part of the terminology used in the OT to describe what happened to people when they died. As Jacob says in his commentary, this can only mean the union of his soul with the souls of his forefathers (p. 536).
<sup>9</sup>tn The clause begins with the temporal indicator.
<sup>10</sup>sn The verb “bless” in this passage must include all the gifts that God granted to Isaac. But fertility was not one of them, at least not for twenty years, because Rebekah was barren as well.
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “and Isaac lived.”
<sup>12</sup>sn The Book of Genesis tends to tidy up the family records at every turning point. Here, before proceeding with the stories about Isaac’s family, Ishmael’s line will be covered. Later, before discussing Jacob’s family, Esau’s line will be traced.
<sup>13</sup>sn The meaning of this line is not easily understood. The sons of Ishmael will be listed here “by their names” and “according to their descendants.” However, tol<sup>e</sup>dot (tOdl=OT) is difficult. Some have suggested “in the order of their birth,” but that has little support. Others suggest “in their clans.” To be consistent with the use of the word throughout the book, some have suggested “according to their family records.”
<sup>14</sup>tn Heb “and he breathed.”
<sup>15</sup>tn “descendants” has been added.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “which is by the face of,” or, near the border; the territory ran along the border of Egypt.
<sup>17</sup>tn The form is the infinitive with a suffix: “as you go.”
<sup>18</sup>tn A tribal area in the Sinai.
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “he fell.”
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “his.”
<sup>21</sup>sn This last expression, obviously alluding to the oracle for Ishmael, could mean that they lived in hostility to others, or that they lived in a territory that was over against or opposite the lands of the relatives. While there is some ambiguity, the line probably does give a hint of the Ishmaelite-Israelite conflicts to come.
<sup>22</sup>sn Here we see how the title is to be interpreted. What follows for several chapters is not the account of Isaac, except briefly, but the account of Jacob and Esau. It is “what became of” Isaac and his family that fills the next chapters.
<sup>23</sup>sn Again, the idiom is: “was the son of forty years.”
<sup>24</sup>sn Some valuable information is provided here. We learn here that Isaac married 35 years before Abraham died, that Rebekah was barren for 20 years, and that Abraham would have lived to see Jacob and Esau begin to grow up. The death of Abraham was recorded in the first part of the chapter as a “tidying up” of one generation.
<sup>25</sup>sn The verb `atar (rtu) means “entreat.” It is used frequently in the stories of the plagues in which Moses entreated the LORD to remove the plagues. The cognate word in Arabic means “to slaughter for sacrifice”; and the word is used in Zeph. 3:10 to describe worshippers or suppliants who would bring offerings. Perhaps some ritual accompanied his prayer here.
²⁶tn Or “answered his entreaty/prayer.”
²⁷tn Or “conceived.”
²⁸tn The word used here, rasas (JXr) in the Hithpael, is a violent word, depicting a struggle that was far out of the ordinary.
²⁹sn She wants to know what is happening to her, but the question itself reflects a growing despair.
³⁰sn In other Scriptures this would mean going to a prophet (1 Sam. 9:9, e.g.). It is possible she would have gone to see Abraham, because he would be still alive, and he was a prophet. But there is no information given.
³¹sn This is a metonymy in the poem, of course; it is a metonymy of the effect, the cause being the two sons who will produce the nations. But the point of using this figure is to say that the real struggle will be between the nations, and one nation will be stronger than the other. In other words, all of Jacob’s scheming was unnecessary in the final analysis; he could have behaved righteously and not stolen the blessing and still have this oracle fulfilled—in Israel.
³²tn The infinitive construct expresses purpose—the days were fulfilled to give birth.
³³tn The construction has w^ehinneh (hN@h!w=) at the beginning of the clause—”O look!”
³⁴sn The word “reddish” is ‘admoni (yn!Omd=o^); this word forms a preliminary word play on the tribal development from Esau—they were Edomites. The writer sees in Esau’s appearance at birth a sign of what was to come. After all, they have already been made aware of the “nations” that were here being born.
³⁵tn Heb “all of him.”
³⁶sn Here is another word play on the descendants from Esau, as well as the sentiment that forms the paronomasia with the name. The word “hairy” is se’ar (ruC@); the Edomites will later lived in Mount Seir, perhaps named for its wooded nature. But the description here foreshadows that of the descendants.
³⁷sn The name “Esau” is not etymologically related to se’ar (ruC@); but it draws on some of the sounds, and is meant to bring forward the description.
³⁸tn The disjunctive clause beginning here is meant to be circumstantial. Whereas Esau was stative at birth, Jacob was active.
³⁹sn The name of Jacob will be explained by this word “heel,” `aqeb (bq@u). The name, being a verb, probably means something like, “may he protect,” i.e., as a rearguard, dogging the heels. It would not have a negative connotation, not until Esau redefined it.
<sup>40</sup>sn This name was probably chosen because of the immediate association with the incident of grabbing the heel. After receiving such an oracle, the parents would have preserved in memory almost every detail of the unusual births.
<sup>41</sup>tn The idiom is “the son of sixty years.”
<sup>42</sup>tn The clause may be subordinated to the parallel clause that follows it, for it is the main point.
<sup>43</sup>tn The adjective here is actually the participle from yada` (udy), “to know”—a knowing hunter.
⁴⁴sn The vivid contrasts are striking. In contrast to Esau as the man of the field, Jacob is civilized, as “dwelling in tents” signified. And whereas Esau was a skillful hunter, Jacob was calm, even-tempered (tam [<T], which normally has the idea of “blameless”).
⁴⁵tn While this verb is a preterite with a waw consecutive, it is still part of the circumstantial descriptions—the clause does not advance the narrative.
⁴⁶sn The expression is literally, “the taste of game [hunt] was in his mouth.” The word for “game, venison” is here the same Hebrew word as “hunter” in the last verse. Here it is figurative—what is intended was what was hunted.
⁴⁷sn The verb here is a participle, as opposed to the preterite in the previous clause. Isaac’s love was conditioned on the hunt, but Rebekah’s was continuous and enduring.
⁴⁸sn There are some significant words and word plays in this story that help clarify the points of the story. The verb “cook” is zid (dyz!), which sounds like the word for “hunter,” sayid (dy!X^). This is deliberate, for the hunter becomes the hunted. The word does not mean “hunt”; it means “cook, boil.” But by the sound play comes to mean “set a trap by cooking.” The usage of the word shows that it can also have the connotation of acting presumptuously (as in boiling over). This too may be a comment on the scene. For good discussions on the rhetorical devices in the Jacob narratives, see J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis).
⁴⁹sn The word is a very rare word; it is usually used for feeding animals, and this is part of the picture the narrative is drawing of Esau. He comes in from the hunt, only to enter the trap. He is famished, and can only point at the red stew, and ask Jacob to feed him.
⁵⁰tn The verb has no expressed subject and so is given a passive translation.
⁵¹sn Here is the inclusion of the name that Esau’s family would have, Edom. Edom was the place where they lived, so-named probably because of the reddish nature of the hills. The writer can use the word “red” to describe the stew that Esau gasped for to convey the nature of Esau and his descendants, a lusty, passionate, but profane people who lived for the moment. Again, the word play is meant to capture the omen in the nomen.
⁵²tn Heb “today.”
⁵³tn Heb “and what is this to me a birthright?” He means, Of what value is the birthright to me?
⁵⁴tn Heb “today.”
⁵⁵sn The commentaries will discuss the customs that lie behind this. There is evidence from Hurrian culture that rights of inheritance were occasionally sold or transferred. Here Esau is portrayed as a profane person who would at the moment rather have a meal than the right to inherit. He will forget this trade shortly, and seek the father’s blessing.
⁵⁶sn Typical of Hebrew narrative, after the tension is resolved with the dialogue, the working out of it is recorded in a rapid sequence of verbs (see Gen. 3:1-7).
⁵⁷sn The clause begins “and Esau despised.” The verb is not another in the sequence of actions after selling the birthright. It is a summary statement explaining how he could have done this. “To despise” means to treat something as worthless, with contempt. He would not have sold it if he had not despised it.
¹tn Heb “And there was.”
²tn Heb “was.”
³sn This chapter is designed in great detail to parallel the stories of Abraham. This is not a parallel tradition or source that was confused with the Abraham material and entered as a doublet; rather, it is part of the Hebrew style. The selection of identical or similar events being told in similar wording is meant to underscore the fact that the blessing has now passed to Isaac—even if he fails as his father did.
⁴sn The words recall 12:10 very specifically, which report that “Abram went down to Egypt”; here we read “do not go down to Egypt.”
⁵tn Heb “say to you.”
⁶tn The word means “live temporarily without ownership of land”; the family will not actually possess the land until the conquest.
⁷sn The promise of divine presence is a promise to intervene to protect and to bless.
⁸sn The Abrahamic blessing will pass to Isaac. Everything that that blessing included will now belong to the son, and in turn will be passed on to his sons. But there is a contingency involved: if they are to enjoy the full blessings, they will have to obey the word of the LORD. And so obedience is enjoined here, with the example of how well Abraham obeyed.
⁹tn Or “seed.”
¹⁰tn The verb is qum (<Wq); in the description of a covenant in process it would mean “confirm, make sure, ratify.”
¹¹sn This oath is recorded in Gen 15.
¹²tn The verb is the Hiphil perfect with the waw consecutive from rabah (hbr), “multiply.”
¹³tn Or “seed.”
¹⁴tn Again the form is the perfect tense in sequence with the preceding verb.
¹⁵tn Or “seed.”
¹⁶tn The form used here is again the Hithpael perfect with the waw consecutive, with the nuance of the passive, to harmonize with the verb in 12:3.
¹⁷sn The ambiguity of this word in a line like this is intentional. It means “seed, descendant, offspring.” And while it is true that people everywhere will be enriched by the existence of Israel as the kingdom of priests, the fullest blessing comes through the Seed par excellence, Jesus Christ. In him eternal blessings will extend to every nation.
¹⁸sn The language of this verse is clearly interpretive, for Abraham did not have all these laws. The terms are legal designations for sections of the Law and presuppose the existence of the Law. Some Rabbinic views actually conclude that Abraham had fulfilled the whole law before it was given (see Mishnah Kiddushim 4:14); some argue that this story could only have been written after the Law was given (Westermann, Genesis, vol. 2, pp. 424-5). But the simplest explanation is that the writer—Moses the Lawgiver himself—elaborated on the simple report of Abraham’s obedience by using terms he was used to using, raising Abraham as the model of obedience. In essence he would be saying, if Abraham had had all these laws that you (i.e., Israel, to whom Genesis is addressed) have, he would have complied.
¹⁹tn The clause is subordinated to the following clause, both beginning with preterites.
²⁰sn Many critical treatments of the narratives do not believe there were three incidents of this lie, only one that got borrowed and duplicated. To them, this is probably the original, which then was attached to the more important person and supernatural elements added. Of course, that is based on a totally different view of Scripture that leaves little room for revelation and inspiration. It makes far more sense to see the son doing what his father did (which is very true to life)—lying to avoid problems. But Rebekah, unlike Sarah, is not actually a sister.
²¹tn The word “thinking” is supplied because the next clause is written with a first person suffix, clearly showing that Isaac was saying of thinking this.
²²tn Heb “the days were long to him there.”
²³tn What he saw is introduced here with w^ehinneh (hN@h!w=) to stress the immediate impact.: “there was Isaac.”
²⁴sn The word used here is m^esaheq (q?@X^m=) which forms a strong paronomasia with the name “Isaac” right before it. The word is the Piel of sahaq (q?X), “laugh.” It was used in the Ishmael story for Ishmael’s playing with Isaac, a play that had more meaning than what was on the surface, but in a negative sense. Here the word depicts a kind of playing, perhaps caressing or fondling, that indicated immediately that this was a wife and not a sister. The incident, and the choice of word, also reveals that his deception made a mockery of the great covenant. His playing revealed he had acted in bad faith to the men of Gerar, and in weak faith before God.
²⁵tn N. H. Snaith, “The meaning of Hebrew ‘ak,” VT 14 (1964):221-225.
²⁶tn Heb “said.”
²⁷tn The pronoun adds an emphasis to the question: “What in the world have you done?”
²⁸tn Heb “people.”
²⁹tn The verb means “lie down”; here the idea of “lie with” or “sleep with” is euphemistic for “have sex with.”
³⁰sn The word ‘asam (<vo) is a critical word in the Law; it is the word for the “reparation offering” in Leviticus 5. The term describes a crime or sin that would involve retribution. It can be translated, “trespass, guilt, reparation offering.” So Abimelech’s point is that Abraham’s deception has put him and his people in a very dangerous place.
³¹tn The word literally means “touch, strike”; here it has the idea of “harm” in any way. It would include molesting the woman or killing the man.
³²tn The construction is emphatic: it has the Hophal imperfect with the infinitive absolute from mut (tWm).
³³tn The preterite with waw consecutive is here again subordinated to the next clause as a temporal clause.
³⁴tn Or “hundredfold.”
³⁵tn This final clause is intended to explain why he had such a harvest.
³⁶tn The verb is wayyigdal (lD^g=Y!w^), from gadal (ldG), “and he became great.” The greatness would include possessions and influence; so I would not limit it to wealth.
³⁷tn Heb “and he went, going and becoming great.” The construction is emphatic in stressing that his growth in possessions and power continued steadily.
³⁸tn Heb “and there was to him.”
³⁹tn Heb “possessions of sheep.”
⁴⁰tn Heb “possessions of cattle.”
⁴¹sn The verb “envy” (qana’ [onq]) is a very strong word, describing intense jealousy or impassioned zeal that leads to some activity. “Envy/jealousy” is selfish; “zeal” is unselfish. The first nuance is in this context.
⁴²sn These words that provide the reason for the expulsion of Isaac from their land are similar to those that the Egyptians used of later Israel (Exod. 1:9).
⁴³sn The wadi is the dry river bed where the water will flow in the rainy season, which would be rare in the Negev. So it would be similar to a valley. But the water table under it would be higher than in the desert because of water soaking in during the torrents, making it easier to find water when digging wells. This does not minimize the blessing of the LORD, for the men of the region knew this too, but had not the same results.
⁴⁴tn The construction is a verbal hendiadys with sub (bWv), a verb often used in such a construction: “he returned and dug” = “he dug again, re-opened.”
⁴⁵tn The verb is made passive because no subject is expressed.
⁴⁶tn Heb “and the Philistines had stopped them up.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “and called names to them.”
⁴⁸tn Heb “according to the names that his father called them.”
⁴⁹sn The Hebrew has “living” water. This describes a spring of fresh spring water that flows or gushes out.
⁵⁰sn Here is the term rib (byr!) again (see chap. 13); it describes a strife, conflict, quarrel, that often has legal ramifications.
⁵¹tn A passive is used for the verb because there is no expressed subject.
⁵²sn The name means “Contention” or “Strife.” The causal clause explains why the name was given, and in so doing uses the Hithpael perfect from the same root to do so. Here, then, is a paronomasia made of two words from the same root.
⁵³tn The verb is again given a passive voice translation because there is no expressed subject.
⁵⁴sn The word satan (/FC) means “to oppose, be an adversary” (as in Satan); here there is no sound play with the name, but the obvious connection is in the meaning of the verb and the name.
⁵⁵sn The Hiphil verb from rahab (b?r) means “make room” and so forms a paronomasia with the name Rehoboth, explaining its significance. The story shows Isaac’s patience with the opposition; it also shows how God’s blessing outdistanced the men of Gerar—they could not stop it or seize it any longer.
⁵⁶tn Or “seed.”
⁵⁷tn Heb “And he built.”
⁵⁸tn See 4:26 and 12:8.
⁵⁹sn The past perfect is used because the narrative to follow records the treaty at Beersheba. Prior to this we are told that Isaac settled in Beersheba; presumably, this treaty would have allowed him to do that. However, it may be that he settled there and then made the treaty by which he renamed the place Beersheba.
⁶⁰tn Heb “and.”
⁶¹tn The disjunctive waw here begins a circumstantial clause expressing the reason.
⁶²tn The perfect tense is joined here with the infinitive absolute to underscore the idea of seeing; the potential perfect works well here—they were able to discern what was happening.
⁶³tn The form is a jussive, “Let there be”; but so far they are only expressing their wish for a pact.
⁶⁴tn The form is a cohortative expressing request.
⁶⁵tn The oath formula is used: “if you do us harm” meaning “that you will not do.”
⁶⁶tn Heb “only done good with you.”
⁶⁷tn Since they are making an observation and not declaring a blessing, the regular indicative should be supplied.
⁶⁸tn The verbal hendiadys is “and they got up early / and they swore”; the first becomes adverbial.
⁶⁹tn Heb “a man to his brother.”
⁷⁰sn The name is sib`ah (hub=v!), which means “oath” or “seven”; it is a component in the name Beersheba, and so forms a paronomasia in the sentiment for the name. Critical scholars see chaps. 21 and 26 as doublets of one original tale; but that creates more problems textually and theologically than simply seeing Isaac making another covenant agreement with the people of the land that was similar to his father’s. The place had been named Beersheba earlier by Abraham. And now, with the next generation the treaty has to be made again, and with it the commemorative naming. In this case, the oath and the naming confirm what Abraham had done.
<sup>71</sup>tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator, making this clause subordinate to the next.
<sup>72</sup>tn Heb “the son of forty years.”
<sup>73</sup>tn Heb “bitterness in spirit.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The clause begins with the temporal indicator.
<sup>2</sup>tn Heb “from seeing.”
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “greater.”
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “he;” the referent (Esau) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “and he said.”
<sup>6</sup>tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) introduces a foundational clause, upon which the coming instruction will be based.
<sup>7</sup>tn Heb “hunt,” but he means successfully.
<sup>8</sup>sn The word is (Q) sayid (dy!X^) or (K) sedah (hdyX@), related to the imperative sudah (hdWX), and alluding to chap. 25 which stated he was a hunter. So the imperative is, “Hunt” (meaning catch), and the object is also “the hunt” or “game”—what hunters hunt.
<sup>9</sup>tn The form is the cohortative following the imperative, showing purpose or result.
<sup>10</sup>tn The use of napsi (yv!p=n^) as the subject emphasizes the subject of the verb—the blessing will be with all Isaac’s resources, all his desire and vitality.
<sup>11</sup>tn The clause is a parenthetical clause introduced with the waw disjunctive. This clause prepares for the second scene.
<sup>12</sup>tn The preterite with the waw consecutive introduces a subordinate clause. The next clause is the main idea.
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “and/then Rebekah said.”
<sup>14</sup>tn Heb “saying.”
<sup>15</sup>tn The cohortative expresses the purpose or result of the preceding imperative.
<sup>16</sup>tn The Piel cohortative also expresses logical sequence.
<sup>17</sup>sn In telling the words to Jacob, Rebekah plays down the strong desire of Isaac to bless Esau by leaving out napsi (yv!p=n^); but by adding “in the presence of the LORD” she stresses how serious this is.
<sup>18</sup>tn The idiom of “listen to my voice” means “to hearken, comply, obey.”
<sup>19</sup>tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it carries forward the instruction nuance.
<sup>20</sup>tn The form is the perfect with the waw consecutive; it carries the future nuance after the instructions.
<sup>21</sup>sn The verb is the perfect tense of hayah (hyh) with the waw consecutive: “I will be in his sight” means “I would appear to him as,” i.e., he would think of me as. The irony here is that the old man is almost blind, yet he would be able to perceive a deception.
<sup>22</sup>tn The verb is the Hiphil perfect with the waw consecutive, carrying the sequence to the next clause. This verb and the preceding occur in sentences expressing hypothetical ideas.
<sup>23</sup>tn Heb “upon me your curse.”
<sup>24</sup>tn Or she clothed him.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Here too the verb is labas (vbl), “clothed,” the Hiphil of the root; she put them on as one would clothe someone.
<sup>26</sup>tn The word “hands” (from yad [dy]) includes the forearms.
<sup>27</sup>sn Isaaic’s first questioning shows that the deception is going to require more than what Rebekah had anticipated. Jacob will have to pull off the deceit.
<sup>28</sup>tn The two imperatives, “get up” and “sit,” may form a hendiadys here as well: “sit up.” But they might also simply indicate that he was to get up from his couch and sit at a table.
<sup>29</sup>sn Here, now, we find the words closer to what Isaac had said, “so that your soul may bless me.” That precise wording would have been a nice, convincing touch.
<sup>30</sup>sn Literally, “what is this”; the enclitic pronoun adds a unique force to the question: “how in the world?”
<sup>31</sup>tn The construction uses the verbal hendiadys: “you hastened to find”; the infinitive becomes the main verb and the first verb becomes adverbial.
<sup>32</sup>tn Or “made me meet it.”
<sup>33</sup>tn “to see” has been added.
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “and he did not.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The cohortative with the waw is subordinated to the preceding verb.
<sup>36</sup>tn The presence of napsi (yv!p=n^) again underscores his heartfelt desire to do this.
<sup>37</sup>tn The preterite with the waw consecutive forms a temporal clause to the main verb, “he blessed.” The verb wayyarah (?r^Yw^) has a cognate accusative here to stress that he got a good smell of the aroma.
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “see.”
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “fatness.”
<sup>40</sup>sn The verb is an imperative. But in the oracle of blessing it is not merely a command. The construction parallels the blessing of Adam and Eve which used imperatives. As an oracle, the blessing will enable Jacob to do this.
<sup>41</sup>tn The word is g<sup>e</sup>bir (ryb!g=), “lord, mighty one”—he will be stronger and therefore more powerful than his brother. See 25:23. The feminine of this rare noun means “mistress” or “queen-mother.”
<sup>42</sup>sn It is hard to know when and how this was intended to work out, whether in some immediate arena, or in a war with the Edomites, or at the conquest or in the monarchy. It is a general prediction that Jacob, or properly, Israel, will have victory.
<sup>43</sup>tn The verb is supplied.
<sup>44</sup>tn The verb is supplied.
<sup>45</sup>sn The two lines include talionic justice: curse for curse, blessing for blessing. But the statement is less personal than that of 12:3, using passives instead of the first person verbs. Wenham says that the changes suggest that the recipient is in a less intimate relationship with God than Abraham was (Genesis 16-50, p. 210).
<sup>46</sup>tn The clause begins with the temporal indicator way<sup>e</sup>hi (yh!y=w^).
<sup>47</sup>tn The infinitive construct serves as the direct object of the main verb.
<sup>48</sup>tn The construction uses ‘ak yaso’ yasa’ (oXy oX)y Eo^). The main verb with the particle says “he had just gone out,” and the infinitive makes that idea emphatic.
<sup>49</sup>tn Or “arise.”
<sup>50</sup>tn Heb “so that your soul may bless me.”
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>52</sup>tn The verb “trembled” is joined with a cognate accusative, an adjective “great,” and the adverb m<sup>e</sup>’od (do)m=). But “trembled a very great tremble” is too wooden—”he trembled greatly” begins to catch it.
<sup>53</sup>tn The temporal clause is introduced with the temporal indicator and has the infinitive as its verb.
<sup>54</sup>sn Here also we have the cognate accusative after the verb, followed by two adjectives and the adverb. There is also a possibly word play between the sound of the verb “he cried out” (yis`aq [qu^X=Y!w^]) and the name “Isaac” (yishaq [q?X=y!]).
⁵⁵sn The word mirmah (hmr=m!) is an important word in Scripture, especially Proverbs. It has the idea of purposeful deception.
⁵⁶tn Or “took, received.”
⁵⁷sn It is here that the name “Jacob” receives a negative connotation. The sentiment expressed by Esau forms the explanatory paronomasia: “He has tripped me up/deceived/supplanted” (wayya`q<sup>e</sup>beni [yn!b@q=u=Y^w^] from `aqab [bqu]). The name Jacob means “may he protect” (as a rear guard); but now it comes to mean “may he grab the heel” or deceive.
⁵⁸tn The particle hen (/h@) introduces the foundational clause.
⁵⁹tn The deliberate expression focuses on Esau’s weeping, that it was very loud.
⁶⁰tn Heb “fatness.”
⁶¹sn It may be that this prophecy would find its fulfillment when Jerusalem fell and Edom got its revenge. The oracle makes Edom subservient to Israel, living away from the best land, and so living by the sword. But it ends with a glimmer of hope. The oracle reminds the reader of some of the oracles on the death bed of Jacob.
⁶²tn The verb means “to bear a grudge”; it describes a long term persistent hatred.
⁶³tn Or “to himself.”
⁶⁴tn This would be a cohortative of resolve—he is determined at this point to kill him.
⁶⁵tn The preterite with the waw consecutive is subordinated as a temporal clause.
⁶⁶tn Heb “she sent and called for”; this probably forms a verbal hendiadys to stress the call as urgent.
⁶⁷sn The verb naham (<?n) in the Piel means “comfort, console”; here in the Hithpael it is reflexive. The only way Esau had of dealing with his anger at the moment was to plan to kill his brother after the death of Isaac. See on this verb, D. Winton Thomas, “A Note on the meaning of mitnahem [<?@n^t=m!] in Gen 27,42,” ExT 51 (1939-40):252.
⁶⁸tn The construction is “arise, flee”; the first becomes adverbial in this sentence—get up, go.
⁶⁹tn The form is a perfect tense with a waw consecutive, and so it carries the same force as the imperatives before it.
⁷⁰sn The expression is “a few days”; but in view of the length of the trip over and back it would mean more than that. It is an understatement, meaning a while. But, of course, as the reader knows, it will be twenty years—and he would never see Rebekah again.
⁷¹tn The verb is the perfect tense in sequence.
⁷²tn Heb “to take you.”
⁷³sn The verb is a metonymy of effect; she means that she would lose both of them if Jacob stayed—he would be killed and Esau would flee.
⁷⁴sn The verb qus (JWq) is a very strong term for disgust (Lev. 20:23).
⁷⁵tn Heb “what to me life?”
¹sn The daughters of Canaan simply means Canaanite women. Here Isaac is being very direct; he is doing what Rebekah wanted him to do, without having to tell him exactly what to do.
²tn Here again we have two imperatives, “arise, depart”; the first becomes adverbial and stresses the immediacy of the departure.
³sn The instructions in this section recall Abraham’s instruction to the servant in Gen 24. But this is far more direct in that it tells him precisely who to marry. This was in part due to the fact that they had now the closer ties.
⁴sn The Hebrew is ‘el shadday (yD^v^ lo@) for the discussion see Gen 17:1.
⁵sn These jussives pick up the main elements of the LORD’s blessing first given to Adam and Eve and then continued through the Abrahamic covenant. The blessing now is not through deception: Isaac knows who he is blessing with the covenantal blessings.
⁶tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive brings the final clause to the jussives before—may God do these things, and then you will/so that you will become this. The verb hayah followed by the lamed preposition means “become” (l= + hyh).
⁷tn Or “nations.”
⁸tn The “blessing of Abraham” is the blessing that God gave to Abraham. It will now fall upon Jacob.
⁹tn Or “seed.”
¹⁰tn “the land” has been supplied.
¹¹tn The word is the noun from gur (rWG); “the land of your sojournings,” the land where you have been living as an alien.
¹²tn The preterite with the waw consecutive introduces the subordinate temporal clause: “When Esau saw (i.e., discovered).”
¹³tn “that” has been added.
¹⁴tn The infinitive construct with the preposition and the suffix form the temporal clause now.
¹⁵tn Heb “saw.”
¹⁶tn Heb “evil, bad.”
¹⁷tn Heb “and Jacob left.”
¹⁸tn The verb is “he went”; but since this focuses only on the beginning of the trip, that has to be reflected somehow in the translation.
¹⁹tn The preterite with the waw consecutive introduces a temporal circumstantial clause.
²⁰sn The story will emphasize at first that this was just a place, and that he just happened to come upon it. The insignificant nature of the place is transformed with the vision into Bethel, a famous holy place for Israel. It is the narrative’s way of leading up to the dramatic revelation. See J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1975); and Allen P. Ross, “Jacob’s Vision: The Founding of Bethel,” BSac 142 (1985):224-237.
²¹sn If the verb form ba’ (oB) is the perfect tense, and it is likely that it is because of the word order and agreement, then the sun had gone down. A participle might means it was going down.
²²tn Heb “and he took.”
²³sn The Hebrew has “from the stones of the place,” which could mean one of the stones, or some of the stones.
²⁴sn The noun means “the place of his head.” It serves as an adverbial accusative in the sentence, probably with the sense of “at his head” or “around his head” (if he took “some of” the stones rather than one stone). The text does not actually say it was placed under his head, or served as a pillow—that is assumed by interpreters. It could have been so used, but passages like 1 Sam. 26:11-12 and 1 Kings 19:6 suggest the stones were placed around where his head would be to protect him. This makes more sense.
²⁵sn The contents of the dream are recorded in three clauses introduced with hinneh (hN@h!). Fokkelman points out that the particle functions deictically here—it goes with a lifted arm and an open mouth: “There, a ladder! Oh, angels! and look, the LORD himself” (Narrative Art in Genesis, pp. 51-52).
²⁶sn The word sullam (<Ls%) occurs only here in the OT. But there appears to be an Akkadian cognate simmiltu (with metathesis, and the gender ending) which has a specialized meaning of a stairway or ramp that extended between heaven and earth, i.e., to the top of the ziggurat. The vision at Bethel is exactly of that kind of connection (C. Houtman, “What Did Jacob See in His Dream at Bethel? Some Remarks on Genesis 28:10-22,” VT 27 [1977]:337-352; J. G. Griffiths, “The Celestial Ladder and the Gate of Heaven,” ExT 76 [1964,64]:229-230; and A. R. Millard, “The Celestial Ladder and the Gate of Heaven,” ExT 78 [1966,7]:86-87).
²⁷sn The “angels of God” occur in Genesis only here and in chap. 32 before Jacob fights at the Jabbok. In other words, they appear in the two border theophanies as Jacob is leaving and then re-entering the land.
²⁸tn Or “seed.”
²⁹tn Or “seed.”
³⁰tn The verb is the Qal perfect with the waw consecutive to carry the sequence forward.
³¹tn Or “seed.”
³²tn The clause is a nominal clause; the verb to be supplied could be any tense. But in view of the vision of the presence of God and the angels here with him, the English present seems to fit the context the best.
³³tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, giving it the nuance of a promise. The verb means “watch, guard, keep, protect.”
³⁴tn Heb “said.”
³⁵tn Heb “and he was afraid.”
³⁶tn Heb “this is not except/but.”
³⁷sn This expression provides the first motivation for the naming to come—bet ‘elohim (<yh!l)o$ tyB@), “the house of God.” See W. J. Dumbrell, “The Role of Bethel in the Biblical Narratives from Jacob to Jereboam I,” AJBA 2, no. 3 (1974):65-75.
³⁸tn The two verbs form a hendiadys: “and he got up early…and he took.”
³⁹sn The word could be translated as “a stone.” But it can also be read as “the stone” which he placed at his head, which may mean there was only one, or that this was the main one.
⁴⁰sn The “standing stone” (massebah [hbX@m^]) in the OT is a significant phenomenon. A stone that is standing up had to have been put that way, either for a boundary marker, or a burial, or a shrine. It is clear that it is to reflect the vision in this passage, for the ladder “stood up” (mussab [bXm%]) on the earth, and the LORD “stood” (nissab [bXn!]) over it. The top (ro’s [vor)]) of it was in the heavens where the LORD stood; and so he poured oil on top (ro’s [vor)]) of the stone. See C. F. Graesser, “Standing Stones in Ancient Palestine,” BA 35 (1972):34-63; and E. Stockton, “Sacred Pillars in the Bible,” ABR 20 (1972):16-32.
⁴¹tn “House of God.”
⁴²sn M. G. Glenn, “The Word Luz in Gen. 28:19 in the LXX and in the Midrash,” JQR 59 (1968-69):73-36.
⁴³tn The construction uses a cognate accusative to indicate a specific vow.
⁴⁴sn It is not easy to determine where the protasis/apodosis change comes in this lengthy vow, for all the clauses begin with the conjunction. The protasis forms the foundation on which the apodosis is vowed. Most translations make the change one clause earlier, “then the LORD will be my God.” But it seems that in the context God has already promised that, and when God protects and provides for him he will be showing himself to be his God. So the actual vow comes later, a vow for something that Jacob can actually do. (For more details, see the discussion in Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis).
¹sn The expression is so unusual that it must not be overlooked. It is now that Jacob has a new lease on life, that God has promised him the blessing that he had so desperately tried to gain. And so rather than say “he continued on his way,” the text portrays there is a new step in his walk, an eagerness and swiftness.
²sn The passage is written to reflect the preceding vision. Just as the central picture there was introduced with hinneh (hN@h!) clauses, so is it here. Hinneh (hN@h!) introduces first the well (in 28 the ladder), then the sheep around it (in 28 the angels) and then Rachel (in 28 the LORD) who will be the central focus.
³tn The disjunctive clause, introduced with the waw disjunctive on the noun, gives parenthetical information that the story will use.
⁴tn I.e., the shepherds.
⁵tn Or “grandson.”
⁶tn “him” has been added.
⁷tn Or “is it well with him?”
⁸tn Heb “well.”
⁹tn The text now uses the word w^ehinneh (hN@h!w=) for the third time, introducing Rachel: “and look.”
¹⁰tn Heb “the day is great.”
¹¹tn The forms used are imperatives. But Jacob would hardly be giving direct orders or commands to someone’s shepherds. The nuance here is probably one of advice.
¹²tn Heb “go and shepherd.”
¹³tn Heb “they said.”
¹⁴tn This perfect tense with the waw consecutive is in the subordinate clause and derives its nuance from the imperfect tense “gathered.”
¹⁵tn This perfect tense with the waw consecutive continues the sequence after the temporal clause.
¹⁶tn Or “shepherding [them]” or “a shepherdess.”
¹⁷tn The temporal clause is introduced with way^ehi ka’asher (rv#o&K^ yh!y=w^) + the perfect.
¹⁸tn Heb “Jacob.”
¹⁹tn Heb “drew near, approached.”
²⁰sn The text says nothing initially of the beauty of Rachel. But the reader is struck by the repetition of “Laban the brother of his mother.” Wenham is no doubt correct when he observes that Jacob’s primary motive at this stage is to ingratiate himself with Laban (Genesis 16-50, p. 231).
²¹tn The idiom calls deliberate attention to the fact that he wept out loud.
²²tn The clause begins with the preterite and so may be subordinated to the next parallel clause as a temporal clause.
²³tn This temporal clause is formed with the temporal indicator and the infinitive construct.
²⁴tn Heb “he related.”
²⁵sn The expression sounds warm enough. However, the presence of ‘ak (Eo^) suggests that Laban had to be convinced, that he was grudgingly recognizing that Jacob was a relative and so permitted him to stay (see Jacob, Fokkelman, Wenham).
²⁶tn Heb “a month of days.”
²⁷tn The verb is the perfect with the waw consecutive; the nuance in the question is deliberative.
²⁸tn The disjunctive waw introduces parenthetical material in the next two verses.
²⁹sn It is not clear what is meant by “tender eyes” or “delicate eyes.” The commentaries suggest that they were plain, not having the brightness expected. Whatever is meant seems to be the opposite of her striking sister.
³⁰tn Heb “my giving.”
³¹tn Heb “than my giving.”
³²tn Heb “and Jacob said.”
³³tn Heb “days.”
³⁴tn The verb is the cohortative. It could be subordinated to the preceding request, “that I may go in,” or it may be a separate word expressing his desire. The verb “go in” in the context means intercourse.
³⁵tn Heb “men.”
³⁶tn The line begins with way^ehi (yh!y=w^).
³⁷sn The deception of Jacob by giving him the older before the younger is God’s way of disciplining the deceiver who passed by his older brother. Kidner says this account is “the very embodiment of anti-climax, and this moment a miniature of man’s disillusion, experienced from Eden onwards” (Genesis, p. 160). And von Rad says, “That Laban secretly gave the unloved Leah to the man in love was, to be sure, a monstrous blow, a masterpiece of shameless treachery…. It was certainly a move by which he won for himself far and wide the coarsest laughter” (Genesis, p. 291).
³⁸tn Or “he had sex with her.”
³⁹tn The construction is jolting: “and in the morning, and look (hinneh [hN@h!]), it was Leah.”
⁴⁰/ tn The use of the pronoun is enclitic, adding emphasis to the question—”What in the world have you done to me?”
⁴¹sn The verb rimmah (hMr!) is cognate to the noun used in 27:35 that described Jacob’s deception. Some have suggested that there seems also to be a word play on Aram in this (and other): lammah rimmitani (yn!tyM!r! hMl) in includes the sounds ah-rim, focusing on deception as their trait. Be that as it may, see J. A. Diamond, “The Deception of Jacob: A New Perspective on an Ancient Solution to the Problem,” VT 34 (1984):211-213.
⁴²tn Heb “said.”
⁴³tn Heb “so.”
⁴⁴tn Heb “fulfill the seven of this one.”
⁴⁵sn See Cyrus Gordon, “The Story pf Jacob and Laban in the Light of the Nuzi Tablets,” BASOR 66 (1937):25-27; and John Van Seters, “Jacob’s Marriages and Ancient Near Eastern Customs: A Reassessment,” HTR 62 (1969):377-395.
⁴⁶tn Heb “And he finished.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “the seven of this one.”
⁴⁸tn “Laban” has been added.
⁴⁹tn The preterite with the waw consecutive introduces the temporal clause.
⁵⁰sn The verb “hate” (sane’ [on@C) in Hebrew has the main idea of rejecting spontaneously; whereas “love” (‘ahab (bho) means “choose spontaneously.” There are many other connotations to the word, but this idea is present. Malachi will record the word of the LORD: “Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” One line was chosen and the other rejected. Leah certainly feels unloved, and no doubt at times hated for her part in the deception. On the surface it probably was civil and pleasant, but the bitterness and rejection was always present, as the competition to follow indicates.
⁵¹tn Or “became pregnant.”
⁵²sn The name is r^e’uben (/b@Wor=) literally, “look, a son.”
⁵³sn This sentiment explains the choice and understood meaning of the name (a popular etymology, not the exact one). The sentence has ra’ah b^e`onyi (yy!n=uB= hor), “has looked on my affliction”; the sounds of the name Reuben are dissolved into this sentence. A second word play occurs with the final verb which has the sound of “son,” ben (/B@), within it. These are paronomasias; they are satisfied with the connection of sounds to give an interpretation to the name (see further Driver, Book of Genesis, p. 273).
<sup>54</sup>tn Or “got pregnant.”
<sup>55</sup>sn The name Simeon (sim`on [/Oum=v!]) from the root sama` (umv) with the abstract nominal ending added, “hearing.” It is explained by the expression “the LORD heard” (sama` [umv]). Now both the sound and the sense are actually within this paronomasia.
⁵⁶tn Or “got pregnant.”
⁵⁷sn The Hebrew expression is the verb yillaweh (hw#Ly!), from the verb lawah (hwl). The explanation forms a word play on the name Levi. A similar play occurs in Numbers 18:2 and 4 where the tribe would be joined to the ark in spiritual service. That passage is drawing on this paronomasia but advancing it for tribal significance. But there is a good deal of discussion on the actual meaning of “Levi.” Similar sounding words (e.g., lavi’u) have appeared in other languages with the meaning of “priest.” Of course, Levi or Levite does not mean priest in the OT. Albright wanted to make it “client of God” (lawi’el); Noldeke took it to be a gentilic on the mother’s name (lewi [yw!l@] from le’ah [hol@]). It may be that the word was a common name or title in the ancient world, or a gentilic of Leah; but that is not the sentiment given for the naming. But it would make the additional use of the play easier when the tribe became priestly.
⁵⁸tn Or “got pregnant.”
⁵⁹sn The name Judah (Y^ehudah [hdWhy=]) would translate, “he will be praised.” It is a Hophal imperfect; y^ehud (dWhy=) would be the jussive. In her sentiment she draws on this verb, but in a different form, to focus her attention on the LORD and not Jacob: “I will praise” is ‘odeh (hd#Oo). This name also is given another significance by Jacob in Gen 49:8: “your brothers will praise you (yoduka [;WdOy]).” Neither wordplay provides the exact etymology, although they are related to the verb; they are paronomasias. See W. F. Albright, “The Names `Israel’ and `Judah’ with an Excursis on the Etymology of Todah and Torah,” JBL 46 (1927):151-185; and A. R. Millard, “The Meaning of the Name Judah,” ZAW 86 (1974):216-218.
¹tn The clause begins with waw consecutive and a preterite, so it may be subordinated.
²tn The nuance of potential fits this perfect tense.
³tn Heb “Rachel.”
⁴tn Heb “the anger was hot.”
⁵tn Or “children.”
⁶tn The imperfect (or jussive) with the waw serves to indicate purpose or result after the imperative.
⁷tn “children” has been supplied.
⁸sn This is an idiomatic way of saying the child will be adopted by Rachel as her own. She will bear on behalf of Rachel.
⁹tn The Niphal imperfect with the waw also is subordinated to the imperative, providing another purpose clause.
sn The idea of “being built up” means by having a family.
¹⁰tn Or “became pregnant.”
¹¹sn The expression is dananni (yN!n^D), from the verb din (/yD!), “to judge, vindicate.” The name dan would be either a perfect tense (“he vindicated”) or a participle (“judge”). The explanation is therefore very close to the actual etymology of the name. Rachel sense God was righting the wrong.
¹²tn The expression means that God had responded to her cry, did what she asked.
¹³tn Or “that is why.”
¹⁴tn Or “became pregnant.”
¹⁵sn The name Naphtali must mean something like “my wrestling” in view of the statement Rachel made. She said, “A mighty struggle (naptule ‘elohim [<yh!l)o$ yl@WTp=n^]) have I waged (niptalti [yT!l=T^p=n!]).” The use of “God” in the first expression probably indicates the superlative. Skinner has it, “a veritable God’s bout” (Genesis, p. 387). Some have suggested that the justice of God was to be gained through ordeal (see Anne E. Draffkorn, “Illani/Elohim,” JBL 76 [1957]:216-224).
¹⁶tn The clause begins with the preterite with a waw consecutive; it becomes a temporal clause.
¹⁷sn The name Gad means “fortune.” Her explanation at the birth was appropriate for the name: “What fortune” (bagad [dgB]). Some of the commentaries suggest the name is drawn from a deity Fortune, and her expression was “with Gad’s help” (Gunkel, Genesis, p. 334). The family was not free from such influences, as Rachel’s taking the household idols shows, but it would be hard to verify such a view from this passage. It has also been suggested that the word means “troop”; and that the verb ba’ (oB) was prefixed—”a troop comes.”
¹⁸tn Heb “daughters.”
¹⁹sn The name is similar to the first with the meaning of “happy one” as one who is fortunate or blessed. The verb in the Piel has the idea of “pronounce happy, blessed.” Her statement might say “I am in luck” or “I am blessed.” Her lot in life will be duly recognized by the other women.
²⁰tn Heb “during the days.”
²¹sn Mandrake plants were popularly believed to be an aphrodisiac.
²²tn The form is the infinitive construct with a suffix; it forms the subject of the sentence: “is your taking away…is a small matter.”
sn Her statement means that Jacob has not been sleeping with her. So for the mandrakes she will get one night with Jacob.
²³tn The text simply has the infinitive construct with the preposition and the conjunction: “and to take.” It expresses the result of the first clause: was it a little thing…so that you now take.”
²⁴tn Heb “therefore”
²⁵tn The nuance of the imperfect is permission.
²⁶tn The preterite with the waw consecutive introduces a subordinate temporal clause; the next preterite begins the independent clause.
²⁷tn The nuance of the verb expresses the fact that she has acquired him for the night: “you must.”
²⁸sn The expression in Hebrew sakor s^ekartika (;yT!r=k^C= rk)C), “I have surely hired.” The name Issachar, then, seems to be related to this expression. It could be explained etymologically as “man of recompense” (‘is sakar [rkC-vyo!) or possibly “there is recompense” (yes sakar [rkC-vy@]). Albright suggested that the name originally was “may he find favor” (yashashkir; Northwest Semitic Names, p. 222), based on the existence of a very similar name in Amorite. So there is no easy definition for the name; but it is explained here with the incident and the word for “hire.” The irony is that Rachel thought the mandrakes would work for her, and she was willing to trade one night for them. But in that one night Leah got pregnant.
²⁹tn Heb “listened to.”
³⁰tn Or “became pregnant.”
³¹tn Or “hire.”
³²sn By her words she seems to have regard the act as a sacrifice. God is now rewarding her for that.
³³tn Or “became pregnant.”
³⁴sn There are two motivations, two word plays on the name. The first is the verb zabad (dbz) which means “to endow with” (a dowry). The verb is strengthened in the line with a cognate accusative. The sounds prepare the listener for the closer explanation. This is the verb yizb^eleni (yn!l@B=z=y!) from zabal (lbz), “to honor. Speiser suggests that the link between the two motivations is clarified by seeing the Akkadian word zubulla, “bridegroom’s gift,” behind the name (Genesis, p. 231). But the idea of “honor” is better; it does not require bringing in an unexpected thought (would he be giving a bridegroom’s gift now) from Akkadian. So the name Zebulun would remind Leah of divine justice in the face of injustice, that God had exalted and honored her this way.
³⁵sn The verb zakar (rkz), as seen previously, means more than “remember”; it signifies that God would now act upon what he had promised or what he remembered. She would now be fulfilled.
³⁶tn Or “became pregnant.”
³⁷sn The name Joseph will also have two motivations, two word plays on the name. The first is this verb ‘asap ([so), which has the sound of Yoseph. The name would remind her that God had removed the reproach.
³⁸sn A reproach is a cutting taunt, painful ridicule, open or subtle; it also can mean the occasion for the ridicule, as it probably means here.
³⁹sn The name Joseph means “may he add”; it is a Hiphil jussive form from the verb yasap ([sy). So in this case the name and the explanation are identical—it is not only a paronomasia, a word play, but it is also an exact etymology. The birth of the son has opened her womb; her prayer then is that if that has happened she might have another son.
⁴⁰tn The temporal clause begins with the construction way^ehi ka’aser (rv#o&K^ yh!y=w^). The perfect tense should be past perfect because her giving birth to Joseph preceded his speaking to Laban.
sn For Jacob to ask to leave would mean that seven more years had passed. So all the children were within the range of seven years of each other, Joseph coming right at the end of the seven years.
⁴¹tn The form is an imperative; but it has here the strength of a request.
⁴²tn The cohortative with the waw shows purpose or result after the imperative.
⁴³tn Or “my land.”
⁴⁴tn The cohortative could also express a simple request, “and let me depart.”
⁴⁵tn Heb “my service.”
⁴⁶tn “stay” has been supplied.
⁴⁷sn An alternative suggestion is to read this verb as “I have grown rich” rather than “I divined” (Finkelstein, JAOS 88 [1968]:34, n. 19).
⁴⁸tn Heb “were.”
⁴⁹tn Heb “before me.”
⁵⁰tn Or “increased into abundance.”
⁵¹tn Heb “And the LORD.”
⁵²tn Heb “at my foot.”
⁵³tn Heb “you shall not give.”
⁵⁴tn The two verbs form a verbal hendiadys: “I will return I will tend,” meaning “I will continue tending.” The first verb is a cohortative, suggesting they both are expressing his resolution.
⁵⁵tn Heb “it will be my wage.”
⁵⁶tn Heb “righteousness.”
⁵⁷sn The verb `anah with the preposition b<sup>e</sup> (B= + hnu) means “to testify for, witness for.”
<sup>58</sup>tn Heb “on the following day,” or “tomorrow.”
<sup>59</sup>sn This means whenever Laban comes to check on how much he is actually paying Jacob from the flocks. Jacob would have to be considered completely honest here, for he would have no control over the kind of animals born; and there could be no disagreement over which animals were his wages.
<sup>60</sup>tn Heb “hand.”
<sup>61</sup>tn The disjunctive waw introduces a circumstantial clause of time; Laban removed the animals while Jacob was taking care of the rest.
<sup>62</sup>sn There are several word plays that add to the story, and may have some significance for what Jacob was doing. The main word play is that as he was exposing the wood when he stripped off the bark in strips, he was exposing “white” wood—”Laban” is “white.” Even though Laban had made it difficult for Jacob, Jacob would expose Laban. Also, the word for “poplar” sounds like the name Laban, and the word “striped” (vv. 35, 39) has some of the sounds of Jacob’s name.
<sup>63</sup>tn The verb yaham (<?y) means “to be in heat, to conceive. The preterite here must be subordinated as a temporal clause to say that Jacob put the sticks there when they were in heat, for that is what the next verse says.
<sup>64</sup>tn This temporal clause is formed with the infinitive construct and the preposition and the suffix.
<sup>65</sup>tn The clause beginning with the waw consecutive with the preterite is here subordinated to the next clause as a temporal clause.
<sup>66</sup>tn The same verb yaham (<?y) is used here. It means “be hot, conceive”; here since the result is that they bore young animals, it probably means “conceived” rather than “be in heat.”
<sup>67</sup>tn Heb “the flocks.”
<sup>68</sup>tn Heb “set the faces of.”
<sup>69</sup>tn The form is the infinitive of yaham (<?y) the construction literally reads “and at every breeding-heat of the flock.”
<sup>70</sup>tn The temporal clause is formed with the infinitive construct with a preposition.
<sup>71</sup>tn Heb “he did not put.”
<sup>72</sup>tn Heb “were for Laban”; the construction expresses possession—Laban had the weaker animals.
<sup>73</sup>tn The idiom “and there was to him” expresses possession.
<sup>1</sup>sn The word “wealth” is kabod (dObK). Normally translated as “glory,” this term has as its basic idea that of “weight.” If one is heavy with possessions, then that one is wealthy (13:2). It is of interest to note that Abraham, Jacob, and Joseph all become wealthy when they leave the land. The picture of Jacob’s wealth is significant for the argument of the book, for he is Israel, a type of the nation to come, that will become the twelve tribes with great wealth when they leave the land (for these motifs, see Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis, Cassuto, Genesis, and Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture).
<sup>2</sup>sn The idiom of the face not being with him indicates that from the expressions on Laban’s face Jacob knew that his attitude towards him had changed—he was persona non grata.
<sup>3</sup>sn Note that although Laban’s face was no longer with him, the LORD was going to be with Him. In fact, the former situation made the latter necessary.
<sup>4</sup>tn Two verbs are used here: “sent” and “called,” but “called” is followed by the preposition lamed (l=), so it has a sense of “summoned.” “Sent and called for” can be expressed simply by “sent for.”
<sup>5</sup>tn The word is an adverbial accusative; it means they were in the field.
<sup>6</sup>tn Heb “to his flocks.”
<sup>7</sup>tn Or “I am aware.”
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “And you know.”
<sup>9</sup>sn The verb is a rare one, meaning literally “make a fool of” someone. It involves deceiving someone so that their public reputation suffers (Exod. 8:25).
<sup>10</sup>tn Or “many times.”
<sup>11</sup>tn The infinitive is the Hiphil of ra`a` (uur), “to bring evil” upon someone, “to harm” them. The infinitive is the object of the verb natan (/tn). Once again Jacob pits Laban against God.
<sup>12</sup>tn The imperfect tense functions here in the conditional clause; it has a customary nuance—whatever he would say worked to Jacob’s benefit.
<sup>13</sup>sn The verb nasal (lXn) is a very strong word; in the Hiphil it has the sense of “rescue, deliver.” It is as if God has done the animals a favor by giving them to Jacob (Wenham, Genesis 16-50, p. 271).
<sup>14</sup>tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator way<sup>e</sup>hi (yh!y=w^) with the word for “time”: “and it was at the time of.”
<sup>15</sup>sn The idiom as before emphasizes the close attention in the seeing.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “leaped upon.”
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “leap upon.”
<sup>18</sup>sn In that passage the text simply reported that Jacob poured oil on top of the stone. Now that pouring is interpreted by the LORD as an anointing—masah (?vm). Jacob had consecrated the place.
<sup>19</sup>sn The second relative clause reminds Jacob of his vows when he anointed the stone. God is now going to take him back to the land, and so he will have to pay his vows.
<sup>20</sup>tn Two imperatives are used here again, “arise” and “leave.” The first becomes adverbial: “get up, go” means “go now.”
sn The decision to leave was a wise one in view of the changes in Laban and his sons. But more than that, it was the will of God. Jacob needed to respond to God’s call—the circumstances made it easier.
<sup>21</sup>tn Or “your native land.”
<sup>22</sup>tn The two nouns could form a nominal hendiadys, “a share in the inheritance” or “a portion to inherit.” The expression usually means a portion of the land (1 K. 12:16); but here it would mean anything that Laban might wish them to have. They expected nothing.
<sup>23</sup>tn The construction is the preterite with the infinitive absolute from ‘akal (lko), “to eat.” It means that Laban took to himself all the money and used it. It is not readily apparent what they mean. Since there was service paid for them, they probably mean that their father has cheated Jacob and therefore cheated them as well. See M. Burrows, “The Complaint of Laban’s Daughters,” JAOS 57 (1937):250-276.
<sup>24</sup>tn The word “money” is used figuratively here; it means the price paid for them.
<sup>25</sup>tn Or “rescued.”
<sup>26</sup>tn The construction uses two preterites, “he arose” and “he put”; the first is adverbial, emphasizing that Jacob got up and did this right away.
<sup>27</sup>tn This section of the verse is difficult; “the cattle of his acquiring that he obtained” seems redundant, and is omitted by some translations. But there is enough repetition in these verses to warrant that this too should be retained.
<sup>28</sup>tn The first clause begins with a waw disjunctive and is therefore circumstantial; the second clause is the main one, beginning with the preterite.
<sup>29</sup>sn The teraphim have been the focus of many studies. They seem to have been household idols that guaranteed protection or the right of inheritance. Laban was truly exercised to get them back, for without them he was truly vulnerable (H. A. Hoffner, “Hittite TARPISH and Hebrew TERAPHIM,” JNES 27 [1968]:61-68; M. Greenberg, “Another Look at Rachel’s Theft of the Teraphim,” JBL 81 [1962]:239-248).
<sup>30</sup>sn There is a word play here that is very impressive. Rachel stole (wattignob [bn)g=T!w^]) the teraphim, and then Jacob deceived (wayyignob [bn)g=Y!w^]) Laban. To “steal the heart” of someone means “to deceive.” The word play shows that Jacob and Rachel are of a kindred spirit. Any thought that Laban would have resigned himself to their departure was now out of the question.
<sup>31</sup>tn The hendiadys has “he arose and crossed” to emphasize that he wasted no time in getting across.
<sup>32</sup>sn The river here refers to the Euphrates.
<sup>33</sup>tn The idiom is “he set his face.”
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “his brothers.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The Hiphil of dabaq (qbD) means “draw close”; he caught up to him in Gilead.
<sup>36</sup>tn The verb is the Niphal imperative of samar (rmv), “watch yourself, guard yourself, take heed to yourself.” It is a warning to be on guard against doing something.
<sup>37</sup>sn The words “good and evil” continue a major theme in Genesis begun in the garden. Laban is here not permitted to say anything to Jacob that would be intended to hurt him or to enhance him. He was not to contradict Jacob’s words or ways in any way. Wenham notes that in spite of this warning, “the following diatribe is one of the fiercest and longest in Genesis” (p. 274).
<sup>38</sup>tn The disjunctive waw introduces a circumstantial clause.
<sup>39</sup>tn The verb “hide” and the infinitive “to flee” form a hendiadys, the infinitive becoming the main verb and the other the adverb: “flee secretly.”
<sup>40</sup>tn The preterite continues the sequence of the verbs in Laban’s speech; here the nuance of potential fits the sentiment.
<sup>41</sup>tn Or “grandchildren.”
<sup>42</sup>tn Here again is a verbal hendiadys, made up of the Hiphil verb “be foolish” and the infinitive construct (probably) “to do.” He says, “you have done foolishly.”
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “there is to my hand.”
<sup>44</sup>tn Heb “from speaking.”
<sup>45</sup>tn The construction uses the infinitive absolute and the perfect tense to emphasize the idea of Jacob’s departure.
<sup>46</sup>tn The construction uses the Niphal infinitive absolute with the Niphal perfect, “to long for”—”you longed greatly for.”
<sup>47</sup>sn This last sentence is dropped into the speech rather suddenly. The speech so far has been a mixture of anger and accusation and sweetness and hurt; he seemed to express an understanding for Jacob’s desire to leave. But why did he take the gods? See Charles Mabee, “Jacob and Laban: The Structure of Judicial Proceedings,” VT 30 (1980):192-207; and G. W. Coats, “Self-Abasement and Insult Formulas,” JBL 91 (1972):90-92.
<sup>48</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>49</sup>tn Heb “he;” the referent (that person) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>50</sup>tn Heb “brothers.”
<sup>51</sup>tn Or “recognize.”
<sup>52</sup>tn This disjunctive clause forms a parenthetical statement.
<sup>53</sup>tn “them” has been added.
<sup>54</sup>tn The disjunctive clause provides another parenthetical statement necessary to the storyline.
<sup>55</sup>tn “them” has been added.
<sup>56</sup>tn Heb “let it not be hot in the eyes of my lord.”
<sup>57</sup>tn Heb “I am unable to rise.”
<sup>58</sup>tn Heb “the way of women is upon me.”
sn The explanation would have forestalled Laban looking in the saddle. Presumably, gods and uncleanness resulting from menstruation were incompatible (as in Lev 15); it never entered his mind that they would be where she was sitting. But her sitting on them, even if the condition was feigned, expressed her opinion of his household gods. Her words that the “custom of women” was upon her was a retaliation for his appeal to custom in the marriage deception (29:26). So once again the deceiver is deceived.
<sup>59</sup>tn Heb “it was hot to Jacob.”
<sup>60</sup>tn The verb is rib (byr!), which can be translated “strive, quarrel.” It often serves in legal disputes. Here then is the countercharge: “and he contended with Laban.”
<sup>61</sup>tn The verb means “to burn” and in this passage “hotly pursue”—as soldiers chasing after defeated enemies (1 Sam. 17:53).
<sup>62</sup>tn The verb yakah (?ky) means “to quarrel, dispute”; it can mean start a dispute, dispute, or settle a dispute. The latter is clearly what is in mind here—they can judge between us—they can settle it.
<sup>63</sup>tn Heb “you exacted payment from me.”
<sup>64</sup>tn Heb “this to me.”
<sup>65</sup>sn There have been attempts to redefine this title for God; but “fear of God” is a fitting epithet for the LORD. It was this very experience of God—fear, dread—that kept him from harming Jacob. See M. Malul, “More on pahad yishaq (Gen. 31:42,53) and the Oath by the Thigh,” VT 35 (1985):192-200.
<sup>66</sup>tn The imperative “come” serves as an interjection.
<sup>67</sup>tn The verb hayah (hyh) followed by the lamed (l=) preposition means “become.”
<sup>68</sup>sn Here is the introduction of one of the main motifs in the commemorative naming to follow—`ed (du@), “witness.”
⁶⁹sn The Hebrew word for “pillar, standing stone” is massebah (hbX@m^). In this passage the word will be recalled in the name given, Mizpah (hPX=m!), which will differ by only one letter.
⁷⁰sn The Hebrew is gal (lG^), “heap,” which will be part of the naming below.
⁷¹tn Heb “And Laban called it.”
⁷²sn The name Y^egar Sahadutha’ (otWdh&C rg^y=) is Aramaic, Laban being an Aramean; it means “witness heap.” For other Aramaisms in the chapter, see Greenfield, VT Supp 32 (1982):129.
⁷³sn The name Gal`ed (du@l=G^) also means “heap of witness,” but this is a Canaanite or Western Semitic dialect that is closer to later Hebrew. The patriarchs would not have used the eastern Semitic dialect of Laban since they were living in Canaan, although they could have.
<sup>74</sup>sn The passage employs another paronomasia, the name Galeed being dissolved into its two component parts. It also makes a play on the name of the region, Gilead. The region of Gilead was the border between east and west, later Syria and Israel. It was an area were both languages were spoken. And the event that took place here is one that secured the border and prevented hostilities—it could not have been written later when there was nothing but war between the two countries.
<sup>75</sup>sn A second name is added to the place, Mizpah (hPX=m!), which means “watch post,” or the “standing stone (massebah [hbX@m^]).” The sound of the word for “standing stone” has triggered in his thinking the significance of this point, and so the pun on that is made with the name Mizpah. It then receives an explanation so typical of naming in Genesis, a paronomasia using the verbal root: “may he watch” (yisep [[X#y!]). Part of the point of this standing stone was that neither Laban or Jacob felt safe with each other, and so they agreed to go their separate ways, trusting the LORD to keep the watch at the border. Jacob did not need this treaty; but Laban, without his household gods, felt he did.
<sup>76</sup>tn Heb “hidden.”
<sup>77</sup>tn Heb “each man from his neighbor.”
<sup>78</sup>tn Heb “see.”
<sup>79</sup>sn The text uses the oath formula, “if I cross over.” He is taking the oath that he will not do it.
<sup>80</sup>tn The construction is a cognate accusative with the verb, expressing a specific sacrifice.
<sup>81</sup>sn The text says “bread, food” (lehem [<?#l#]). Presumably this is a kind of peace offering (as zebah [?b^z#] later is used in Leviticus), which would mean they were eating the animal sacrificed.
<sup>82</sup>tn 31:55 is the first verse of ch. 32 in the Hebrew text.
<sup>83</sup>tn The verbal hendiadys is “he got up early / he kissed”; sakam (<kv) often occurs in a hendiadys, becoming adverbial.
<sup>84</sup>tn Or “grandchildren.”
<sup>1</sup>sn The “angels of God” (mal’ake ‘elohim [<yh!l)o$ yk@o&l=m^]) occurs only here and in 28:12 and nowhere else in the OT. In both passages “going on his way” is used (28:20). Moreover, the verb paga` + b^e (B= + ugP) occurs here and in 28:11. And in both places Jacob interpreted what he had seen before he named the place. So the same kind of event took place now at the border to the promised land that took place there when he was leaving the land. It was a spot where heaven made contact with earth, and where God made his presence known to the patriarch. See C. Houtman, “Jacob at Mahanaim: Some Remarks on Genesis XXXII 2-3,” VT 28 (1978):37-44.
²sn The text does not explain how Jacob saw them or how he met them. The encounter could be good or bad. If the parallel with chap. 28 is used, then this meeting would have been amicable.
³sn The meaning of the name Mahanaim is difficult. It appears to be a simple dual, meaning “two camps.” That would harmonize with Jacob’s later division of his family into two camps (v. 7). The two camps here could be the host of God and the host of Jacob. It may be that the ending is an archaic plural or adverbial spelling that dissolved into the dual. But in this text its significance is explained as a dual, and that is all that a paronomasia requires. It need not provide an exact etymology.
⁴sn The chapter will be filled with allusions to this opening scene. At the outset Jacob saw the “angels of God,” mal’ake ‘elohim (<yh!l)o$ yk@o&l=m^), and then sent “messengers, mal’akim (<yk!ol=m^), to Esau. The vision certainly prompted Jacob’s actions.
⁵tn Heb “field.”
⁶sn The reader is made aware of Jacob’s groveling in fear before Esau even this early as he repeatedly calls his brother his lord, as if to minimize what had been done twenty years ago.
⁷tn The form is a preterite with the waw consecutive; it could be rendered as an English present tense as the Hebrew perfect/preterite allows, much like an epistolary aorist in Greek.
⁸tn “this message” has been added.
⁹tn Heb “to find.”
¹⁰tn Heb “And the messengers returned.”
¹¹tn The disjunctive waw introduces a circumstantial clause.
¹²sn The Hebrew has lisne mahanot (tOn?&m^ yn@v=l!), “into two camps.” The idea of two camps that he named in the beginning of the chapter has now influenced Jacob’s actions, but on a much lower plane.
¹³tn Heb “to, unto.”
¹⁴tn The word “escape” is a feminine noun. The term most often refers to refugees from war. It essentially says, “the surviving camp shall be for escape.”
¹⁵sn The Hiphil cohortative of yatab (bFy) means “to cause good” or “to treat well, favorably.” It includes more than prosperity, but that is its essential meaning. Here the form is subordinated to the preceding imperative, and may be translated “that I may.” Jacob is reminding God in his prayer of this call so that God will honor His word.
¹⁶tn Hesed (ds#?#, here plural) and ‘emet (tm#o$) are frequently found together forming a nominal hendiadys, and that could be the case here as well: “lovingkindness and faithfulness” means “faithful love.”
¹⁷tn Heb “you have done.”
¹⁸tn The form is the Hiphil imperative with the force of a prayer, not a command. The particle na’ (on) can reflect this in the translation. The word nasal (lXn) is one of the main words in the OT for salvation; it means rescue, deliver.
¹⁹sn The word “hand” (yad [dy]) meaning the hand and forearm actually, is metonymical for “power.”
²⁰sn By the suffix “me” Jacob probably includes the whole company with him. The clause “mother by the children” is a circumstantial clause without a waw; but it specifies essentially that the “me” will extend to these.
²¹tn Heb “But you, you said.”
sn Some commentators have thought this final verse of the prayer redundant, but it actually follows the predominant form of a lament in which God is motivated to act. The only motivation Jacob can offer to God is His promise (this is actually true of most prayer), and so he falls back on that at the end of the prayer.
²²tn The construction here is emphatic with an infinitive absolute and an imperfect, underscoring God’s promise to bless: heteb ‘etib (byF!yo@ byF@yh@).
²³tn The form is the perfect tense with a waw consecutive, carrying the nuance of the preceding verb forward.
²⁴tn Or “seed.”
²⁵tn The verb is a Niphal imperfect; in view of parallel passages the nuance here should be potential imperfect.
²⁶sn The verb itself means “to spend the night, to lodge.”
²⁷tn The text uses the participle substantivally, “from that which was going” (habba’ [oBh^] from bo’ [oOB]); it adds “in his hand,” meaning under his control or possession.
²⁸sn The noun “gift” is minhah (h?n=m!). The reader could not help but notice the word plays on these sounds in the story. The word “gift” (minhah [h?n=m!]) will occur several times in the passage, as well as “camp” (mahaneh [hn#?&m^]) and “messengers” (mal’akim [<yk!ol=m^]). The word plays repeat the similar sounds, binding the narrative together as a literary unit, and emphasizing that Jacob actually sullied the magnificence of the revelation he had received.
²⁹tn Heb “and he put them in the hand of.”
³⁰tn The distributive sense is expressed by repetition: “drove drove by itself” = “each drove/flock by itself.
³¹tn Heb “to whom you?”
³²tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; it has the nuance of an imperfect of instruction.
³³tn “they belong” has been added.
³⁴tn Or “to your servant Jacob.”
³⁵tn Or “to my lord Esau.”
³⁶tn Heb “according to this word.”
³⁷tn This final clause is introduced with hinneh (hN@h!).
³⁸tn Or “he thought.”
³⁹sn The verb ‘akapp^erah (hrP=k^o&) from kipper (rP#K!) is the Piel cohortative of resolve. The verb means “to atone, pacify, appease.” In Leviticus it has the idea of removing anger due to sin or guilt—and this passage illustrates its meaning very well. So Jacob did not really want to find “grace” in Esau’s eyes—he wanted to buy him off with a gift of more than 550 animals.
⁴⁰tn Heb “his face.”
sn There is significant repetition of the word face here: I will appease his face with this gift going before my face, and afterward I will see his face and perhaps he will lift up my face (forgive).
⁴¹tn Heb “his face.”
⁴²tn Heb “lift up my face.”
⁴³tn The disjunctive waw introduces a circumstantial clause.
⁴⁴tn The construction uses “he arose / and he took”; the first verb is adverbial, indicating that he got right to it.
⁴⁵sn Hebrew rhetoric often begins with a summary statement of the whole passage and then the delineation of the event. Here v. 22 is that summary statement. But v. 23 will start the story by noting that he first sent them over before he crossed over.
⁴⁶tn Heb “and he took them.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “what he had.”
⁴⁸sn The text unfolds the drama for the reader as it unfolded for Jacob—a “man” fought with him. His identity was not yet known.
⁴⁹sn The verb is wayye’abeq (qb@oY@w^), “and he wrestled.” There is a word play between “wrestled” (wayye’abeq [qb@oY@w^]) and “Jacob” (ya`aqob [bq)u&y^]) and “Jabbok” (yabboq [qB)y^]). The sounds links the words together in the memory and makes a comment on the nature of Jacob as a scrappy fighter.
<sup>50</sup>tn Heb “until the going up of the dawn.”
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “he;” the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>52</sup>tn Heb “him;” the referent (Jacob) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>53</sup>sn The verb “touch” (naga` [ugn]) can mean “touch, reach, strike.” The meaning of touch can carry the connotation of “harm, molest, injure.” God’s “touch” cripples Jacob—it would be comparable to a devastating blow.
⁵⁴tn Heb “he;” the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁵⁵tn Heb “dawn has come up.”
⁵⁶tn Heb “he;” the referent (Jacob) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
⁵⁷sn Jacob wrestled with a man thinking him to be a man, and on that basis was equal to the task. But when it had gone on long enough, the night visitor touched him and crippled him. Jacob’s desire for a blessing can only mean that he now knew that his opponent was supernatural. Contrary to many allegorical interpretations that make fighting equivalent to prayer, this passage shows that Jacob stopped fighting, and then asked for a blessing.
⁵⁸sn The question is rhetorical. The LORD obviously knew who this was. But since he is going to change his name, this question is designed to bring to Jacob’s attention all that that name had come to signify.
⁵⁹tn Heb “And he said.”
⁶⁰sn The name is a common construction, using a verb with a theophoric element that usually indicates the subject of the verb. Here it means “God fights.” This name will replace Jacob; it will be both a promise and a call for faith. In essence, the LORD was saying that Jacob would have victory and receive the promises because God would fight for him, not because he could do it by grabbing the heel.
⁶¹sn The explanation of the name now includes another paronomasia to make a popular etymology. These are not exact, and any attempt to redefine the name to fit the statement better misses the point. “You have fought” (sarita [tyr!C]) and prevailed gives the significance of “God fights” (yisra’el [lo@rC=y!]). Yes, Jacob fought, but was crippled. How did he prevail? By God’s blessing. The name served to evoke the memory of the fight and what it meant. Dillmann says that ever after the name would tell the Israelites that, when Jacob contended successfully with God, he won the battle with man (Genesis, vol. 2, p. 279). To be successful with God meant that he had to be crippled in his own self-sufficiency (Allen P. Ross, “Jacob at the Jabboq, Israel at Peniel,” BSac 142 [1985]:51-62).
⁶²sn To control the name of a deity or supernatural being in the ancient Near East was to have it for magical manipulation or power (A. S. Hebert, Genesis 12-50 [London: SCM, 1966], p. 108). For a thorough structural analysis of the passage showing the plays on the names and the request of Jacob, see Roland Barthes, “The Struggle with the Angel: Textual Analysis of Genesis 32:23-33,” in Structural Analysis and Biblical Exegesis, edited by Roland Barthes, et al, translated by Alfred M. Johnson, Jr. (Pittsburgh: Pickwick, 1974), pp. 21-33.
⁶³tn The question uses the enclitic pronoun “this” to emphasize the import of the question.
sn On the one hand the LORD is saying that Jacob should know the name, and on the other hand the LORD is not willing to relinquish his name for Jacob to control. The “name” of the LORD in Scripture is holy.
⁶⁴sn As with previous uses of this verb, the meaning here is that the LORD endowed Jacob with success—he would be successful in everything he did, including meeting Esau.
⁶⁵sn The name Peniel means “face of God.”
⁶⁶sn The paronomasia on the name Peniel is now made with the sentiment of Jacob that he saw God “face to face” (panim ‘el-panim [<yn!P-lo# <yn!P]). The construction uses these words as an adverbial accusative after the object “God.” Seeing the face of God signifies finding grace, just as seeking God’s face means seeking grace.
⁶⁷tn Heb “my life.”
⁶⁸sn The verb is nasal (lXn) in the Niphal preterite. It was commonly understood that no one could see God and live (Gen. 48:16; Exod. 19:21, 24:10; and Jud. 6:11, 22). On the surface Jacob seems to be saying that he saw God and survived. But the statement probably takes in his prayer in 32:10-13 where he prayed to be delivered. If he now says he was delivered, it must mean that he knows his prayer has been answered. Or, having seen God face to face he can now look Esau square in the eye.
⁶⁹tn Heb “shone.”
⁷⁰tn The disjunctive waw introduces a contrastive or parenthetical clause: he may have crossed over, but he was limping.
⁷¹sn On the use of this expression, see Brevard S. Childs, “A Study of the Formula `Until This Day’,” JBL 82 (1963):279-92.
<sup>72</sup>tn Or “was touched.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The idiom draws attention to the deliberate looking at the approaching Esau.
<sup>2</sup>tn Or “and there was Esau coming.”
<sup>3</sup>tn Or “with.”
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “And he put.”
<sup>5</sup>sn This kind of ranking according to favoritism no doubt fed the jealousy over Joseph that came out later. It must have been painful to the family to see that they were expendable.
<sup>6</sup>sn The verb is hishtahawah (hw?&T^v=h!), which means “to bow oneself low to the ground” (a Hishtaphel from hawah [hw?], which is a causative reflexive stem). It usually means “to worship”; but here it is merely groveling.
<sup>7</sup>tn The construction uses the preposition with the infinitive construct to express the temporal clause.
<sup>8</sup>tn The idiom indicates a deliberate turning from the reconciliation with Jacob to look over the others.
<sup>9</sup>sn The verb hanan (/n?) means “to be gracious, show favor”; in this context it indicates “graciously given”—”the children God has graced me with.”
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “What to you.”
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “company.”
<sup>12</sup>tn The form is the perfect tense with a waw consecutive, expressing a future nuance equal to the imperfect of instruction.
<sup>13</sup>tn “which is” has been added.
<sup>14</sup>sn Here is a distinct allusion to the preceding episode in which he saw the face of God and realized his prayer was answered. And now this acceptance by his brother is confirmation of that answer to prayer. Interestingly, it provides the first example of how “God fights”—he changed Esau’s heart.
<sup>15</sup>tn The form is the preterite with a waw consecutive. This is the result of seeing his brother’s face—”I have seen . . . and you have accepted.” It also explains why seeing his brother’s face was like seeing the face of God—he received grace.
<sup>16</sup>sn This word is frequently used in contexts that have sacrificial worship. One would offer a gift or sacrifice to God in the hopes of being accepted—that God would be pleased (Lev. 1:4; Ps. 51:19).
<sup>17</sup>sn The text significantly uses the word b<sup>e</sup>rakah (hkrB=), “blessing”; it is as if Jacob is trying to repay what he stole from his brother twenty years earlier.
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “all.”
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “he said.”
<sup>20</sup>tn The text uses two cohortatives, “let us travel / let us go,” to form a hendiadys: “let’s travel along, get going, be on our way” or the like.
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “upon me.”
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “foot.”
<sup>23</sup>sn The verb yasag (gXy) means to leave, place, station.” The form here is the cohortative of request, forming a polite offer of help.
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “Why this?”
<sup>26</sup>tn This interpretation assumes that the verb is a cohortative of request. Jacob does not want a body guard; he simply wants Esau to give in to his plan.
sn There are several reasons why Jacob chose not to go to Mt. Seir after Esau. First, as he said, they probably could not keep up with the warriors. Second, he probably did not fully trust his brother. The current friendliness could change, and he could lose everything. And third, God did tell him to return to his land, not Seir. But Jacob is still not able to deal truthfully, probably because of fear of Esau.
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “returned on his way.”
<sup>28</sup>tn The clause begins with the waw disjunctive, forming a strong contrast to the preceding clause.
<sup>29</sup>sn The word “stalls” is sukkot (tK)s%) it provides a wordplay on the name of the place itself. The point is to explain the name of the place and to connect it to the life of the patriarch. The exact location of Succoth here is not certain. He did lived there for some time, as these chapters indicate.
<sup>30</sup>tn The verb has not expressed subject and so is taken as a passive.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “before, in front of.”
<sup>32</sup>sn The word q<sup>e</sup>sitah (hFyC!q=) refers to a unit of money, but the value is unknown.
<sup>33</sup>sn The verb chosen here is wayyasseb (bX#Y^w^), from nasab (bXn), “to stand up, set up.” The verb picks up the sounds in the object mizbeah (?^B@z=m!), “altar,” and alludes to the sounds of hbX@m^, “standing stone.”
<sup>34</sup>sn Buying the land and settling down for a while was a momentous step for the patriarch—he was back in the land. And so the commemorative naming of the altar is significant. The report forms a parallel with Gen 28; but here the stress is on the fulfillment of the promises. The name says something like “The God of Israel is an El,” that is, “a strong God, a mighty one.” He is a God who keeps promises. The name could have been shortened from “the altar of El the God of Israel,” but there is no evidence for that.
<sup>1</sup>tn The infinitive of ra’ah (hor) followed by the preposition b<sup>e</sup> (B=), has the idea of “look on, over.” The young girl wanted to see how these women lived, which was a dangerous thing to do at least.
<sup>2</sup>tn Or “young women.”
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “laid her.” The ordinary expression “lay with her” would suggest some kind of an intimate relationship with sexual intercourse. But here we have the sign of the accusative instead of the preposition—she is the object, and so “he laid her,” a humiliating experience.
<sup>4</sup>sn The verb `anah (hnu) in the Piel means several things: “defile, mistreat, violate, rape, shame, afflict. In this context he defiled/shamed/violated her. The modern concept of “date rape” comes to mind with this case.
⁵sn The word dabaq (qbD) means “stick to, cleave to, join.” The sentence says “his soul stuck to” Dinah—he became very attached. A contemporary expression might be “his soul bonded with Dinah.”
⁶sn Literally, “spoke to the heart”; this idea can mean “spoke reassuringly” as in Judges 19:3, 2 Samuel 19:7, and elsewhere.
⁷tn Heb “the young woman.”
⁸tn Heb “for me for a wife.”
⁹tn The disjunctive waw introduces a circumstantial clause.
¹⁰tn Or “Dinah had been defiled.”
sn The verb timme’ (oM@F!), “defile,” is the Piel of tame’ (omF), “to be unclean.” It is a major word in the Levitical code. Whatever is defiled, or unclean was considered ruin and not usable, incompatible with the holiness of God and His institutions. A woman defiled like this was ruined for marriage and shamed in society.
¹¹sn The expected response would be anger or rage; but Jacob kept silent. The narrator is presenting Jacob in a negative light here, too indifferent or confused to act decisively. And when the leader does not act decisively, the younger zealots will, and often with disastrous results.
¹²sn The temporal clause “when they heard” is ambiguous. Does it go with the first or the next clause. If it goes with the first, then Jacob sent them word and they came when they heard. If it goes with the next, then they simply came in from the field and then heard, and when they heard they were grieved.
¹³sn This verse describes the true feelings of those brothers who cared for Dinah. They had come in from the field as soon as they heard the news. And they were grieved (wayyit`ass<sup>e</sup>bu [WbX=u^t=Y!w^] from `asab [bXu], the same word found in 6:6) and were very angry (wayyihar lahem m^e’od [do)m= <h#l r?^Y!w^]).
¹⁴tn The word n^ebalah (hlbn=) means “folly, disgraceful thing, shameful thing.” This statement may be the opinion of the brothers, or of the narrative, or both.
¹⁵tn The infinitive here explains the preceding verb, and so has the epexegetical use.
¹⁶tn The Niphal imperfect in the clause has the nuance obligatory—ought, should—but here negated.
¹⁷tn “his heart loves.”
¹⁸sn The verb hasaq (qv?) means “love” in the sense of being attached to or drawn to someone. This is a different way of saying what was reported earlier. However, there is no mention here of the violation.
¹⁹sn The verb is a rather significant offer: “form marriage alliances with us” (hatan [/t?]). Here is part of the formation of the message of this chapter—the disastrous defilements that would come through alliances with Canaanites.
²⁰tn The imperfect tense has the nuance of permission.
²¹tn Heb “before you.”
²²tn The basic meaning of sahar (r?s) seems to have this sense, although its participle carries the idea of a trader (see Speiser, BASOR, 164 [1961]:23-28).
²³tn Heb “say.”
²⁴tn Or “pay.”
²⁵tn The cohortative expresses his resolve.
²⁶tn Heb “say.”
²⁷tn The second infinitive is in apposition to the first, explaining what they are not able to do.
²⁸sn The word “reproach” usually means “ridicule, taunt, reproach.” It can also mean the reason behind it, the condition of shame or disgrace.
²⁹tn The infinitive here serves as an epexegetical infinitive, explaining how they would become like them.
³⁰tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive; in the conditional sentence this forms the apodosis. The same is true of the next several verbs.
³¹tn Heb “listen to us.”
³²tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive. It expresses the future after the conditional clause. The same is true of the last verb in the sentence.
³³tn Heb “sister.”
³⁴tn Heb “eyes.”
³⁵tn Heb “eyes.”
³⁶tn The infinitive construct serves epexegetically to the Piel perfect tense before it.
³⁷sn The word kabed (db@K) means “to be heavy.” In the Piel it comes to mean “honor.” The Niphal form here probably does not have the idea of “honorable”—although that would be a result of it—but “important.”
³⁸tn The waw disjunctive introduces a parenthetical clause, explaining why the community would respond to him.
³⁹tn Heb “wide on both hands” = in both directions.
⁴⁰tn Heb “listened to.”
⁴¹tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator.
⁴²tn Heb “a man his sword.”
⁴³tn Heb “city [living] securely.”
⁴⁴tn The verb is plural; but with no expressed subject, it may be made passive.
⁴⁵tn The two verbs can be interpreted to form a hendiadys: “they took captive and they plundered” being “they captured as plunder.”
⁴⁶tn The traditional translation is “troubled” but `akar (rku)always involves personal or national disaster, complete ruin (see Josh 7:25, Judg 11:35, Prov 11:17).
<sup>47</sup>sn The verb yn!v@yo!b=h^l= is from ba’as (voB), which means “to stink, have a foul smell.” In its usages it describes foul smells, stenches, things that are odious. Jacob senses that the people in the land will find this terribly repulsive. See P. R. Ackroyd, “The Hebrew Root B’S,” JThS 2 (1951):331-36.
<sup>48</sup>tn Or “we.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The two imperatives are “arise” and “go up”; as before the first probably serves adverbially, indicating that Jacob should get up and go, or go at once.
<sup>2</sup>sn The relative clause clearly identifies who God is for whom he must build an altar, and the temporal clause within the relative clause makes it certain. The LORD is here calling Jacob to fulfill his vows that he made in Gen 28.
<sup>3</sup>tn Or “that you are keeping.”
<sup>4</sup>sn Removing false gods, becoming ritually clean, and changing garments would become in Israel necessary steps in consecration when approaching the LORD in worship.
<sup>5</sup>tn Here are two cohortative, “let us arise” and “let us go up”; the first is adverbial—he is exhorting them to get up and go.
<sup>6</sup>tn See Ps 20:1 which draws on this language.
<sup>7</sup>sn Here Jacob is referring to his flight from Esau where God promised to be with him in the way (Gen 28:20), and his prayer to be delivered.
<sup>8</sup>tn Heb “hand.”
<sup>9</sup>sn Wenham compares Gen 34 and Num 31 to argue that the rings and the gods that they are getting rid of here could have been part of the plunder that came from Shechem (Genesis 16-50, p. 324). For the burial of the gods, see E. Nielson, “The Burial of the Foreign Gods,” StTh 8 (1954,5):102-122.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “and they journeyed.”
<sup>11</sup>sn This expression is open to a couple of interpretations. It could be “a terror from God,” i.e., God sent fear into them. Or it could be “a divine terror,” i.e., the kind of fear one has for God. Or it could be the use of the title “God” for the superlative, i.e., “tremendous terror.”
<sup>12</sup>tn “God of Bethel.”
<sup>13</sup>tn The verb is third masculine plural; see Gen 20:13.
<sup>14</sup>sn This woman was very beloved apparently. She was Rebekah’s nurse, but attached herself to Jacob as she had with Isaac. She must have been about 180.
<sup>15</sup>tn There is no expressed subject, so the verb is made passive.
<sup>16</sup>sn The name ‘allon bakut (tWkB /OLo^) means “the oak of weeping.” An oak tree was revered in the ancient world, often designated as shrines or landmarks. This one was named for the weeping at the death of Deborah.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “El Shadday.”
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “come out of your loins.”
sn The promises here bring forward the Abrahamic promises established in chap. 17. They also confirm what Isaac had declared to Jacob in Gen 28:3,4. Here, though, for the first time Jacob is promised kings.
<sup>19</sup>sn The verb “gave” refers to the Abrahamic promise of the land. However, the actual possession yet lay in the future. The decree of the LORD made it certain; but it has the sense “promised to give.”
<sup>20</sup>tn Or “seed.”
<sup>21</sup>tn Or “standing stone.”
sn This passage overlaps with Gen 28:18-19, where Jacob stood up a massebah (hbX@m^) and poured oil on it and called the place Bethel. Critical scholarship sees this as a duplicate. But it makes very good sense to see Jacob re-establishing the place in fulfillment of the vow he had made here earlier. In support of this is the fact that the present narrative alludes to and is built on the previous one.
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “and he poured out.”
<sup>23</sup>sn The verb nasak (Esn) means “pour out, make libations,” and nesek (Es#n#) is a “drink-offering,” usually of wine or of blood. The word yasaq (qXy) means “pour out,” often of anointing oil, but of other elements as well.
<sup>24</sup>sn In view of the previous naming of Bethel, here Jacob was confirming or affirming the name through an official ritual marking the fulfillment of the vow. This place now did become Bethel, the house of God.
<sup>25</sup>tn The verb cannot mean “she gave birth” because she had not yet done so; this is the inchoative aspect: “she was in childbirth.”
<sup>26</sup>tn The construction uses a Hiphil infinitive, which Speiser classifies as an elative Hiphil. The contrast is with the previous Piel: there “she had hard labor,” and here, “her labor was at its hardest.” Failure to see this, Speiser notes, has led to redundant translations and misunderstandings (Genesis, p, 273).
<sup>27</sup>sn The episode recalls and fulfills the prayer of Rachel at the birth of Joseph: “may he add” another son.
<sup>28</sup>tn The Hebrew expression has “in the going out of her life (napsah [hvp=n^]),” i.e., as her life/soul was departing. The idea could be expressed that she named the child with her dying breath.
<sup>29</sup>sn The name Ben-Oni (ben ‘oni [yn!Oo-/B#]) means “son of my affliction.” It is ironic that Rachel’s words to Jacob in Gen 30:1, “Give me children or I’ll die,” take a different turn here, for it was having the child that brought about her death.
<sup>30</sup>tn The disjunctive waw introduces a contrastive clause.
sn There was a preference for giving children good names in the ancient world, and “son of my affliction” would not do (see the incident in 1 Chron. 4:9,10). It would be a reminder of the suffering of Rachel (in this connection, see also D. Daube, “The Night of Death,” HTR 61 <sup>10</sup>:629-632). So Jacob named him Benjamin (binyamin [/ym!yn=B!]), “son of the right hand.” The name Benjamin appears in the names at Mari, so it is a well attested name. There have been attempts to connect this name to the resident tribe listed at Mari, “sons of the south” (“right hand” also meaning “south”), but this assumes a different reading of the story. See James Muilenberg, “The Birth of Benjamin,” JBL 75 (1956):194-201.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “standing stone.”
<sup>32</sup>tn “farther” has been added.
<sup>33</sup>sn The location is not given. It appears to be somewhere between Bethlehem and Hebron. Various traditions have identified it as at the shepherd’s fields near Bethlehem (it means “tower of the flock”; see Mic. 4:8), or by Solomon’s pools.
<sup>34</sup>sn The act seems to have had other purposes than merely satisfying his sexual urge. By having sex with Bilhah he would have prevented her from succeeding Rachel as the favorite wife; and by sleeping with his father’s concubine he would also be attempting to take over the clan—something Absalom foolishly attempted on the roof top later.
<sup>35</sup>tn The verse begins “and they were.”
<sup>36</sup>tn This is an adverbial accusative of location.
<sup>37</sup>tn This name is in apposition to the preceding. Mamre was near Hebron.
<sup>38</sup>tn The verb is gur (rWG), referring to temporary settlement without ownership rights.
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “and the days were.”
<sup>40</sup>tn The verb means “expire”; unless this verb and the next form a hendiadys, this verb would describe the expiration of life. It may be subordinated to the next verb.
<sup>41</sup>tn Heb “satisfied, completed.”
<sup>1</sup>snThis chapter records what became of Esau. It will list both his actual descendants as well as the people he subsumed under his tribal leadership, people who were aboriginal Edomites. The chapter is long and complicated, and merits further study (see J. R. Bartlett, “The Edomite King-List of Genesis 36:31-39 and 1 Chronicles 1:43-50.” JThS 16 [1965]:301-314; and W. J. Horowitz, “Were There Twelve Horite Tribes?” CBQ 35 [1973]:69-71). In the format of Genesis, the line of Esau will be “tidied off” before the account of Jacob will be traced. As such the arrangement makes a strong contrast with Jacob (seen in the arrangement of chap. 36 being contrasted with 37:1 which ends the section). As Delitzsch says in his New Commentary on Genesis, “secular greatness in general grows up far more rapidly than spiritual greatness” (vol. 2, p. 238). Or, the progress of the world far out distances the progress of the righteous who are waiting for the promise.
<sup>2</sup>tn Heb “land of their settlements.”
<sup>3</sup>sn The term “father” in genealogical records needs to be carefully defined. It can mean father literally, grandfather, political overlord, and founder.
<sup>4</sup>tn Or “grandsons.”
<sup>5</sup>tn Or “grandsons.”
<sup>6</sup>tn Or “sons.”
<sup>7</sup>tn Or “grandsons.”
<sup>8</sup>tn Or “grandsons.”
<sup>9</sup>sn The same pattern of sons, grandsons, and chiefs will now be listed for Seir. Seir is both the name of the place and the name of the ancestor of these tribes. The name Horite is probably not to be identified with Hurrian. What happened is that the clan of Esau settled in this area, intermarried with these Horites and eventually dispossessed them, so that they all became known as Edomites (Dt. 2:12 telescopes the whole development).
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “chiefs of the Horites.”
<sup>11</sup>tn Or “sons.”
<sup>12</sup>tn Heb “chiefs of the Horites.”
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “chiefs of the Horites.”
<sup>14</sup>tn Heb “the sons/children of Israel.”
<sup>15</sup>tn These clauses now begin with the preterite and waw consecutive, which can be subordinated to the next clauses.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “chiefs of Esau.”
<sup>1</sup>tn Heb “And Jacob lived.”
<sup>2</sup>tn Or “the land of his sojournings.”
<sup>3</sup>sn The next section of the book begins with the heading This is the account of Jacob in 37:2. So this verse, 37:1, actually forms part of the preceding section. In contrast to all the settled and expanded population of Esau, Jacob is still moving about in the land without a permanent residence, and without kings. Even if the Edomite king list was added later (as the reference to kings in Israel suggests), its placement here in contrast to Jacob is important. Certainly the text deals with Esau before dealing with Jacob—that is the pattern. But the detail is so great in 36 that the contrast cannot be missed.
<sup>4</sup>tn The idiom is “the son of seventeen years.” The word “son” that begins this clause is in apposition to the name Joseph.
<sup>5</sup>tn Heb “shepherding, feeding.”
<sup>6</sup>tn The construction is a little ambiguous. It could be “now the lad was with.” It probably means he was like a servant.
<sup>7</sup>tn The suffixed genitive specifies that the bad or damaging report was about the brothers.
sn The popular expositions on this section frequently play Joseph up as a “tattletale,” or as some have it, “he told tales about his brothers” as if they were not true. This is reading material into the text that is simply not there. It is true that Numbers 13 and 14 use the same expression to describe the evil report of the spies—but what they reported was true, only they used it to discourage the people (Joshua did not disagree with what they saw in the land). The entire Joseph story is written with elements of wisdom literature, and may be designated a kind of wisdom literature as well. So Joseph is presented in a good light—not because he was perfect, but because the text is showing how wisdom rules. In light of that, this section shows Joseph faithful to his father in little things, even though unpopular; and so he will be given authority over greater things.
<sup>8</sup>tn The disjunctive waw introduces a parenthetical statement that explains part of the animosity the brothers had to Joseph.
sn The statement brings forward a motif that played an important role in the family of Isaac—parental favoritism. Jacob surely knew what that had done to him and his brother, and to his marriages. But now he showers affection on Rachel’s son Joseph.
<sup>9</sup>sn It is not clear what this robe was like. The idea that it was a coat of many colors goes back to the Greek. Cognate studies have suggested a coat or tunic with long sleeves, or a tunic that was richly embroidered. It set Joseph apart as the favored one.
<sup>10</sup>tn The clause begins with a preterite and waw consecutive, and so is here subordinated to the next clause.
<sup>11</sup>tn Or “civilly.”
<sup>12</sup>tn The construction uses the preterite with a cognate accusative to underscore that this was a unique event: “and he dreamed a dream.”
<sup>13</sup>sn The expositor again must avoid reading things into the text. Joseph is often presented as gloating over his brothers. The text simply says “he told his brothers.” The text gives no warrant for interpreting his way as arrogant or condescending. Rather, it seems fairly normal to share a dream with the family.
<sup>14</sup>tn The construction uses a hendiadys, “they added to hate,” meaning they hated more. The verb “they added” (wayyosipu [Wps!OYw^]) also forms a word play on the name of Joseph.
<sup>15</sup>tn All three clauses in this dream report each begin with w<sup>e</sup>hinneh (hN@h!w=),”now,” “suddenly, and “but”; this gives the telling of the dream a vividness, as if it is being unfolded before them.
<sup>16</sup>sn Here is the word hishtahawah (hw?&T^v=h!) again, “to bow down to the ground.” It is used both for worship and for obeisance to masters.
<sup>17</sup>tn The construction uses the infinitive absolute with the imperfect tense in a question. The infinitive intensifies the idea of reigning as well as the question, the doubt. It is as if they said, “You don’t mean you will rule over us, do you?”
<sup>18</sup>tn The sentence is parallel to the preceding question (due to ‘im [<o!]), but now with a stronger verb, masal (lvm), “have dominion, mastery.”
<sup>19</sup>tn The construction is identical to Gen 37:5.
<sup>20</sup>sn The brothers response is understandable, given what has already been going on in the family. But here there is a hint of uneasiness in their words—they hated him because of the dream and his words. The dream bothered them, as well as his telling them. And their words in the rhetorical question are ironic, for this is exactly what would happen. The dream was God’s way of revealing it.
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “And he dreamed yet another dream.”
<sup>22</sup>tn Both clauses of the dream report begin with w<sup>e</sup>hinneh (hN@h!w=), “Look” and “Here.”
<sup>23</sup>tn The clause beginning with the preterite is subordinated to the next—their response.
<sup>24</sup>sn The question is asking the meaning of the dream. The father thinks he has it right, but finds it incredible.
<sup>25</sup>tn The sentence uses the infinitive absolute and the imperfect of bo’ (oOB) in the question, with the same force as the earlier parallel construction: “you don’t mean we will actually do this, do you?” The infinitive then serves as the purpose of the coming—to bow down.
<sup>26</sup>sn The brothers were already jealous of him, but this made it even worse. Such jealousy easily leads to action, as the chapter will show. And yet, dreams were considered a form of revelation, and their jealousy was not just of the favoritism of their father, but of the dreams. This is why Jacob would not let it go.
<sup>27</sup>tn “in mind” has been added.
<sup>28</sup>tn The first clause may be subordinated to the second as a temporal clause since both begin with preterites.
<sup>29</sup>tn The text uses an interrogative clause: “Are not your brothers…,” which means “your brothers are….”
<sup>30</sup>tn Heb “he;” the referent (Joseph) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “Here I am.”
<sup>32</sup>tn Heb “see.”
<sup>33</sup>sn There is an interesting word play in these stories with the word salom (<Olv), “peace.” Joseph is sent her to check on the “peace” of his brothers; but they could not speak to him in “peace.” This link alerts to the coming conflict.
<sup>34</sup>tn The participle is introduced with w<sup>e</sup>hinneh (hN@h!w=).
<sup>35</sup>tn The imperative in this sentence has more of the nuance of a request than a command.
<sup>36</sup>tn Heb “they traveled from this place.”
<sup>37</sup>tn Heb “And they said.”
<sup>38</sup>sn The expression used is ba`al hahalomot (tOml)?&h^ lu^B^), “lord/master of dreams.” It may carry only the idea of “possessor of dreams,” but given their hatred of him and his dreams, there may be more of a sarcastic note. They obviously think that by killing him they will end the dreams.
³⁹tn The word describing the animal is actually “evil,” ra`ah (hur). This could be translated a number of ways: an evil beast, a dangerous animal, a wild animal, ferocious animal—any animal that is predator and wild.
<sup>40</sup>tn The expression is literally, “what his dreams will be.” It is usually translated, “what will become of his dreams,” but the dreams form the subject of the sentence.
<sup>41</sup>tn The clause begins with the preterite and is subordinated to the next clause that has the main action of the sentence.
<sup>42</sup>sn Reuben succeeded in keeping Joseph alive, although that might not seem like a rescue to some readers. The point is interesting because it indicates that the “brothers’ who were plotting to kill him were only a few of the brothers, probably the maidservants’ sons.
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “and he said.”
<sup>44</sup>tn Heb “a life.”
<sup>45</sup>sn There are some key word plays in this speech that unify the point being made: “shed” is tisp<sup>e</sup>ku (WkP=v=T!), “cast” is hasliku (Wkyl!v=h^), and “lay” is tisl<sup>e</sup>hu (W?l=v=T!).
<sup>46</sup>tn “he said this” has been added.
<sup>47</sup>tn The disjunctive clause is parenthetical to the story.
<sup>48</sup>tn Heb “bread, food.”
<sup>49</sup>sn The idiom draws out the action of seeing the caravan; they did not simply notice it in passing, but watched it closely as it came by.
<sup>50</sup>tn What they saw is introduced with w<sup>e</sup>hinneh (hN@h!w=) to draw attention to it.
<sup>51</sup>tn Heb “let not our hand be upon him.”
<sup>52</sup>tn Heb “listened.”
<sup>53</sup>tn The clause begins with a preterite and is subordinated as a temporal clause to the next clause.
<sup>54</sup>tnThe construction is a verbal hendiadys, “they drew / they lifted up.”
<sup>55</sup>tn “to find that” has been added.
<sup>56</sup>sn Recall that it was with two kids of the goats that Jacob had deceived his father (27:9); now his sons will continue the deception that dominates this family.
<sup>57</sup>sn The two verbs are difficult. It sounds as if they sent the tunic on ahead and then came and brought it to their father. That might have left the initial impact of the news settle first. Or the first verb may be merely stylistic, answering to the earlier verse where Joseph was sent to them.
<sup>58</sup>tn Text has “on his loins.”
<sup>59</sup>tn The verb qum (<Wq) means “rise, stand”; the idea of rising up to comfort does not capture the scene as well as standing by.
<sup>60</sup>tn Heb “and he said.”
<sup>61</sup>sn The word Sheol is used frequently in the Bible. It can mean the grave, death, the realm of departed spirits (Ps. 49), or figuratively of extreme danger (Ps. 30). There is no passage in the Bible that uses this word in the sense of Hades (a realm of departed spirits) when the righteous are involved. Or, in every place where the righteous go to Sheol, Sheol can refer to death, the grave, or a place of danger.
<sup>62</sup>tc The text at this point spells the name of the merchants as m<sup>e</sup>danim (<yn!dm=), not midyanim (<yn!yd=m!). BHS wants to repoint it to match the previous reference in 37:28. Perhaps, though, that is the wrong way to work this textual problem. This is clearly the rare form; to change it to match the ordinary spelling of Midianites is exactly what the textual critic should not do. One can see why a scribe would tend to do that; but if the form had been Midianites, why would it be changed here to Medanim? Perhaps the original, in both places, was Medanim. The significance of that would be that an alleged discrepancy in the text is resolved. Ishmaelites are not Midianites; but Medanim are.
<sup>63</sup>sn The words might indicate that Potiphar was the chief executioner.
<sup>1</sup>tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator way<sup>e</sup>hi.
<sup>2</sup>tn “to stay” has been added.
<sup>3</sup>tn Heb “man.”
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “man.”
<sup>5</sup>tn The phrase “as a wife” has been added to clarify the meaning.
<sup>6</sup>tn Or “became pregnant.”
<sup>7</sup>tc There is textual support to read this verb as a feminine, “she called,” to match the next two verses. But the stronger evidence and more plausible argument supports the MT as it stands.
<sup>8</sup>tn Or “became pregnant.”
<sup>9</sup>tn The sentences uses a verbal hendiadys: “she added / she bore”; this emphasizes that she bore again.
<sup>10</sup>sn The line could also read, “he was in Kezib when she bore him,” meaning Judah. But the referent is not very close. 1 Chr 4 mentions Kezib as a later dwelling place for the clan of Shelah.
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “and Judah took.”
<sup>12</sup>tn The imperative with the waw indicates the purpose of the first imperative.
sn The purpose of this custom, called the levirate system, was to ensure that no line of the family would become extinct. The name of the deceased was to be maintained through this custom of having a child by the nearest relative. See M. Burrows, “Levirate Marriage in Israel,” JBL 59 (1940):23-33.
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>14</sup>tn Heb “would not be his.”
<sup>15</sup>tn The construction shows that this was a repeated practice and not merely one action.
sn The text makes it clear that the purpose of the custom was to produce an heir for the deceased brother. Onan had no intention of doing that. But he would have sex with the girl as much as he wished. He was willing to use the law to gratify his desires but not willing to do the responsible thing.
<sup>16</sup>tn “his seed” has added.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>18</sup>sn This clause explains that Judah had no intention of giving Shelah to Tamar for the purpose of the levirate marriage. Judah apparently knew the nature of his sons, and feared that God would be angry with the third as well.
<sup>19</sup>sn There is not enough information to know how long this was. The text says “the days increased.” It was long enough for Shelah to mature and for Tamar to see she would not have him.
<sup>20</sup>tn The first clause is subordinated to the next in the sequence of actions.
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “And it was told to Tamar, saying.”
<sup>22</sup>tn The active participle indicates the action was in progress—he was on the way.
<sup>23</sup>sn The expression indicates that he “reckoned her for a prostitute”—took her to be a prostitute (zonah [hnOz]), which was what she had intended for him to do. She obviously had some idea of his inclinations, or she would not have tried this risky plan.
<sup>24</sup>sn The verb is the simple bo’ (oOB), “to go in.” It is not the intimate “lie with you” or “know you” that would normally express a personal relationship; it is merely the way to express having sexual relations. Without any preliminaries Judah says “Let me have sex with you.”
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “until you send.”
<sup>26</sup>tn “them” has been supplied.
<sup>27</sup>tn Or “became pregnant.”
<sup>28</sup>tn The sentence has “she arose and left,” the first verb in the pair emphasizing that she wasted no time, she got up and left.
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “the hand of his friend.”
<sup>30</sup>tn The perfect tense has the nuance of potential perfect here.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “And he asked.”
<sup>32</sup>tn Or “the place she had been.”
<sup>33</sup>sn The word for “cult prostitute” is q<sup>e</sup>desah (hvd@q=), from qadas (vdq), “be holy.” The idea in this word means “set apart, distinct.” So a woman who did not marry but was dedicated to temple service, basically cultic prostitution, would be called q<sup>e</sup>desah (hvd@q=). The masculine form is used for male cult prostitutes. Judah thought he had gone to a zonah (hnOz) an ordinary whore; but Hirah went looking for a cult prostitute, perhaps because it had been a sheep-shearing festival. Did Judah have scruples against going to a woman connected with pagan worship, but not a woman of the streets? For further discussion on the subject, see E. M. Yamauchi, “Cultic Prostitution,” in Orient and Occident: Essays Presented to Cyrus Gordon, AOAT 22 (Neukirchen-Vluyn, Neukirchener, 1973), pp. 213-223.
<sup>34</sup>tn “the things” has been added.
<sup>35</sup>tn The word buz (zWB) describes contempt that respectable and honest people would have for the worthless, foolish, or disreputable.
<sup>36</sup>tn Or “Judah was told.”
<sup>37</sup>sn The verb zanah (hnz) is usually translated “play the prostitute” or the like. Its connotations probably convey more than the precise activity of prostitution, embracing any loose or promiscuous activity. But since she will produce the payment she received for the sex, it fits this context, whether the accusers knew that or not.
<sup>38</sup>tn “word” has been supplied.
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “who these to him.”
<sup>40</sup>sn The verb nakar (rkn) means “to recognize, note” and here translated identify. She asked him to see if he could recognize whose they were, and he recognized immediately that they were his. There are some literary links between these passages as well. In chap. 37 the brothers took a kid of the goats to kill for the deception of Jacob, and then asked him to recognize the coat. Here Jacob wants to give her a kid of the goats, but leaves his identification instead, and then must recognize them. The narrative makes several links like this so that the reader does not lose sight of that passage until this one comes to its completion.
<sup>41</sup>tn “them” has been supplied.
<sup>42</sup>sn The word righteousness means conforming to the standard. In the culture and with the levirate law Judah showed himself irresponsible and unfaithful. Tamar fought for her right to be the mother of Judah’s line; when she was not given Shelah, and when Judah’s wife died, she took action to ensure that the line did not die out. It was a desperate act, but courageous. For her it was within her rights; she did nothing that the law did not entitle her to do. But for him it was fornication because he thought he was going to a prostitute. See also Susan Niditch, “The Wronged Woman Righted: An Analysis of Genesis 38,” HTR 72 (1979):143-148.
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “know her.”
<sup>44</sup>tn The construction uses a verbal hendiadys, “add to know” means “know again.”
<sup>45</sup>tn “child” has been added.
<sup>46</sup>sn The verb paras (JrP) means “make a breach, break through.” It frequently occurs with a cognate accusative , Elsewhere it refers to judgment breaking forth (cf. 2 Sam 5:20, 6:8; Ps 106:29). Here it simply mmeans breaking out. The event provided the meaningful name Perez, “he who breaks through.” The naming signified the completion of Tamar’s struggle and also depicted the destiny of the tribe of Perez who later became dominant (Gen 46:12 and Num 26:20).
sn Here is the climax of the story, and the clue to its significance in the midst of the Joseph narrative. Judah and his brothers had sold Joseph into slavery, thinking that they could thwart God’s plan that the elder brothers should serve the younger. God worked that principle out through these births in Judah’s own family, affirming that the elder will serve the younger, that Joseph’s leadership could not so easily be set aside. So the next chapter begins with Joseph in Egypt doing well. See Judah Goldin, “The Youngest Son; or, Where Does Genesis 38 Belong?” JBL 96 (1977):27-44.
<sup>47</sup>sn This child was named Zerah because of the scarlet thread (sani [yn!v]). The name is not explained by a word play on the sounds. In western Aramaic z<sup>e</sup>hori is “scarlet, scarlet thread.” In Babylonian it is zahuritu. If such a Semitic word lies behind the name, it simply involves a metathesis of the two letters. But in Hebrew the word zerah (?r^z#) refers not to scarlet but the dawn, “shining.” The name could have meant something like “shining one” or “God has shined” originally; but it obviously is here connected to the incident. Zerah became the head of a tribe (Num 26:20), from whom came Achan (Josh. 7:1).
<sup>1</sup>tn The Hophal perfect here is given a past perfect translation to restore the sequence of the narrative for the reader. Gen 38 is a digression in the family of Judah that traces its history for a generation or so; Gen 39 picks up where ch. 37 left off.
<sup>2</sup>tn Heb “from the hand of.”
<sup>3</sup>sn The clause could be read, “and he was a prosperous man.” The word for “prosperous,” masliah (?^yl!X=m^), a Hiphil participle from salah (?lX). The word describes him as successful in what he was doing, or making progress or advance in his situation (compare 24:21).
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb “was.”
<sup>5</sup>tn Text adds “in his hand.”
<sup>6</sup>sn The verb is sarat (trv) means “minister, serve.” It is in the same semantic field as `ebed (dbu), “slave, servant,” but refers to a higher domestic service, usually of a personal attendant. Here Joseph will be made the household steward, a position well-attested in Egyptian literature.
⁷sn The verb paqad (dqP) means “appoint” here; it has a wide range of meanings in the OT—visit, number, appoint. The common idea in all of them, and at the heart of the word, is “to change the destiny.” If God “visits” it is to bless or to judge. Here Potiphar is responding to God’s blessing and appoints Joseph the overseer—a true change in destiny.
⁸tn Heb “into his hand.”
⁹tn Heb “and it was from then.”
¹⁰tn The first clause beginning with the temporal indicator is subordinated to the next as a temporal clause.
¹¹sn The meaning of the word “blessed,” of course, carries the idea of enrichment, prosperity, success. It is the way believers describe success at the hand of God. The text illustrates the promise made to Abraham that whoever blesses his seed will be blessed (Gen 12:1-3).
¹²tn “both” has been added.
¹³sn The passage gives us a good picture of a young man who was responsible and faithful, both to his master and to his God. And this is within a very short time of his being sold into Egypt. It undermines the view that in chap. 37 as a seventeen year old he was a liar, a tattle tale, and an arrogant adolescent.
¹⁴sn The verb `azab (bzu) is a strong word, indicating he relinquished the care, forsook, abandoned it to Joseph. This is stronger than what was said earlier. Apparently he had come to trust Joseph so much that he knew it was in better care with Joseph than with anyone else.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “hand.”
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “know.”
<sup>17</sup>sn The reference to food or bread here is figurative for his private affairs and is not limited literally to what he ate.
<sup>18</sup>tn The expression is “handsome of form and handsome of appearance,” the same Hebrew expressions that were used in Gen 29:17 for Rachel. It is the kind of description given for Sarah and Rebekah that made them susceptible to advances. The Jewish Publication Society (TaNaCh) has it “well built and handsome.”
<sup>19</sup>tn The expression is that “she lifted up her eyes” to Joseph, an expression that emphasizes here deliberate and careful scrutiny of him.
<sup>20</sup>sn The story has long been connected with the wisdom warnings about the strange woman who tries to seduce the young man with her boldness and directness (see Prov 5-7, especially 7:6-27). This is part of the literary background of the story of Joseph that gives it the wisdom flavor. See Gerhard von Rad, “The Story of Joseph,” in God at Work in Israel, translated by John Marks (Nashville: Abingdon, 1974), pp. 19-35; and G. W. Coats, “The Joseph Story and Ancient Wisdom: A Reappraisal,” CBQ 35 (1973):285-97.
<sup>21</sup>tn Heb “and he said.”
<sup>22</sup>tn Heb “know.”
<sup>23</sup>tn “here” has been added.
<sup>24</sup>tn Heb “hand.”
<sup>25</sup>tn The nuance of potential imperfect fits this context.
<sup>26</sup>tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator, followed by the infinitive construct with the preposition k<sup>e</sup> (K=). This clause could therefore be given a concessive nuance, although simple temporal would work as well.
<sup>27</sup>tn The verb is sama` (umv), which means “listen; here with the following preposition it could mean “listen to, obey.”
²⁸tn The text uses a verbal hendiadys, “he fled and he went out.” This emphasizes the point that he got out of there quickly.
²⁹sn For more discussion on the temptation, see A. M. Honeyman, “The Occasion of Joseph’s Temptation,” VT 2 (1952):85-87.
³⁰tn The verb has no expressed subject, and so could be treated as a passive. But it is clear from the context that her husband brought Joseph into the household.
³¹sn She raises the ethnic issue when talking to her servants about what their boss had done—“he put a Hebrew over you.”
³²sn The infinitive “to mock” recalls the story of Gen 19 where Lot when he tried to rebuke the people was called a mocker (19:14); it also recalls the mocking of Isaac by Ishmael (21:9). It describes an activity that either cannot be taken seriously or does not take something seriously. Here it means holding something up for ridicule, or toying with something harmfully. Attempted rape would be such an activity, for it would hold her in contempt and not take her seriously.
³³tn Heb “that I raised.”
³⁴tn Heb “according to these words.”
³⁵sn She now refers to him as a Hebrew slave, a very demeaning description in her charge.
³⁶sn The statement needs no explanation because of the connotations of “came in to me” and “to fool with me.”
³⁷tn Heb “according to these words.”
³⁸tn Heb “did to me.”
³⁹sn Literally, “the house of roundness,” suggesting that it might have been a fortress or citadel.
⁴⁰sn The story of Joseph is filled with cycles and repetition: two dreams of his, two dreams in ch. 40, two dreams of Pharaoh, two trips of his brothers—and here, the second time he has been thrown into a prison situation for no good reason, with his garment being used as evidence. Joseph will tell Pharaoh that twice means it is of God (41:32). In addition, see Howard Jacobsen, “A Legal Note on Potiphar’s Wife,” HTR 69 (1976):177.
⁴¹sn This last sentence probably means that he was in charge of everything that went on in the prison. Anything to be done had to have his approval, he had to do it.
⁴²tn Heb “was not looking at anything.”
¹sn The cupbearer in Hebrew corresponds to Egyptian wb’, an official (frequently foreign) who often became a confidant of the king and wielded political power (see K. A. Kitchen, NBD, p. 283). Nehemiah held this post in Persia. The baker may be Egyptian retehti the head of the bakers, but one with privileges in the royal court.
²sn The text uses “sinned” here. While it is not clear how they sinned against the king—and it would not take much—the choice of this word is meant to contrast the previous account in which Joseph would not sin but was thrown into prison.
³sn The word saris (syr!s) used here of these two men and of Potiphar in the last chapter, commonly means “eunuch.” But evidence from Akkadian texts shows that in the earlier period its cognate was more general, meaning court official, and later received the specific meaning.
⁴sn There are several interesting elements to this story that need to be studied. Some have suggested that this captain, who was over the keeper of the prison, would have served in court, possibly like a chief butler, having ample opportunity to preside over the imprisonment of court officials. More importantly, if it is the same man Potiphar, and the text does not so indicate, then one can understand how he would appoint Joseph to serve them as he had served him.
⁵sn This is the same word sarat (trv), “to serve as a personal attendant,” that was used in chap. 39.
⁶tn Heb “they were days in custody.”
⁷tn Heb “dreamed a dream.”
⁸tn Heb “a man his dream in one night.”
⁹tn Heb “a man according to the interpretation of his dream.”
sn The word pitron (/Ort=P!), “interpretation,” is cognate to peser (rv#P#, so important for studies in Qumran and Midrash). It is a term that means the interpretation of signs, dreams, or other ominous revelations.
¹⁰sn The verb only occurs here and Dan 1:10. It means “sick, emaciated.” Sad and depressed would be part of it.
¹¹tn Heb “why are your faces bad today?”
¹²tn The text uses a cognate accusative with the verb to underscore the uniqueness of the dream (here and v. 5).
¹³tn “them” has been added.
¹⁴sn As Wenham points out, threes dominate the dream: three branches, three stages of growth, and three actions of the cupbearer.
¹⁵tn “represent” has been added.
¹⁶sn This is a metonymy of adjunct, an idiom, that usually means restore to dignity, office, and power. David referred to God as the one who lifted up his head when he had to flee the palace from Absalom (Ps. 3). The idiom is comparable to our saying someone can hold his head up high.
¹⁷sn The literal meaning of the word is “judgment, decision,” but judgment is usually made by precedent. So the meaning of “custom” also occurs with this word (see 1 Kgs 18:28).
¹⁸tn The form is the perfect tense with a suffix; it functions in a volitional sense here, a plea or a request.
¹⁹tn This form is also a perfect tense with a waw following the other perfect.
²⁰tn Heb “deal with me [in] kindness.”
²¹sn The Hiphil of zakar (rkz) means “cause to remember, make mention, boast.” The implication is that Joseph would be pleased for them to tell his story and give him the credit due him so that Pharaoh would release him. Pharaoh had never met Joseph, so the simple translation of “cause him to remember me” would mean little.
²²tn “prison” has been added.
²³tn The verb means “to steal,” but in the Piel/Pual “steal away.” The idea of “kidnap” would be closer to the sense, meaning he was stolen and carried away. The infinitive absolute underscores the point he is making.
²⁴tn Heb “good.”
²⁵tn Or “three wicker baskets.”
²⁶tn “represent” has been added.
²⁷sn Joseph repeats the same expression from the first interpretation, but with an evil twist—this one would be hung! The idiom is given a more literal meaning,
²⁸tn Heb “and he restored.”
²⁹tn Heb “his cupbearing.”
³⁰sn The dreams were fulfilled exactly as Joseph had said, down to the very detail. Here was confirmation that Joseph could interpret dreams—that his own dreams were still valid. It would have been a tremendous encouragement to his faith. But it would also have been a great disappointment to spend two more years in jail. But the chapter shows that he had not lost faith.
¹tn Heb “two years, days.”
²tn Heb “was dreaming.”
³tn Heb “beautiful of appearance.”
⁴tn Heb “fat of flesh” = fat-fleshed.
⁵tn Heb “evil of appearance.”
⁶tn Heb “lean of flesh” = lean-fleshed.
⁷tn Heb “fat.”
⁸sn The two dreams, as will be explained in the following verses, reflected the economy of Egypt. Because of the Nile, the land of Egypt weathered all kinds of famines—there was usually grain in Egypt, and if there was grain and water the livestock would flourish. These two dreams, however, repeated the theme that poverty would overtake plenty, that the blessing of the herd and the field would cease.
⁹tn The text has “he sent and called,” which must indicate an official summons.
¹⁰sn This is an Egyptian word (hyr-tp) that describes a class of priests who were skilled in such interpretations.
¹¹tn “there was no interpreter.”
¹²tn The form is the Hiphil participle of zakar (rkz); it carries an active sense, something like “make mention, recall.”
¹³sn The word for “sin,” hata’ (oF?), does have as the basic idea “to fail, to miss”; so what he describes in the account is what he failed to do, what he was remiss in—mentioning Joseph.
¹⁴tn Heb “dreamed a dream.”
¹⁵tn Heb “he restored.”
¹⁶tn Here again we have “sent” and “called,” reflecting a summons to the court.
¹⁷tn I.e., his outer cloak.
¹⁸tn Heb “dreamed a dream.”
¹⁹tn Heb “there is no interpreter.”
²⁰tn Heb “saying.”
²¹tn The exact expression is “you hear a dream to interpret it,” or as some have suggested, “you only have to hear a dream to be able to interpret it.
²²tn Heb “not within me.”
²³tn Heb “answer.”
²⁴tn The expression s^elom par`oh (hu)r=P^ <Olv=) is here rendered “the welfare of Pharaoh,” because the dream will be about life in his land. Some interpret it to mean an answer of peace—one that will calm his heart, or the answer that he desires.
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “when they went inside them.”
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “it could not be known.”
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “And I saw.”
<sup>28</sup>tn “all this” has been added.
<sup>29</sup>tn Heb “there was no one telling me.”
<sup>30</sup>tn “its meaning” has been added.
<sup>31</sup>tn “dream” has been added.
<sup>32</sup>tn The form is the active participle, expressing imminent future.
<sup>33</sup>tn “dream” has been added.
<sup>34</sup>tn “are also” has been added.
<sup>35</sup>tn Heb “the word that I spoke.”
<sup>36</sup>sn The word means “plenty, satiety, abundance”; it comes from the verb meaning “to be satisfied, sated.” In those seven years they will have all they need.
<sup>37</sup>tn The perfect with the waw consecutive continues the time of the future participle.
<sup>38</sup>sn The verb killah (hLk!) means “to finish, destroy, bring an end to.” The famine will be sever enough to ruin the land.
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “known.”
<sup>40</sup>tn Or “heavy.”
<sup>41</sup>tn The Niphal infinitive here is the object of the preposition; it is following by the subjective genitive: “and concerning the dream’s being repeated.”
<sup>42</sup>tn The clause uses a Piel participle and the infinitive construct in a hendiadys: God “is hurrying…to do it,” meaning he is going to do it quickly.
<sup>43</sup>tn dq@p=y^ is the Hiphil jussive of paqad (dqP), “to appoint,” followed by the cognate accusative p<sup>e</sup>qidim (<yd!q!P=), “overseers” (appointees).
<sup>44</sup>sn The language is figurative (metonymy); it means what the land produces, i.e., the harvest.
<sup>45</sup>tn Heb “hand.”
<sup>46</sup>tn This is an adverbial accusative.
<sup>47</sup>tn The last word is somewhat problematic. It is the Qal perfect with a waw consecutive, so it follows the sequence of jussives before it. The verb means “keep, preserve, guard. “Let them preserve it” works, but it seems to be isolated.
<sup>48</sup>tn The word piqqadon (/OdqP!), related to the verb paqad (dqP), means “deposit, store”; it indicates what will be held in storage for the bad years.
<sup>49</sup>tn Or “cease to exist.”
<sup>50</sup>tn Or “in the eyes of.”
<sup>51</sup>sn Wenham translates this “shall kowtow to your instruction” (p. 395). The word means “kiss,” although there is some textual support for reading “will be judged, ruled by you.” But that is probably an attempt to capture the significance of this word. Wenham lists a number of references where individuals have tried to make connections with other words or expressions—such as a root meaning “order themselves” lying behind “kiss,” or an idiomatic idea of “kiss” meaning “seal the mouth,” and so “be silent and submit to.” See K. A. Kitchen, “The Term Nsq in Genesis 41:40,” ExT 69 (1957):30; David S. Sperling, “Genesis 41:40: A New Interpretation,” JANES 10 (1978):113-119.
<sup>52</sup>tn This is an idiom, literally “at your mouth,” meaning your instructions.
<sup>53</sup>tn Heb “And Pharaoh said…”
<sup>54</sup>tn Or “I now set you.”
<sup>55</sup>sn Joseph becomes the grand Vizier of the land of Egypt, as the earlier “master of the palace” in Hebrew equates (see W. A. Ward, “The Egyptian Office of Joseph,” JSS 5 (1960):144-150; and Roland De Vaux, Ancient Israel (New York: McGraw Hill), pp. 129-131).
<sup>56</sup>sn This is an Egyptian word; it describes the fine linen robes that Egyptian royalty wore. The clothing will signify Joseph’s rank in office.
<sup>57</sup>tn The chariot of the second man in Egypt.
<sup>58</sup>sn The word ‘abrek (Er@b=o^) appears to be a causative imperative from the word barak (ErB), “to kneel.” It is a homonym of the word “bless,” identical in root letters but not related.
<sup>59</sup>tn idiom for “take action.”
<sup>60</sup>tn “God speaks and lives.”
<sup>61</sup>sn A novel was written in the time of Philo, entitled Joseph and Asenath, which included the account of the conversion of Asenath to Joseph’s faith in Yahweh. Whether factual or not, all that can be determined from this chapter is that their children received Hebrew names with a significance for his faith. See V. Aptowitzer, “Asenath, the Wife of Joseph—a Haggadic Literary-Historical Study,” HUCA 1 (1924):239-306.
<sup>62</sup>sn That is, Heliopolis.
<sup>63</sup>tn The expression is “son of thirty years.”
<sup>64</sup>sn JPS interprets this to mean that he “emerged in charge of the whole land.”
<sup>65</sup>tn Heb “by handfuls.”
<sup>66</sup>tn “saying” has been added.
<sup>67</sup>sn The name Manasseh (m<sup>e</sup>nasseh [hV#n^m=]) forms a description of the divine activity on behalf of Joseph, explaining in general the significance of his change of fortune. The name is a Piel participle, suggesting the meaning “he who brings about forgetfulness.” Martin Noth says that the name is the kind that would suggest compensation for misfortune or bereavement at the of birth which overcame the blow (PN, p. 211, n. 1). The verb nassani (yn!V^n^)! may have been used instead of the normal nissani (yn!V^n!) in Hebrew to provide a closer paronomasia with the name. The giving of this Hebrew name shows that Joseph retain his heritage and faith; and it shows a brighter future lay before him.
<sup>68</sup>tn “saying” has been added.
<sup>69</sup>sn The explanation of the name Ephraim (‘eprayim [<y!r^p=o#]) uses yn!r^p=h!, from the verb parah (hrP), “to bear fruit.” The word for fruitfulness or fruit is connected with this line of the family from Rachel (30:2) on down (see Gen 49:22, Deut 33:13-17, and Hos 13:15). So the biblical tradition links the idea with Joseph’s line in Ephraim. But there is a slight difficulty with the name Ephraim itself. It appears to be a dual, for which Delitzsch simply said it meant “double fruitfulness” (A New Commentary on Genesis, Vol. 2, p. 305). G. J. Spurrell suggested it was a diphthongal pronunciation of a name ending in -an or -am, often thought to be dual suffixes (see Diblayim in Hos 1:3; Notes on Genesis, p. 334). Many, however, simply connect the name to the territory of Ephraim and interpret it to be “fertile land” (C. Fontinoy, “Les noms de lieux en -ayim dans la Bible, UF 3 [1971]:33-40). The dual would then be an old locative ending. There is no doubt that the name became the name of the land in which the tribe settled, and it is possible that is where the dual ending came from; but in this story it has a different meaning for the fruitfulness—Joseph’s fruitfulness that came from God. The narrator thus recorded the birth report about the ancestor of the Ephraimites, and with a precise choice of expression, perhaps changing the name to the dual, incorporated the word play into the Joseph story to show the fruitfulness began with him, and then would attach to the hill country of Ephraim thanks to the blessing.
<sup>70</sup>tn The clause begins with a preterite and is subordinate to the next.
<sup>71</sup>tn The first clause is a disjunctive clause that is circumstantial to the next.
<sup>72</sup>tn Reading with the versions; the Hebrew has “he opened all that was in them.”
<sup>1</sup>tn The preterite with the waw is subordinated to the main action of the sentence as a temporal clause.
<sup>2</sup>sn The point of the question is that they should be going to get grain rather than sitting around doing nothing. Jacob, as the patriarch, still makes the decisions for the whole clan.
<sup>3</sup>tn The form is the imperfect with waw following imperatives, expressing purpose of result.
<sup>4</sup>tn The imperfect tense continues the nuance of the verb before it in this purpose clause.
<sup>5</sup>tn This could also be translated “thought,” suggesting his reasoning rather than verbal expression. But he certainly would have said something about Benjamin’s not going.
<sup>6</sup>sn The noun ‘ason (/Oso) is a rare word meaning “accident.” Apart from its use in these passages it occurs in Exodus 21:22-23 of an accident to a pregnant woman. The term is a rather general one, but Jacob was no doubt thinking of his loss of Joseph.
<sup>7</sup>tn The verb is qara’ (orq II), which means “meet, befall, encounter.”
<sup>8</sup>tn The disjunctive clause provides the reader with parenthetical information necessary to the action of the story line.
<sup>9</sup>sn Here is the beginning of the fulfillment of Joseph’s dreams of chap. 37. But it is not the fulfillment, since all his brothers and his parents must come. The point of the dream, of course, was not simply to get the family to bow to Joseph, but that Joseph would be in a rulership position to save the family—and the world.
<sup>10</sup>tn The word “faces” is an adverbial accusative, clarifying that their bowing was with their faces to the ground.
<sup>11</sup>tn The first clause is subordinated to the second as a temporal clause.
<sup>12</sup>sn The text is filled with allusions to draw the stories together and show the significance of what Joseph was doing. The first is that “he recognized them” (nakar I [rkn], “recognize”), whereas they had taken the bloody tunic to Jacob to see if he could recognize it. Then, “he disguised himself” (nakar II [rkn], “be a stranger”) before them, playing off “recognize.” But it also probably alludes to 37:18 where the word nakal (lkn) was used for their “plotting” against him. What Joseph will do in all these stories is to test his brothers to see if they have changed and have the integrity to be patriarchs of the tribes of Israel. He will do this by putting them in the same situations that they and he were in before. The first test will be to awaken their conscience—Egypt, Benjamin, loss of Joseph, a brother left in Egypt, accusation of spying—and it does awaken their consciences.
<sup>13</sup>tn Heb “said.”
<sup>14</sup>tn The verb sabar (rbv) is a denominative verb, meaning “to buy grain”; the word “food” could simply be the direct object, but may also be an adverbial accusative.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “and Joseph recognized.”
<sup>16</sup>st/ The LORD had made him forget all this with the birth of Manasseh and the rise to power, but now it all came rushing back on him. And so he wanted to see how they would react if they were accused of spying.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “nakedness.”
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “nakedness.”
<sup>19</sup>tn Heb “one is not.”
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb “saying.”
<sup>21</sup>sn Joseph uses the familiar oath formula By the life of Pharaoh to let the brothers know the certainty of what he said. There is some discussion in the commentaries on swearing by the life of Pharaoh, but since the formulation here reflects the Hebrew practice, it would be hard to connect the ideas exactly to Egyptian practices. Joseph did this to make the point that his Hebrew brothers would understand. See M. R. Lehmann, “Biblical Oaths,” ZAW 81 (1969):74-92.
<sup>22</sup>tn The verb could be translated as a simple jussive, “and let him take,” but after the imperative it probably indicates purpose.
<sup>23</sup>tn The waw disjunctive on the pronoun before the imperative introduces a circumstantial clause: Send one…while you remain.
<sup>24</sup>tn “to see if” has been added.
<sup>25</sup>sn The same word is used for Joseph’s imprisonment in 40:3,4,7. Wenham notes that there is also some mirroring going on here. The word “he gathered” (‘asap [[so]) is not normally used in a context like this, but it forms a wordplay on the name Joseph and keeps the comparison working.
<sup>26</sup>tn The verb is the imperative after the preceding imperative; such a construction could have temporal sequence “and then” but more likely logical sequence “so that.”
<sup>27</sup>sn Joseph brings God into the picture to quicken their consciences. The Godly person cares about the welfare of people, whether they live or die. So he will send grain back, but keep one of them in Egypt. This more precisely parallels the previous experience of abandoning a brother to Egypt.
<sup>28</sup>tn The disjunctive waw with the pronoun makes this clause a circumstantial clause: “and you go” becomes “while you go.”
<sup>29</sup>tn The imperfect here is an injunction.
<sup>30</sup>tn After the injunction this imperfect may be subordinated to reflect the purpose of the injunction.
<sup>31</sup>sn The verb is ‘aman (/mo) in the Niphal. The basic meaning of the word is “support, reliable”; so the Niphal has the sense of “faithful, sure, reliable.” The word “truth” (‘emet [tm#o$]) is cognate to this word. Joseph will test them to see if their words are true, i.e., he will verify their words this way.
<sup>32</sup>tn Heb “a man to his neighbor.”
<sup>33</sup>tn Or “we are guilty”; the word can also mean the effects of being guilty, so “punished for the guilt.”
<sup>34</sup>sn The verb daras (vrD) means “require.” This passage draws on the covenant stipulations of Gen 9, that is, God would require from the hands of those who shed blood. In other words, God would exact payment or punishment.
<sup>35</sup>tn “was listening.”
<sup>36</sup>sn The word “interpreter” comes from the word lis (Jyl!), “to scorn.” But since it has a wide range of meanings from “scorn to “interpret,” and is related to the noun for “satire, riddle,” the basic idea probably has to do with speaking indirectly or obliquely. See further, M. A. Canney, “The Hebrew melis (Prov IX 12; Gen XLII 2-3),” AJSL 40 (1923-24):135-137.
<sup>37</sup>tn The entire verse is introduced with a waw disjunctive and forms a significant parenthetical clause. This is the first time he had any information about their side of the treachery.
<sup>38</sup>tn “He returned / he spoke” forms a hendiadys; it also may be subordinated to the next clause, otherwise there is no indication of what he said.
<sup>39</sup>tn Probably: “had Simeon taken.”
<sup>40</sup>tn Heb “and they filled,” but this verb forms a noun clause serving as the object.
<sup>41</sup>tn This clause begins with the infinitive construct and also serves as direct object of the verb.
<sup>42</sup>tn The clause beginning with the preterite is subordinated as a temporal clause.
<sup>43</sup>tn Heb “the lodging place.”
<sup>44</sup>tn Heb “went out”; the exact meaning is unclear.
<sup>45</sup>tn Heb “a man to his neighbor.”
<sup>46</sup>tn Here is the enclitic pronoun again, adding emphasis to the question: “What in the world?”
<sup>47</sup>tn Heb “gave us, made us out.”
<sup>48</sup>tn “if we were” has been added.
<sup>49</sup>tn Heb “one is not.”
<sup>50</sup>tn “grain” has been added.
<sup>51</sup>tn The cohortative with the waw after the imperative shows purpose.
<sup>52</sup>sn A study of their report is in order. They have softened the news considerably, making it sound like Simeon was a guest of Joseph’s instead of being bound in prison, not mentioning the threat of death, and not at this time bringing up the money in the one sack. But the main idea is clear, Simeon is gone, and Benjamin will have to go with them. Their discovery of the money in each sack brought fear to them all, but a different kind of fear in the brothers than in the father. They are guilty. He sees an ominous connection between the money and the missing son. It sounds as if he suspects they sold Simeon to Egypt for their money, and that is the impression the writer wants to leave because it would have crossed the brothers minds that he thought that.
<sup>53</sup>tn The clause begins with the preterite and serves as a temporal clause to the final verb.
<sup>54</sup>tn Heb “is not.”
<sup>55</sup>tn The nuance of the imperfect is desiderative.
<sup>56</sup>sn Jacob’s emotional outburst says more than he probably knew. They brought word of Joseph, and now of Simeon, so they deprived him of his two sons. In fact, their crime did do just that. But the strong statements of Jacob trigger an emotionally excessive response by Reuben.
<sup>57</sup>tn The nuance of the imperfect is permission.
<sup>58</sup>tn Heb “my hand.”
<sup>59</sup>tn The Niphal of sa’ar (rov) describes Benjamin as the survivor of Rachel’s line, the remnant.
<sup>60</sup>sn The expression is figurative, using a part for the whole—they would put him in the grave. But the gray head signifies a long life of worry and trouble.
<sup>61</sup>tn Hebrew: sh<sup>e</sup>’olah (hlOov=).
<sup>1</sup>tn The clause is parenthetical to the storyline.
<sup>2</sup>tn The clause is a temporal clause, beginning with way<sup>e</sup>hi ka’asher (rv#o&K^ yh!y=w^).
<sup>3</sup>tn The text uses the infinitive absolute with the verb to stress the point: ha`ed he`id (du!h@ du@h); the verb means “to witness, testify.” It draws upon the oath that Joseph took, and makes the threat ominous.
<sup>4</sup>tn meaning, “have an audience.”
<sup>5</sup>tn The construction uses the undeclinable verb yes (vy@) with a suffix that serves as the subject of the participle: “if there is you sending,” or, “if you are sending.”
<sup>6</sup>tn The same construction is uses here as in the previous note, but with the negative form.
<sup>7</sup>tn The verb is the Hiphil perfect of the verb ra`a` (uur), “to be evil” in the Qal, “do wickedly” in the Hiphil.
<sup>8</sup>tn The Hiphil infinitive functions epexegetically here in the sentence, explaining how they brought evil to Jacob.
<sup>9</sup>tn “us” has been added.
<sup>10</sup>tn The construction using the infinitive absolute and the perfect of the verb sa’al (lov) emphasizes that Joseph questioned them thoroughly.
<sup>11</sup>sn The report here does not exactly match the previous account where they supplied the information to clear themselves. This section probably expresses how they remembered the impact of his interrogation, whether he asked the specific questions or not.
<sup>12</sup>tn The infinitive absolute emphasizes the imperfect tense which here is a historic future, future from the perspective of a past time—how could we know…that he would say.
<sup>13</sup>tn The historic future use of the imperfect tense, future from the perspective of past time.
<sup>14</sup>tn The two verbs form a hendiadys: “rise up and go” becomes “go immediately,” the verb “rise up” becoming adverbial.
<sup>15</sup>tn The imperfect tense follows the cohortatives and serves as the purpose of them.
<sup>16</sup>sn It is not clear how this would work out if Benjamin did not come back. But Judah is offering his life for Benjamin’s if that happens.
<sup>17</sup>sn The verb is mahah (hhm) in the Hitpael, “to linger” (same as in 19:16). After lule’ (ol@Wl) the clause is conditional. See J. Neihaus, “The Use of lule in Psalm 27,” JBL 98 (1979):88-89.
<sup>18</sup>tn The imperfect tense could be simple future instruction, but obligatory would be stronger.
<sup>19</sup>tn The hendiadys using “arise return” means get up and go, or go immediately.
<sup>20</sup>tn Heb El Shadday.
<sup>21</sup>tn After the jussive this perfect tense with the waw is subordinated as result.
<sup>22</sup>sn Several Jewish commentators have suggested that Jacob prophesied unwittingly; they say, “your brother” refers to Benjamin, “your other brother” refers to Joseph.
<sup>23</sup>tn Or “if I lose my children I lose them.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The hendiadys repeats with the verbs “they arose and went down.”
<sup>25</sup>tn The first clause beginning with the preterite becomes a temporal clause.
<sup>26</sup>sn This verse serves as a summary statement, so typical of Hebrew style. The next verses delineate intermediate steps.
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “over the matter of.”
<sup>28</sup>tn The Hithpoel infinitive construct is from the verb galal, (llG), “to roll,” and here “to roll himself upon his,” meaning to assail with overwhelming force (BDB).
<sup>29</sup>tn “take” has been added.
<sup>30</sup>tn The construction is the Qal infinitive absolute with the perfect tense for emphasis.
<sup>31</sup>tn Or “with us.”
<sup>32</sup>tn Among the options for interpreting this are: “All is well,” or “Everything is fine,” or something like “calm down.”
<sup>33</sup>sn This is the first hint at a major theme in the story, that God works through the human actions to do his will.
<sup>34</sup>tn The construction uses the infinitive construct after the preposition, followed by the subjective genitive.
<sup>35</sup>tn The action precedes the action of preparing the gift, and so calls for the past perfect translation.
<sup>36</sup>tn This is the historic future, future from the perspective of the past time: “they will eat” becomes “they would eat.”
<sup>37</sup>sn The use of l<sup>e</sup>shalom recalls the purpose of his visit to them so long ago (37:14).
<sup>38</sup>tn In addition to the verb “bow down” (hishtahawah [hw?&T^v=h!]) just used (v. 26), the text adds wayyiqq<sup>e</sup>du (WdQ=Y!w^ from ddq), “bow down” as in homage to a man of rank (BDB). The two form a hendiadys, the first becoming adverbial, signifying the meaning of the bowing down.
<sup>39</sup>tn The emphasis on looking in this manner suggests that he carefully looked all around the room. It usually indicates that what was going to be seen was important.
<sup>40</sup>sn The language has changed in this section to that which is warmer and more personal, culminating in calling Benjamin “my son.”
<sup>41</sup>sn The same expression is used in 1 Kgs 3:26 for the mother’s feelings for the endangered child.
<sup>42</sup>tn Idiomatic as in JPS; literally, “he sought to.”
<sup>43</sup>tn “food” has been added.
<sup>44</sup>sn That the Egyptians found eating with foreigners disgusting is well-attested in extra-biblical literature. The word to`ebah (hbu@OT), “abomination,” describes that which is tabu, totally loathsome, off-limits. For the Egyptians, see 46:34 and Exod. 8:22. For God, among many passages see Lev 18:22.
⁴⁵sn They were seated in order of their ages, from the firstborn to the youngest.
⁴⁶sn The verb sakar (rkv) means “to be intoxicated, be drunk.” The NIV tries to cover it by saying “drank freely” with him. But the verse says “they drank and got drunk with him.” It shows how relaxed and set at ease they now were. Plenty of alcohol covered what Joseph was doing with them, seating them in order, and showing favoritism to Benjamin. But they were comfortable with it all.
¹tn The construction to@C= /Wlk=Wy is the imperfect of yakol (lky) followed by the infinitive construct of nasa’ (oCn).
²tn The imperfect of instruction.
³tn Heb “the morning was light”; but it serves as a temporal clause to the main verb.
⁴tn The two verbs serve as a hendiadys: “they had gone out / they were not far” = “they had not gone far.”
⁵tn After the imperative this perfect with its waw consecutive would have the same nuance of instruction; however, it will here be subordinated to a parallel form that follows, also a perfect tense with waw consecutive: “and overtake / and say,” becomes “when you overtake / say.”
⁶sn The word “cup” is not mentioned in the question. The accusation was probably worded with the assumption that they would know what he was talking about.
⁷tn The construction is emphatic; the statement about divination said so emphatically was meant to impress on them how serious this theft was. It does not actually mean that Joseph did use it for divination, although he might have.
⁸tn Heb “what you have done.”
⁹tn The clause begins with a preterite and so is subordinated to the next preterite.
¹⁰tn Heb “according to these words.”
¹¹tn Heb “according to this thing.”
¹²tn “the rest of” has been added.
¹³tn The word n^eqiyim (<Y!q!n= <yq!n) means “free” of guilt and the responsibility for it, acquitted.
sn The ruling that the steward made differs somewhat from their suggestion, for it was prepared earlier. Joseph’s purpose was to single out Benjamin and let the rest go free, to see if they would abandon him too. He was not interested in enslaving them all.
¹⁴tn The two verbs form a hendiadys, “they hurried and they lowered.” Their speed in doing this shows their presumption of innocence.
¹⁵sn The narrative is already beginning to bring Judah to the fore in this scene.
¹⁶tn The disjunctive clause forms a parenthical comment.
¹⁷tn The construction is nahes y^enahes (v?@n^y= v?@n^), “fully able to divine,” with the intended meaning that he can find things out by divination.
¹⁸tn The nuance is potential imperfect.
¹⁹tn The verb is the Hithpael of sadaq (qdX), “prove ourselves just, declare ourselves righteous, prove our innocence.”
²⁰sn The first three questions are rhetorical; Judah is stating that there is nothing they can say to clear themselves. He therefore must conclude that they have been found guilty.
²¹sn Joseph now has the same expression that they used.
²²tn Heb “hand.”
²³tn “the rest of” has been added.
²⁴sn Judah’s speech begins with the fear and trembling of one who is condemned. Joseph has as much power as Pharaoh, either to condemn or to pardon. Judah will make his appeal, wording his magnificent speech in such a way as to appeal to Joseph’s compassion for the father, whom he mentions fourteen times in the speech.
²⁵tn “there is” has been added.
²⁶tn The cohortative after the imperative shows purpose.
²⁷tn meaning “actually see him.”
²⁸tn “his father” has been added.
²⁹tn The last two verbs are perfect tenses with waw consecutive. The first is subordinated to the second as a conditional clause.
³⁰tn The construction is a verbal hendiadys, using the imperfect followed by the infinitive, the infinitive becoming the main verb of the clause.
³¹tn The first clause is temporal, beginning with the temporal indicator and ki (yK!).
³²tn Heb “we are not able to go down.”
³³tn The form is a perfect tense with the waw consecutive, following the conditional clause.
³⁴tn The construction uses a perfect tense with the waw consecutive to introduce the conditional clause, the protasis, and then another perfect tense with a waw for the apodasis: “if you take / then you will bring down.”
³⁵tn Heb “evil/calamity.”
³⁶tn Heb Sheol.
³⁷tn Heb “his life is bound up in his life.”
³⁸tn The temporal clause beginning this verse is made with the temporal indicator w^ehayah (hyhw=) and the infinitive construct with the preposition.
³⁹tn The verb is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, drawing upon the preceding future time clauses for its time.
⁴⁰tn The form is the perfect tense with the waw consecutive, continuing the sequence.
⁴¹tn Heb Sheol.
⁴²tn The Hebrew has “lest I see,” which expresses a negative purpose—”I cannot go up lest I see” is the idea.
⁴³tn Or “sorrow.”
⁴⁴tn Heb “find.”
¹tn Or “his attendants.”
²tn Heb “stood.”
³tn The text has, “and he gave his voice in weeping”; it means that he let go, that he did not try to refrain from weeping, but wept aloud.
⁴tn Both constructions simply say “heard.”
⁵tn Heb “let it not be hot in your sight.”
⁶sn The tension remains in their minds, and in ours, how their wickedness and God’s intentions work together. Clearly, God is able to change the actions of wickedness to some gracious end. But this is saying more than that; it is saying that from the beginning it was God who sent him here. Although harmonization of these ideas remains humanly impossible, what should be the focus is the divine intention. Only that will enable reconciliation.
⁷tn Heb “in the midst of.”
⁸sn The repetition of this theme that God sent him is reminiscent of commission narratives in which the leader could announce that God sent him (e.g., Exod 3:15).
⁹tn The verb sum, sim (<WC, <yC!) means “place, put, establish,” and here, followed by lamed (l=) means “to make,” that is “to make you a remnant.
¹⁰tn The verb is Hiphil infinitive, giving a second purpose clause.
¹¹sn The words “remnant” and “deliverance” occur frequently together, e.g., Exodus 10:5. Joseph is here seen as a Noah figure, called to save the race by a great deliverance.
¹²tn The two imperatives “hurry” and “go up” form a hendiadys, the first becoming adverbial.
¹³tn The verb is perfect tense with waw consecutive; it is either instruction or future.
¹⁴sn The verb w^ekilkalti (yT!l=K^l=K!w=) is from a verb kul (lWK), which in the Qal means “contain, comprehend,” but in the Pilpel here it means “nourish, support, sustain.” 1 Kings 20:27 as here means “supply with food.”
¹⁵tn Heb “my mouth.”
¹⁶tn The Hiphil perfect with the waw carries the force of imperfect of instruction.
¹⁷tn The two verbs, both perfect tenses with waw consecutives, form a hendiadys: “hurry / bring down.”
¹⁸tn Heb “sound.”
¹⁹tn Heb “was good in the eyes of.”
²⁰tn Two imperatives: l^eku bo’u (Wob)-Wkl=), both meaning “go.”
²¹tn The imperative with waw shows the result of the cohortative “I will give.”
²²tn “to say” has been added.
²³tn This and the next verb are perfect tenses with waw consecutive, in sequence with the imperative.
²⁴tn Heb “do not regard.”
²⁵tn Heb “mouth.”
²⁶sn This is the outer garment, the one useful for many things. It was such a cloak that the brothers used to deceive their father, so this could have been a gesture of reconciliation as well as generosity.
²⁷tn Heb “like this, according to this.”
²⁸tn The verb ragaz (zgr) means “stir up”; in Prov 29:9 it has the connotation of “quarrel”; but in Exod 15:14 and frequently elsewhere it means “fear”—either of robbers, or of the future with him in Egypt. As Wenham says, these two interpretations are not mutually exclusive.
²⁹sn The idiom means that he was stunned, the heart signifying the will which was stopped, or grew faint. The reason was that he could not believe the news. He was overwhelmed by the news and unable to respond.
³⁰tn The perfect tense as a potential perfect might fit better the response of Jacob, for it is more idiomatic—he could not believe it.
³¹tn These clauses beginning with the preterites are subordinated as temporal clauses to Jacob’s response.
¹tn Heb “and he journeyed.”
²tn The clause begins with a preterite and is subordinated to the next clause as a temporal clause.
³tn The construction uses a cognate accusative to emphasize the action of the main verb.
⁴tn The plural form has the singular meaning, probably as a plural of intensity.
⁵tn ‘El (lo@, but here with the article).
⁶tn The form is the infinitive construct of yarad with a prefix mem.
⁷tn The use of the independent pronoun and the infinitive absolute with the Hiphil imperfect strongly emphasizes the statement: “I, I will surely bring you up.”
⁸sn Literally, “will put his hand upon your eyes.” This is a promise of peaceful death with Joseph present to close his eyes.
⁹tn Heb “arose.”
¹⁰tn Heb “with him.”
¹¹tn The MT has Iob (bOy); but SP and some Greek manuscripts have Jashub (Num 26:24; 1 Chr 7:1).
¹²tn Heb “all the lives of his.”
¹³tc MT has Ziphion; see Num 26:15, SP and LXX.
¹⁴sn It is questionable whether the “young” Benjamin had 10 sons by the time he went into Egypt, but it is not impossible. If Benjamin was born when Joseph was six or seven, he was ten when Joseph was sold into Egypt, and 32 at this point. Some suggest that the list originally served another purpose, and included the names of all who were in the immediate family of the sons, whether born in Canaan or Egypt.
¹⁵tn Heb “tied, bound.”
¹⁶tn The form is a preterite; it is subordinated to the next preterite as a temporal clause.
sn The verb form “and he appeared to him” is usually used for God in the OT. Its use here may underscore the honor and importance of Joseph.
¹⁷tn Heb “feeders of sheep.”
¹⁸tn Heb “men of livestock.”
¹⁹sn Joseph is apparently trying to stress to Pharaoh that his family is self-sufficient, that they will not be a drain on the economy of Egypt. They have kept animals for ages. But they will need land for their animals; and so on the edge of Egypt, in Goshen, they could live their life. The settled Egyptians were uneasy with nomadic people, and so if Israel settled in Goshen they would be no threat.
²⁰tn Heb “men of cattle.”
¹tn Heb “come.”
²tn The particle hinneh (hN@h!) suffixed is used for the force.
³tn The verb is gur (rWG), “to sojourn, to live temporarily.”
⁴sn The expression “able men” is ‘anse hayil (ly!?^ yv@n=o^), “men of skill”; this is the same expression used in Exodus 18:21 for the choice of elders.
⁵tn Heb “make them rulers.”
⁶tn Heb “caused him to stand.”
⁷sn The precise meaning of the verb is difficult in this passage, because the contents of what Jacob said that was a blessing are not given. The expression could simply mean that he greeted Pharaoh, but that seems insufficient for the use of this word, unless the greeting involved something greater than normal greetings. Rather, it should be interpreted that he praised Pharaoh (as part of a greeting too), for the verb is used this way for blessing God. But it is also possible that he offered some blessing oracle because Pharaoh had blessed them through Joseph.
⁸tn Heb “How many are the days of the years of your life?”
⁹tn Heb “the days of.”
¹⁰sn The word is “evil,” but that would give the wrong connotation. The word ra` (ur^) describes evil in the sense of pain, calamity, difficulty, sorrow. He is thinking back through all the sorrows and troubles he has had to endure to get to this point.
<sup>11</sup>tn Heb “the days of.”
<sup>12</sup>sn The word for “possession” is a “holding.” He gave them a plot of land with rights of ownership in the land of Goshen.
<sup>13</sup>sn The name Rameses is another designation for the region of Goshen, named Rameses because of the city in that region (Exod. 1:11). The use of this name may be a modernization of the text for the understanding of the readers, substituting a later name for the earlier; or, there may have been an earlier Rameses for which the region was named. See J. J. Bimson, Redating the Exodus and Conquest (Sheffield: JSOT, 1978).
<sup>14</sup>sn The verb wattelah (Hl^T@w^), is from a root lahah (Hhl) which means “faint, languish”; it figuratively describes the land as wasting away, drooping, being worn out.
<sup>15</sup>sn The verb laqat (Fql) is used of gleaning in the fields, picking up every grain or stalk that was left by the reapers. So Joseph was scraping up every piece of money left.
<sup>16</sup>tn “payment” has been added.
<sup>17</sup>tn Heb “house.”
<sup>18</sup>tn The first clause is subordinated as a temporal clause before the main clause of the verse.
<sup>19</sup>tn The figure is metonymy of subject, all the people of Egypt.
<sup>20</sup>tn The deliberative use of the imperfect.
<sup>21</sup>tn “food” has been added.
<sup>22</sup>tn The definite article is translated here as possessive pronoun.
<sup>23</sup>tn The clause beginning with a preterite is subordinated to the main clause.
<sup>24</sup>sn The idea of “slaves” or “servants” does not sit well with the modern mind. But in the ancient world it was the primary way of dealing with the poor and destitute. If they became slaves, i.e., servants actually, then it was Pharaoh’s responsibility to feed them and care for them. It was the best way for them to survive the famine.
<sup>25</sup>tn The imperfects after the imperative take on the nuance of purpose or result.
<sup>26</sup>tn The MT has “and he removed the people to the cities,” which does not make a lot of sense in the verse. The SP and the Greek have “he made them slaves for slavery” (or bondage).
<sup>27</sup>tn The perfect tense with the waw consecutive functions as the equivalent of a command or injunction; it follows the foundational clause introduced with hen (/h@).
<sup>28</sup>tn The verse begins with the temporal indicator, “and it will be.”
<sup>29</sup>tn “the crop” has been added.
<sup>30</sup>tn The perfect tense with the waw is in sequence to the future of the previous clause; it is equivalent to the imperfect of instruction or injunction.
<sup>31</sup>tn Heb “and for your eating.”
<sup>32</sup>sn P. Victor, “A Note on Hoq in the Old Testament,” VT 16 (1966):358-361.
<sup>33</sup>tn “which is in effect” has been added.
<sup>34</sup>tn Heb “And Israel lived.”
<sup>35</sup>tn The verb means that they acquired property, took possession of the land with all the rights (cf. 47:11).
<sup>36</sup>sn The motifs from the beginning of creation are now brought forward to the blessing on the family of Israel. Exod 1 will reiterate this.
<sup>37</sup>tn Heb “And Jacob lived.”
<sup>38</sup>tn Heb “the days of.”
<sup>39</sup>tn Heb “days.”
<sup>40</sup>sn See Gen 24:2.
<sup>41</sup>tn Or “deal with me in faithful love. “Loyal love and truth” is often a hendiadys.
<sup>42</sup>tn Heb “lie down.”
tn The verb is a perfect tense with waw consecutive; it forms the temporal clause for the following perfect tense with waw consecutive, which is equal to an imperfect of instruction.
<sup>43</sup>sn The verb normally means “bow down,” especially in worship. Here it might simply mean “bend low,” perhaps from weakness. But since there is no explanation given for what he did, it is too hard to come to a conclusion.
<sup>44</sup>tn The Greek text understood this word as “staff”, and interprets that Jacob worshipped at the top of his staff. That is the translation used by the writer of the Letter to the Hebrews (11:21). This difficulty is part of the larger problem of inter-testamental quotations in which the NT often uses the LXX (Greek OT).
<sup>1</sup>tn With no expressed subject the verb can be made passive in voice.
<sup>2</sup>tn The preterite “and he [one] told” has no expressed subject, and could be given a passive translation. It also introduces a temporal clause, subordinated to the main clause to follow.
<sup>3</sup>tn hinneh (hN@h!).
<sup>4</sup>tn Heb El Shadday (‘el sadday [yD^v^-lo@]).
<sup>5</sup>tn The participle following hinneh (hN@h!) has the nuance of a certain and often imminent future.
<sup>6</sup>tn Now the verbs become perfect tenses with waw consecutives to carry on the certain future idea.
<sup>7</sup>tn Or “seed.”
<sup>8</sup>sn The word describes a permanent holding in the land, occupation and possession with all the rights. It is the same word that was used for the land given to them in Goshen.
<sup>9</sup>sn Jacob is here adopting his two grandsons as his sons, and so they shall have equal share with the other brothers, They will be in the place of Joseph and Levi (who will become a priestly tribe) in the settlement of the land. See I. Mendelsohn, “A Ugaritic Parallel to the Adoption of Ephraim and Manasseh, IEJ (1959):180-183.
<sup>10</sup>tn Heb “called, named.”
<sup>11</sup>sn This means that they will be incorporated into the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh.
<sup>12</sup>tn the text simply has “upon me, against me,” which is the adversative use of the preposition (Williams, Hebrew Syntax).
<sup>13</sup>tn The clause begins with the preterite; it is subordinated as a temporal clause to the next.
<sup>14</sup>tn The Piel cohortative with the sequential waw has the nuance of purpose after the imperative.
<sup>15</sup>tn Heb “heavy.”
sn The disjunctive clause forms a parenthesis necessary for the rest of the story. The weakness of Israel’s sight is one of several connection between this chapter and chap. 27. Here there are two sons, and it appears that the younger is being blessed over the older by a blind old man. While it was by Jacob’s deception in chap. 27, here it is with Jacob’s full knowledge.
<sup>16</sup>tn Heb “he;” the referent (Joseph) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
<sup>17</sup>tn The verb is pillalti (yT!l=L^P!), from palal (llP). In this stem it usually means “mediate, judge”; so the idea would probably be “judge, have the opinion, expect” to see your face. See E. A. Speiser, “The Stem pll in Hebrew,” JBL 82 (1963):301-6, where he argues that it means “to estimate” as in Exod 21:22.
<sup>18</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>19</sup>sn The two boys had probably been standing by Jacob’s knees when being adopted and blessed.
<sup>20</sup>tn The disjunctive clause is circumstantial, a concessive clause.
<sup>21</sup>tn Or “guided me.”
<sup>22</sup>sn The verb ga’al (loG) has the basic idea of “protect” as a kinsman redeemer. It is used for buying someone out of bondage, marrying the widow, paying off debts, avenging the family, and the like. The meanings of “deliver, protect, avenge” would be most fitting when God is the subject (see A. R. Johnson, “The Primary Meaning of the Root Ga’al,” VTSupp 1 (1953):67-77).
<sup>23</sup>tn Or “be recalled through them.”
<sup>24</sup>tn The preterite introduces a temporal clause before the main verb.
<sup>25</sup>tn Heb “it was bad in his sight.”
<sup>26</sup>tn Heb “seed.”
<sup>27</sup>tn Heb “fullness.”
<sup>28</sup>tn Or “pronounce this blessing.”
<sup>29</sup>sn See E. C. Kingsbury, “He Set Ephraim Before Manasseh,” HUCA 38 (1967):129-136; H. Mowvley, “The Concept and Content of `Blessing’ in the Old Testament,” BiTr 16 (1965):74-80; and I. Mendelsohn, “On the Preferential Status of the Eldest Son,” BASOR 156 (1959):38-40.
³⁰tn The pronoun is plural in the Hebrew text.
³¹tn The pronoun is plural in the Hebrew text.
³²tn The pronoun is plural in the Hebrew text.
³³sn The word is s^ekem (<k#v=). It could be translated “shoulder, portion, or Shechem.” Jacob was giving Joseph one portion above his brothers, or the mountain ridge he took from the Amorites, or Shechem. Or all three, for the ambiguity allows that. He could be referring to the land in Shechem he bought in chap. 33, but he mentions here the warfare, and that would refer to chap. 34 (even though at the time he denounced it). But when Joshua conquers the land he was free to go right to Shechem and cut the covenant, And, Joseph was later buried in Shechem (Josh. 24:32).
¹tn The Hiphil cohortative with the waw shows the purpose of the Niphal imperative before it.
²sn This expression is found most frequently in prophetic passages; it may refer to the end of the age, the eschaton, or to the distant future. The contents of some of the sayings in this chapter stretch from the immediate circumstances to the time of the settlement in the land to the coming of Messiah. There is a great deal of literature on this chapter: start with Carl Armerding, “The Last Words of Jacob: Genesis 49, “ BSac 112 (1955): 320-28; Helmuth Pehlke, “An Exegetical and Theological Study of Genesis 49:1-28,” Dallas Theological Seminary Dissertation, 1985; and B. Vawter, “The Canaanite Background of Genesis 49,” CBQ 17 (1955):1-18.
³sn The noun pahaz (z?^P^) only occurs here. A related verb occurs twice in the prophets (Jer. 23:32; Zeph. 3:4) for false prophets inventing their messages, and once in Judges for unscrupulous men bribed to murder (9:4). It would describe Reuben as “frothy, boiling, turbulent” as water. LXX has “run riot”; Vulgate as “poured out”; and Targum Onkelos has “you followed your own direction.” It is a reference to his misconduct in chap. 35, but the simile and the rare word invite some speculation for the connection. Pehlke suggest “destructive like water,” for he acted with pride and presumption and disregarded the godly order.
⁴tn rt^OT-lo^, the Hiphil of yatar (rty), only has this meaning here. The prophecy says that because of the character of the ancestor, the tribe of Reuben would not have the character to lead (see 1 Chr 5:1).
⁵tn This is a euphemism for having sexual intercourse with his wives.
⁶tn The last verb is third masculine singular, as if for the first time Jacob told the brothers, or let them know that he knew.
sn See Stanley Gevirtz, “The Reprimand of Reuben,” JNES 30 (1971):87-98.
⁷tn The last word <h#yt@r)k@m= is difficult. It has been rendered “habitations, merchandise, counsels, swords.” If it is from the verb karat (trK) and formed after noun patterns for instruments and tools (maqtil, miqtil form), then it would be “knives.” Since the verb is used in Exod 4:25 for circumcision, then the idea would be “their circumcision knives.” And that fits Gen 34. This is the view of M. Dahood, “`MKRTYHM’ in Genesis 49,5,” CBQ 23 (1961):54-56.
<sup>8</sup>sn Hebrew uses the word “glory” for the self, the person, parallel here to “soul.” The verbs are second person, for he is addressing himself.
<sup>9</sup>sn To curse their anger is to curse them with the anger. What is predicted here is a division and a scattering. Most commentators see here an anticipation of Levi being in every area but not their own. That may be part of it, but not entirely what the curse intended. These tribes for their ruthless cruelty would be eliminated from the power and prestige of leadership.
<sup>10</sup>sn The word play is effective: Y<sup>e</sup>hudah (hdWhy=) means “he will be praised,” and the verb in the line is cognate to it, yoduka (;WdOy), “they will praise you.” The name is a Hophal, but the verb a Hiphil. The sounds are reflected in the next part as well with “your hand,” yad<sup>e</sup>ka (;d=y). His power will be the reason for the praise.
<sup>11</sup>sn The word “feet” is here a euphemism; the line is meant to say that there will also be a descendant from the line of Judah who will be heir to the throne.
<sup>12</sup>sn The word “Shiloh” is difficult; it has been the focus of many discussions and suggestions. Some prefer to leave it as it is, siloh (hl)yv!) with the understanding it is the place where the ark rested for a while in the time of the Judges. By repointing the text others arrive at the translation “tribute” (Wenham), or “ruler” (Westermann). The interpretation “to whom it [belongs]” relies on the versions. It would mean the rightful heir to the throne. This fits the context very well and makes good sense.
<sup>13</sup>sn See J. Blenkinsopp, “The Oracle of Judah and the Messianic Entry,” JBL 80 (1961):55-64; and E. M. Good, “The `Blessing’ on Judah,” JBL 82 (1963):427-32.
¹⁴tn The verb is a perfect tense; in this oracle it would best be prophetic perfect, anticipating this coming king.
sn The abundance of wine is a sign of the paradisiacal splendor of the Messianic age—everything will be in abundance, Jesus’ first sign was changing the water to wine (Jn. 2), a sign that the Messiah was present.
¹⁵sn Some translate these as comparatives, “darker than wine,” and so a reference to his appearance. But if it is in the age of abundance, of wine and milk, then the dark eyes would be from the wine, and the white teeth from the milk.
¹⁶sn The verb means “to settle,” but not necessarily as a permanent dwelling place. The tribal settlements by the sea would have been temporary and not the tribe’s territory.
¹⁷tn The form is preterite, as are the next two verbs in this verse; they must be equivalent to the prophet perfects.
¹⁸sn The oracle shows that this tribe will be willing to trade liberty for the material things of life; Issachar would work for the Canaanites, a reversal of the oracle on Canaan (see Calum M. Carmichael, “Some Sayings in Genesis 49,” JBL 88 [1969]:435-44; and Stanley Gevirtz, “The Issachar Oracle in the Testament of Jacob,” ErIs 12 [1975]:104-112).
¹⁹sn The verb forms a wordplay on the name: Dan means “judge”; and the verb yadin (/yd!y) is simply the imperfect tense of the word.
²⁰sn The connection to a venomous serpent is meant to say that Dan, although small would be potent, gaining victory through its skill and shrewdness. Jewish commentators have linked the image in part with Samson. That link at least illustrates the point: though a minority tribe, it would gain the upper hand over others.
²¹sn There are many suggestions in the commentaries as to what to do with this verse. The simplest understanding is that in the middle of the oracle Jacob prays, especially seeing the conflicts in a tribe like Dan, that lie ahead.
²²sn The verse has several word plays. The first clause reads: Gad g^edud y^egudennu (Wnd#Wgy= DwdG= DG), and the second clause uses yagud (dg%y). The verse uses the verbs gud (dWG), “overcome, attack,” and gadad (ddG), “cut off” > “marauding bands”.
²³sn The word “fat” when applied to products of the ground means abundant in quantity and quality.
²⁴sn The word “delicacies” (ma`adanne [yN@d^u&m < /d#u@]) refers to foods that were delightful, the kind fit for a king.
²⁵sn Almost every word in the verse is difficult. Some take it to mean that Naphtali will be swift and agile, and be used to take good messages (reading “words of beauty”). Others argue that the tribe was free-spirited, but then settled down with young.
²⁶tn The expression trP) /B@ is difficult. It seems to say “a son of fruitfulness.” The second word is an active participle, feminine singular, from the verb parah (hrP), “to be fruitful.” The translation “bough” is chosen for /B@ because Joseph is pictured as a vine growing by the wall, healthy and fruitful. But there are difficulties with this interpretation. The word “son” is nowhere else translated as a plant. And the noun “branches” (literally “daughters”) is a plural here whereas its verb is singular. And in the other sayings an animal is used and not a plant. So Speiser suggested the noun was “wild ass,” and the plural (“daughters”) is taken as “wild asses” and “wall” becomes “hillside.” For this verse other theories have been given, from seeing the inclusion of the Ishmaelites in the word “hillside”, to a wordplay on Ephraim (ben porat [trP) /B@]) or to see Joseph as successor to Pharaoh. There are as many difficulties with the newer suggestions, and so the simpler idea of his fruitfulness will be retained.
²⁷tn Heb “daughters.”
²⁸tn While the verbs in this verse and the next are past tense, they probably are prophetic perfects referring to the future based on the past attacks that were overcome.
²⁹tn Heb “and he shall help you.”
³⁰tn Heb “and he shall bless you.”
³¹sn There are alliterations between “heaven” (samayim [<y!m^v]) and “breast” (sadayim [<y!d^v]), “deep” (t^ehom [<OhT=]) and “womb” (raham [<?^r]).
³²tn Heb “have prevailed over.”
³³tn The MT has yr^Oh, “my progenitors.” But the term for “progenitors” is “conceivers” and that is without parallel for fathers. And the parallel passage in Deuteronomy 33:15 has the consonants hrry (yrrh) suggesting here the r (r) was confused for a w (w). So “hills” would be a better reading, and form a parallel with the next clause.
³⁴sn See Isaiah Sonne, “Genesis 49:24-26,” JBL 65 (1946):303-306.
³⁵tn The preterite here is subordinated as a temporal clause to the main clause preceding it.
³⁶tn Heb “his blessing.”
³⁷tn The Niphal participle after the subject pronoun expresses the certain future.
³⁸tn The preterite serves to introduce the temporal clause.
¹sn The expression reflects Joseph’s unrestrained sadness over the death of Jacob; he probably threw himself across the body and embraced his father.
²tn Heb “for thus are fulfilled the days of embalming.”
³sn This probably means a time of national mourning.
⁴tn Heb “weeping.”
⁵tn The first clause with its preterite is subordinated to the second with its preterite as a temporal clause.
⁶tn Referring to the royal court.
⁷tn Heb “in the ears of Pharaoh.”
⁸tn Imperfect of injunction.
⁹tn The second cohortative is here subordinated to the first as a purpose clause.
¹⁰tn The cohortative now expresses resolve, a promise to return.
¹¹tn Heb “camp.”
¹²tn The clause beginning with the preterite is again subordinated to the main idea.
¹³sn The language does not make the location certain. The expression “across Jordan” could be either way, depending on one’s perspective. However, it is commonly used in the OT for Trans-Jordan. This would suggest that the cortege came up the Jordan Valley and crossed into the land at Jericho—as the Israelites would later.
¹⁴tn The cognate accusative certainly emphasizes their lamentation; but the two adjectives and the adverb indicate it was a very great lamentation.
¹⁵tn The first clause with its preterite is subordinated to the next main clause.
¹⁶tn The verb has no expressed subject and so is made passive.
¹⁷sn The word play on the name serves to retain the event in the memory. The name ‘abel misrayim (<y!r^X=m! lb@o) probably once meant “the meadow of Egypt.” But the very mention of that name would now recall the “mourning of Egypt,” ‘ebel misrayim (<y!r^X=m! lb#o@).
¹⁸tn Heb “And his sons.”
¹⁹tn The first clause with its preterite is subordinated to the main clause.
²⁰tn The imperfect tense could be a simple future; it could also have a desiderative nuance.
²¹tn The construction makes use of the Hiphil infinitive absolute and the Hiphil imperfect to stress “repay fully.”
²²tn The verb means “command”; but they would hardly be commanding him. It probably means they sent their father’s instructions to Joseph.
²³tn Heb “spoke.”
²⁴tn Heb “For am I”
²⁵sn The verb is hasab (bv?), “to device, plan, think.” The word recalls the earlier chapters where the thoughts and intents of the heart are evil.
²⁶sn The major motifs of good and evil come to a dramatic climax in the book here.
²⁷tn This Hiphil infinitive construct serves epexegtically, explaining the previous verb.
²⁸tn Heb “nourish, provide food.”
²⁹tn Heb “spoke to their heart.”
³⁰tn Heb “saw Ephraim, the children of the third.”
³¹sn This expression implies their adoption by Joseph.
³²sn The verb paqad (dqP) means “to visit,” i.e., to intervene for blessing or cursing; here he announces that God would come to fulfill the promises by delivering them from Egypt. The statement is made certain by the use of the infinitive absolute with the verb: “God will surely visit you.” The OT itself falls silent with the promise that God would visit His people; and that was fulfilled with the incarnation, the “visitation from on High” in the words of Zacharias. And furthermore, the NT closed with the promise of a great visitation from heaven at the end of the age.
³³tn The perfect tense with the waw carries the same nuance as the specific future before it.
³⁴tn The Hiphil perfect with the waw consecutive has the force of an imperfect of injunction.
³⁵tn Heb “son of a hundred and ten years.”
³⁶tn The preterite is subordinated as a temporal clause.