On Election in The Book of Genesis
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
A Thesis for the Master of Theology Program in Hebrew Bible / Old Testament
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter
53 Body Pages }
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis ______ Introduction to A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis 1-2
The Primeval History: Genesis 1:1 – 11:26 3-19
The Abraham Cycle: Genesis 11:27 – 25:18 19-36
The Jacob Cycle: Genesis 25:19 – 35:22
36-40 Mariakis Nicholas Emmanuel HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research The Joseph Cycle:D.Genesis – 50:26 Professor Andrew35:23 Teeter 40-45 Conclusions: The Nature and Purpose of Election in Genesis 45-53
Bibliography 54-60
53 Body Pages }
1
Introduction to A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis The book of Genesis, the beginning of the Hebrew Bible, is an inexhaustibly rich text that itself describes a series of beginnings. The creator-God fashions the material world, crafting the heavens and the earth, governing it with lightness and darkness, day and night, waters above and below, and places within it a sundry mix of floral and faunal creations that inhabit the Deity’s canvas. The playfully imaginative work of God culminates in the formation of humanity, of hāʾādām,A who, unlike theofother material creatures, bears the likeness the divine (1:26-27). Theology Chosenness: On Election in the ofBook of Genesis Though the human creature is set apart as particularly unique amongst the other beasts and flying creatures, ʾĔlōhîm blesses the whole of his inventive creaturely artistry and commands both the animals and image-bearers to “be fruitful and multiply” – important language that Genesis employs throughout the course of the narrative (1:22-28).1 The singularly exceptional humanity, though, alone is chosen to rule within and over God’s carefully devised world (1:28). Writing of Genesis 1:1-2:4a in Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts, Michael Fishbane notes that the pericope “provides a reflection of an orderly, harmonious creation.”2 Everything, thus far, is pleasant and good, and when “the work [of creation] was completed,” writes James Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis 3 Kugel, God enjoyed “the first HDS Sabbath in the world” (1:31; 3999-11: Reading and 2:2-3). Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter Inherent to such harmony is both the symbiotic dynamic between the floral, faunal and human realms, and within humanity itself. The writer of Genesis envisages this “first phase”4 of the human experiment to espouse unity. Humanity, hāʾādām, is conceived as one, and as such, the sum of image-bearing humankind shares a divinely-imbued kinship. For the author of Gene1
Unless noted otherwise, all translations belong to the author.
2 Michael Fishbane, Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts (New York: Schocken Books, 1979), 8. 53 Body Pages }
53.
3
James L. Kugel, The Bible as It Was (Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1997),
Joseph Blenkinsopp, Creation, Un-Creation, Re-Creation: A Discursive Commentary on Genesis 1-11 (London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2011), 1. 4
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
2
sis, this point is vital and should shape how one reads the narratives that follow, both from Genesis 2 through 50, as well as the Hebrew Bible overall. These early chapters of Genesis, notes Eckhard J. Schnabel, demonstrate that “God's purposes are relevant for the entire world and for all human beings,” while framing “the universal context for Israel’s story.”5 Such universality is likewise observed by Professor Jon D. Levenson. In his essay entitled, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” he writes, “The placement of the story of cosmic creation by God (’elo-
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
him) at the beginning of the entire Bible (Gen. 1:1-2:3) establishes a universal horizon for the particular story of Israel, which occupies most of the rest of that sacred book.”6 Indeed, though Genesis regards image-bearing humanity as universally fraternally related, the book nevertheless tells the story of elect individuals such as Abraham and the other patriarchs – specially chosen individuals who form Israel, the specially unique nation for which God maintains a “mysterious love.”7 The following biblical-theological study will examine election within Genesis synchronically across the text, structured according to the book’s unfolding cycles in the Primeval History and ancestral narratives, and culminating with summary conclusions regarding Genesis’ theology of election. This thesis proposes to demonstrate that election is a central focus Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis of the entirety of the book ofHDS Genesis and isReading a highlyand nuanced and sophisticated doctrine, one 3999-11: Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter which is a divine act with human actors that is multi-aspectual in its nature and purposes.
5 Eckhard J. Schnabel, “Israel, the People of God, and the Nations.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45, no. 1 (2002): 35. 53 Body Pages }
Jon D. Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” edited by Mark G. Brett, in Ethnicity and the Bible, Biblical Interpretation Series; v. 19. (Leiden: Brill, 1996), 146, cf. 147. 6
Joel S. Kaminsky, “Did Election Imply the Mistreatment of Non-Israelites?” The Harvard Theological Review 96, no. 4 (2003): 424, 425. 7
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
3
The Primeval History: Genesis 1:1 – 11:26 { Chapter 1:1-2:4 } Though the writer of Genesis could have initiated the text alternatively, the author chose to start the book by drawing attention to God as a cosmic designer. “In the beginning,” writes the narrator, “God created the skies and the land”8 (cf. 2:4). God wills, and it is so. ʾĔlōhîm chooses to be creative. Indeed, to produce this delightfully strange world born of his divine imagination,
A Theology OnactElection the“theBook God must first elect to of do Chosenness: so. This generative of makinginthe skies of andGenesis the land” or the “heavens and the earth” confirms God as both the world fashioner and divine ruler who main-
tains a distinct vertical relationship to his created order. Writing of God’s ultimate supremacy, Bill Arnold states that one of the “theme[s] to remember from the Primeval History is the unchallenged sovereignty of God.”9 God as creator and divine sovereign are both necessary preconditions in the act of biblical election. As Genesis 1:1-2:4 attests to YHWH as the “creating and sustaining God”10 who is thus capable of electing, might there be indications of election within this opening sequence of the book? Is election a theological concept that only begins to emerge later in Genesis? Richard J.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis Clifford addresses the topic of election with respect to Genesis 1 (and 2:1-4) in his 2013 article HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor called “Election in Genesis 1.” In the piece, D. he Andrew “exploresTeeter the surprising fact that Gen. 1 contains
covert references to several defining features of Israel, viz., the Sabbath, the temple, the dietary laws, and the conquest.”11 If so, such could shape one’s reading of Genesis 1 onward.
8
בראשית ברא אלהים את השמים ואת הארץ
9 Bill T. Arnold, Introduction to the Old Testament. Introduction to Religion (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 80. Emphasis added. 53 Body Pages } 10 Arnold, 80.
Richard J. Clifford, “Election in Genesis 1,” edited by Gary A. Anderson, and Joel S. Kaminsky, in The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson, Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity; v. 19 (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2013), 7. 11
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
4
For Clifford, Genesis 1, with its seven-day or “heptadic structure,”12 looks forward to both the Primeval History through to the ancestral narratives and beyond.13 Day seven, in particular, God’s cessation from labor, points to “the text’s profound theocentrism.”14 God-centric as the text is, “The new world is deliberately put in parallel to the heavenly world and its inhabitants while remaining quite distinct from it.”15 Clifford’s preliminary analysis of the role of structure serves to set up his survey of the four features in question. First, Clifford looks to connections On between God’s resting 2:2 andoftoGenesis the larger instituA Theology of Chosenness: Election in thein Book
tion of Sabbath, which permeates the Hebrew Bible, and is articulated in the Decalogue (Exod. 20:9-11; Deut. 5:12-15). Genesis 2:2 reads, “And God completed on the seventh day his work that he had done. And he rested on the seventh day from all his work that he had done.”16 Israel’s “observance of [the Sabbath],” writes Clifford, “becomes a sign that they are God’s people, imitating his manner of acting by the way they structure their week.”17 Participation in this divinely ordained covenant rest served as a marker to distinguish Israel from the larger group of nations as well as “proclaiming God’s sovereignty to the Gentile world.”18 Second, Clifford observes parallels between passages from Genesis 1 and the book of Exodus, which set the creation account in comparison with the tabernacle. Building on previous Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research work from Levenson,19 Clifford briefly discusses some ofTeeter these salient correspondences: Professor D. Andrew
Jon. D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988), 66ff. 12
13 Clifford, “Election in Genesis 1,” 8. cf. David Andrew Teeter, “Genesis 1,” HDS 1102: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament 1: Pentateuch and Former Prophets (class lecture, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, September 24, 2020). 14
Clifford, 9.
15
Clifford, 9.
16
Bodyעשה Pagesאשר } ויכל אלהים ביום השביעי מלאכתו ביום השביעי מכל־מלאכתו אשר עשה53וישבת
17
Clifford, 13.
18
Clifford, 13.
19
Levenson, 82-86. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
5
Correspondences Between Creation in Genesis 1:31, 2:1-3, and the Tabernacle 20 Genesis 1:31 // Exodus 39:43
//וירא אלהים את־כל־אשר עשה והנה־טוב מאד ויהי־ערב ויהי־בקר יום הששי׃ וירא משה את־כל־המלאכה והנה עשו אתה כאשר צוה יהוה כן עשו ויברך אתם משה׃ Genesis 2:1 // Exodus 39:32
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
//ויכלו השמים והארץ וכל־צבאם׃
ותכל כל־עבדת משכן אהל מועד ויעשו בני ישראל ככל אשר צוה יהוה את־משה כן עשו׃ Genesis 2:2 // Exodus 40:33b–34
//ויכל אלהים ביום השביעי מלאכתו אשר עשה וישבת ביום השביעי מכל־מלאכתו אשר עשה׃
ויכל משה את־המלאכה׃ פ ויכס הענן את־אהל מועד וכבוד יהוה מלא את־המשכן׃ Genesis 2:3 // Exodus 39:43 Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter
//יברך אלהים את־יום השביעי ויקדש אתו כי בו שבת מכל־מלאכתו אשר־ברא אלהים לעשות׃
וירא משה את־כל־המלאכה והנה עשו אתה כאשר צוה יהוה כן עשו ויברך אתם משה׃ Genesis 2:3 // Exodus 40:9
//ויברך אלהים את־יום השביעי ויקדש אתו כי בו שבת מכל־מלאכתו אשר־ברא אלהים לעשות׃
ולקחת את־שמן המשחה ומשחת את־המשכן ואת־כל־אשר־בו וקדשת אתו ואת־כל־כליו והיה קדש׃ } 53 Body Pages Clifford, 14-15; cf. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence, 82-86. 20
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
6
In comparing between Genesis 1:31 and Exodus 39:43, there appears a parallel between God and Moses, each respectively taking sight of all of their work; in Genesis 2:1 and Exodus 39:32, the completion of the skies and the land is set in comparison with the completion of the tabernacle of the tent of meeting; in Genesis 2:2 and Exodus 40:33b–34, God and Moses each complete their creational work; in Genesis 2:3 and Exodus 39:43, God and Moses provide blessing – the former blesses the seventh day, the latter, the “sons of Israel”; and in Genesis 2:3 and Exodus 40:9, God
On Election intabernacle the Book sanctifies A theTheology seventh day,of as Chosenness: Moses is commanded to anoint the andoftoGenesis sanctify its various cultic vessels and accouterments. In addition to the observations of Clifford and Levenson, Fishbane likewise notes these important intertexts. Recalling the work of Martin Buber, Fishbane writes, “a final compositor wished to direct the attentive hearer-reader (‘Horleser’) to a correspondence between worldbuilding and shrine-building, and therewith convey his theological insight that it is the task of mankind to extend and complete on earth the divine work of creation.”21 Moreover, Fishbane lays forth additional connections between the creation and the tabernacle narrative: first, both employ the “rare expression” rûaḥʾĔlōhîm ()רוח אֹלהים, the Exodus usage being with regard to the Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS Reading andsecond, Research tabernacle artisan Bezalel (Gen. 1:2;3999-11: Exod. 31:3; 35:31); both contexts, cosmos and tabernaProfessor D. Andrew Teeter cle, are distinctly interested in Sabbath cessation (Gen. 2:2; Exod. 35:2).22 For Clifford, “Genesis 1 foreshadows its construction” and “aligns the construction of the temple with the construction of the universe, making the Jerusalem temple a memorial of creation.”23 The third comparison that Clifford draws is with respect to the dietary laws within Leviticus. Zeroing in on the eleventh chapter of Leviticus, he states: Limiting ourselves for the moment to the P dietary laws in Leviticus 11, we can see that many of the criteria refer to animal means of locomotion, including hoofs (Lev. 11:2–8), 53 Body Pages } 21
Fishbane, 12.
22
Fishbane, 12.
23
Clifford, 15. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
7
fins and scales (Lev. 11:9–12), wings (Lev. 11:20–23), paws (lit. ‘hands,’ Lev 11:27), ways of creeping on the ground (Lev. 11:29), ways of crawling on the belly, and ways of walking on four legs (Lev. 11:41–42). Genesis 1 classifies animals by their locomotion and Lev. 11 develops the classification into criteria. Genesis 1 and Lev. 11 also share vocabulary, e.g., šāraṣ [שרץ, swarming, Gen. 1:20, Lev. 11:29], rāmaś [רמש, creeping, Gen. 1:21, Lev.
11:44], ḥāyāh [חיה, living, Gen. 1:24, Lev. 11:2, 27], and le˘mînāh [למינה, according to its kind, Gen. 1:20, Lev. 11:29].24
For Clifford, these “laws’ connection to Israel, the elect people, is only implicit and allusive,” however, such as the intertextual connections to the Sabbath and the temple.25
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Lastly, Clifford takes note of the rare term, kābaš ()כבש, to subdue,26 which features once in the creational imperative of Genesis 1:28 – “be fruitful and multiply, and fill the land and subdue it”27 – as well as three times in the conquest narratives (Num. 32:22, 29; Josh. 18:1; cf. 2 Sam. 8:11).28 He balks at interpretations of the word that strip it of its forceful semantic thrust and instead reads it as he does vis-à-vis the conquest narratives.29 For Clifford, this anticipates these subsequent episodes, of the seizing of the land by means of force.30 These notable correspondences lead him to the following supposition. Clifford writes, If allusions to Israel are indeed locked in Gen. 1, the fact has implications for the meaning of election in the Bible. The Gen. 1 allusions to Israel have been read in at least two Nicholas Mariakisto insiders that God’s real interest ways. According to the first, Gen. 1Emmanuel is communicating HDS 3999-11: Reading and in creating the world was Israel; others nations areResearch mentioned, but they are present only Professor D. Andrew Teeter as backdrop and audience for God’s business with Israel. According to the second, the foreshadowing means that from the beginning there existed a complementarity between the elect nation and the other nations.31
24
Clifford, 16-17.
25
Clifford, 16-17.
26
The verb occurs only fourteen times throughout the Hebrew Bible.
27
פרו ורבו ומלאו את־הארץ וכבשה
28
Clifford, 18.
29
Clifford, 19-20.
30
Clifford, 20.
31
Clifford, 8.
53 Body Pages }
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
8
Assuming that it is the subtle intention of Genesis’ author that the elect people of Israel are in view, it is still important to keep in mind Levenson’s point that “in both creation accounts at the beginning of Genesis (1:1-2:3 and 2:4-24), it is humanity in general and not any people in particular that is created. Israel is not primordial,” but rather “emerges in history” with the calling of Abraham. 32 The early accounts in Genesis speak of “human solidarity.”33 { Chapter 2:5-3:24 }
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
The very act of creation itself perhaps intimates something of the elective act, and it could be that the writer of Genesis is anticipating later explicit elections across the book through God’s formation of humanity. In Genesis 2:7, YHWH-God then fashions the primordial human, suggesting an elect position for Adam: “And the LORD-God shaped the human of dust from the ground, and he breathed into his nostrils a breath of life, and the human became a living being.”34 Similar language is used of God’s formation of Israel, such as in Isaiah 43:1, wĕyōṣerkā Yiśrāʾēl ()ויצרך ישראל, and is elsewhere employed in Isaiah 44:21, 45:11, as well as in Jeremiah 18:6. Outside of Genesis, yāṣar ( )יצרis used with respect to universal humanity (Zech. 12:1) along Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis with creation at large ( Jer. 51:19), but not concerning specific nations besides Israel. Benedikt HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter Otzen observes that Isaiah 43:7 uses two other creation verbs in addition to yāṣar, both bārāʾ ()ברא, and ʿāśâ ()עשה.35 He notes that the context of this Isaianic verse contains key deliverance and election terms as gāʾal ( ( )גאל43:1), ʿāzar ( ( )עזר44:2), bāḥar ( ( )בחר43:20; 44:1f), and a
a
32
Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” 147.
33
Levenson, 147.
34
9a
53 Body Pages }
וייצר יהוה אלהים את־האדם עפר מן־האדמה ויפח באפיו נשמת חיים ויהי האדם לנפש חיה
Benedikt Otzen, “יָ ַצר,” in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, Vol. 11 (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1990), 263. 35
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
9
ʾāhēb ( ( )אהב43:4).36 He writes, “the primordial creation of Israel is seen in the same perspective a
as its present deliverance; both concepts coalesce in the notion of election.”37 Though Israel does not form until the election of Abraham, nevertheless, such “Familiar motifs associated with the idea of salvation and election are joined here with the idea of creation.”38 Other aspects of the Eden narrative perhaps anticipate the forthcoming national election. After the creator forms the protohuman and places the image-bearing creature within the garden
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
of Eden to “work it and to guard it” ()לעבדה ולשמרה,39 YHWH-God commands the human to abstain from a lone tree, the “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (( )עץ הדעת טוב ורע2:1517). The creator causes to fall “a deep sleep upon the man” ()תרדמה על־האדם, and from his ṣēlā ()צלע, crafts a suitable companion which hitherto he could not find (2:18-25). Outside of Genesis, ṣēlā is primarily used for cultic architectonics like the tabernacle and the temple, as well as for furnishings such as the ark of the covenant (Exod. 25:10-12, 14; 26:20; 1 Kgs. 6:5, 8, 15; Ezek. 41:5-11). Heinz-Josef Fabry remarks that “some interpreters understand ṣēlāʿ here too as a term Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis from sacral architecture.”40 Acknowledging that such an interpretation is disputed among scholHDS 3999-11: Reading and Research ars, he continues, writing, Professor D. Andrew Teeter J has thus portrayed the creation of man and woman in terminology designed to evoke associations with the construction of the sanctuary. The Yahwist’s intention is twofold. Theologically, the Yahwist suggests that human beings come to the fulfillment for which they are destined by creation only as man and wife, and as “God’s temple” (cf. 1 Cor.
36
Otzen, 263.
37
Otzen, 263.
38
Otzen, 263.
53 Body Pages }
Although “keep” is a common rendering of šāmar ( )שמרhere, the semantically appropriate “guard” was instead chosen because of the larger context, that is, the looming and threatening serpent figure in 3:1ff. 39
Heinz-Josef Fabry, “צ ָלע,” ֵ in Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, ed. G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, Vol. 12 (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2003), 402. Emphasis added. 40
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
10
3:16). During his own age, the Yahwist is also responding to the anticipated construction of the temple of Solomon.41 Moreover, of further import from the Eden narrative is that the writer conceives of a close dwelling relationship between God and the early image-bearers. God communicates with the humans (2:16-17; 3:9ff) and is portrayed as walking among them (3:8). This dwelling motif perhaps connects the creation narrative in Genesis 1:1-2:4 to the objective of the roving tabernacle. “And I will reside in the midst of the sons of Israel,” says YHWH-God, “and I will be to them
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
their God” (Exod. 29:45; cf. 40:35b, “for the cloud resided upon [the tent of meeting]” [)]כי שכן עליו הענן.42 This close relationship between God and Humanity 1.0 (the Deity’s first human program, regime, or system of relations between God and his image-bearers)43 deteriorates with the couples’ eating from the forbidden tree, and who then become subject to death (3:3-7). They are expelled from Eden, and so begins the next phase of the saga: life outside of the garden where the ground is now cursed (3:17). Yet, there is hope – a coming zeraʿ ( )זרעfrom Eve to crush the serpent, albeit the meaning of which is murky (3:15). YHWH’s prognostication in verse 15 may function as “a parable concerning the principle of evil,” writes Umberto Cassuto, who
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis refers to the temptation of Cain in 4:7.44 Gerhard von Rad, contra early Christian interpreters, HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter does not see a messianic proto-Gospel (Protoevangelium) in 3:15.45 Ultimately, the divine pledge of zeraʿ will feature prominently through Genesis in the patriarchal promise episodes. As such, 3:15 perhaps suggests and foreshadows forthcoming divine elective acts (12:7; 26:3; et al.). 41 42
Fabry, 402-403.
ושכנתי בתוך בני ישראל והייתי להם לאלהים
Humanity 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 nomenclature derived from lectures by Professor David Andrew Teeter, HDS 1102: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament 1: Pentateuch and Former Prophets (class lectures, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA). 53 Body Pages } 43
Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part One, From Adam to Noah, Genesis I-VI. Translated by Israel Abrahams ( Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1961), 161. 44
45
1972), 93.
Gerhard von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary, Old Testament Library (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
11
Before proceeding outside the garden, it bears mentioning that the Genesis text describes Eden as a place of plentiful life-giving water. Eden is “indirectly” portrayed as a “cosmic mountain,”46 and from its elevated and lush topography goes forth a single river that divides into four rivers, rivers that are associated with the peoples which feature in the Table of Nations in chapter 10 (2:10-14; cf. Ezek. 28:13-14). The Pishon extends to Havilah (2:11; cf. 10:7, 29), the Gihon extends to Cush (2:13; cf. 10:6-8), and the Tigris proceeds east of Assyria (2:14; cf. 10:11, 22). In Genesis 15:8, God includes the Euphrates in his covenantal promise Abram. That the A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book oftoGenesis
river from Eden “becomes fourfold” and global “thus evok[es] universalism,” writes Thomas L. Brodie.47 The creator-God’s beneficence extends to all peoples within his creation, not merely the elect. Terje Stordalen calls this the “blessing capability of the garden.”48 { Chapter 4:1-26 } The divine promise of seed from 3:15 comes to preliminary fruition with the births of Cain and Abel (4:1-2). Dianne Bergant notes the text’s “play on the sound of ( קַ֫יִ ןqayin; Cain) and the verb ( ָקנָ הqānâ; produced),49 as well as ( ַקנָּ אqanāʾ; jealous), which describes Cain’s disNicholas Emmanuel Mariakis ֶ֫ ; hebel) means ‘ephemeral’ or ‘short-lived,’ a porposition.”50 She continues, writing, “Abel (ה ֶבל HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter tent of what is to come.”51 The narrative proceeds to set in contrast the brothers whereby Abel’s vocation is announced as ancient animal husbandry, while Cain’s is farming (4:2). As hinted by Cain’s portentous name, YHWH accepts Abel’s “offering” ()מנחה, born from the “firstborn of his 46
Fishbane, 17.
47
Thomas L. Brodie, Genesis as Dialogue (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 140.
Terje Stordalen, “Man, Soil, Garden: Basic Plot in Genesis 2-3 Reconsidered,” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 17, no. 53 (1992): 17. 48
Albeit qānâ generally means to “acquire” “get.” 53 Body or Pages } Francis Brown, Samuel Rolles Driver, and Charles Augustus Briggs, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977), 888. 49
50
Dianne Bergant, Genesis (Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2013), 20.
51
Bergant, 20. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
12
flock” ()מבכרות צאנו, but refuses Cain’s (4:3-5). Bergant continues, “Cain, on the other hand, simply brings ‘an offering of the fruit of the ground’ (4:3), not necessarily the firstfruits as the law prescribes (Exod. 23:19). The difference in the character of the sacrifices might explain God’s preference of one over the other.”52 Perhaps, indeed, the writer of Genesis is pointing the reader towards the value of proper sacrifice, or rather that the land had been cursed, which thereby precluded such an offering (3:17).53 However, is there another explanation?
A his Theology of Yet Chosenness: OnReclaiming ElectiontheinBiblical the Book of ofGenesis In 2007 text, I Loved Jacob: Concept Election, Joel S.
Kaminsky states that the Hebrew Bible’s “most explicit and developed statements” pertaining to Israel’s election are found in Deuteronomy and Deutero-Isaiah.54 However, he initiates his “study of the Bible’s election theology with the Genesis stories of brotherly struggle,” which, he argues, “have much to say about Israel’s understanding of her chosenness.”55 Kaminsky begins his exegesis with Cain and Abel, preferring to view them as twins due to the text’s singular usage of yādaʿ ( )ידעin verse 1, along with the fact that the “story shares a host of similarities to the Jacob and Esau episode.”56 As the human-fashioningNicholas God is relational with Adam and Eve, so too is he with Cain Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research following his rejection of the elder’s offering (4:6-7). Kaminsky finds this point salient, writing, Professor D. Andrew Teeter “That Cain and God are having an intimate conversation suggests that the non-acceptance of
Cain’s offering does not mean that Cain is utterly alienated from God or somehow cursed, but only that he is not specially blessed.”57 God accepts the younger brother’s offering, on the other
52
Bergant, 20.
Joel S. Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob: Reclaiming the Biblical Concept of Election (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007), 20. 53
54
Kaminsky, 20.
55
Kaminsky, 20.
56
Kaminsky, 21.
57
Kaminsky, 24.
53 Body Pages }
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
13
hand, because Abel is chosen to make such an oblation, thus occupying the space of the elect. Cain flatly dismisses God’s direction and summarily murders his brother (4:7-8). Kaminsky then introduces an important category useful for understanding the proceeding cycles and the dynamic between the elect and those among the nations. He writes, “Cain appears to occupy a type of middle ground best described by the term ‘non-elect,’” and as such, “God’s blessing flows through the world in mysterious ways that, while merciful, are not, strictly speak58 Joseph Blenkinsopp, however, does not think the question of Abel’s election can ing, equitable.” A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
be answered, instead looking to an interpretation that he trusts adheres more closely to the bibli-
cal text. He favors an interpretation related to suitable offerings.59 Though this may be the case, the writer would be deferring until Noah to portray the first clear instance of election. Following Cain’s slaying of his brother, Cain is subsequently “cursed from the ground”60 and settles in Nod, to the east of the Eden (4:9-16). Though he fears being killed, and by whom the text does not say, YHWH provides a “sign” that Cain will not be struck (4:14-15). The following verses 17-24, detail Cain’s progeny, particularly noteworthy being Lamech, who follows in the likeness of Cain as a violent killer, establishing a trajectory for humankind in Genesis (4:23-24). The chapter concludes with a flash of hope,Emmanuel a son to replace Abel. Seth is born to the primordial Nicholas Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research couple, and “the status of the electProfessor instead passes to theTeeter latest born,” writes Kaminsky.61 AddiD. Andrew tionally, the final line of the chapter speaks to the inclusive nature of worship: “then [humanity] began to call upon the name of YHWH” (4:26c).62 Writing of this era before Abraham, Levenson writes, “It is significant that the primeval history (Genesis 1-11) presents humankind as primor-
58
Kaminsky, 24.
59
Blenkinsopp, 92.
60
This may challenge Kaminsky’s understanding of Cain’s position, though not the category of non-
61
Kaminsky, 25.
elect itself.
62
53 Body Pages }
אז הוחל לקרא בשם יהוה Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
14
dially monotheistic and, in fact, YHWHistic.”63 Even those outside the elect lineage may have a relationship with the creator. { Chapter 5:1 - 9:29 } Genesis 5:1 features the first tôlēdôt ( )תולדותformula for humankind (cf. 2:4), detailing the ten-generation lineage from Adam to Seth onward. The death that God warned of in 2:17 and 3:3-4 permeates the human condition. Successive generations are subject to return to the dust
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
(3:19). Though death becomes an essential feature for humanity, God nonetheless blesses the totality of humanity, which looks back to God’s universal blessing and creational imperative in 1:28. The text of 5:2 reads, “male and female he made them, and he blessed them, and called their name ‘humanity’ on the day they were made.”64 In 5:29, the tôlēdôt directs to Noah, who is presented as a crucial figure who will bring about comfort ( )נח״םfrom humanity’s painful toil stemming from the cursed ground in 3:17 (5:29).65 Writing of this passage, Fishbane writes, “There can be no doubt that this text was intended to balance the curse to the first man, Adam in Genesis 3:17…Noah is thus portrayed as a new Adam, a provider of hope and comfort east of Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research By chapter 6, “Evil has become cosmic its scope,” writes Terence Fretheim,67 and God Professor D. in Andrew Teeter
Eden.”66
devises what will result in the de-creation of the earth through a catastrophic, overwhelming deluge (6:1-7, 11-13). Noah, however, in verse 8 is one who “found favor in the eyes of YHWH,” and who is depicted as a “righteous” ( )צדיקand “blameless” ( )תמיםfigure in the following line.68 63
Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” 148.
64
זכר ונקבה בראם ויברך אתם ויקרא את־שמם אדם ביום הבראם
65
Fishbane, 31.
66
Fishbane, 31.
53 Body Pages }
Terence E. Fretheim, New Interpreters Bible: Genesis to Leviticus, edited by Leander E. Keck. Vol. 1. (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1994), 384. 67
68
ונח מצא חן בעיני יהוה
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
15
YHWH commands Noah to construct an ark, a large floating vessel of deliverance that preserves his wife and the lives of his sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth (6:10). He is also instructed to stock the watercraft with sundry animals evoking language from the Genesis creation accounts (6:9-20). The plans for the ship will echo Eden; the preserved remnant shall dwell in close proximity with animal-life that will, in postdiluvian time, become fruitful and multiplied (1:22; 8:17). Before the forthcoming flood, God promises to establish with Noah the first “covenant” (bĕrît; ברית ) in Genesis. I will establish covenantin with saysof theGenesis LORD, “and you A Theology of“And Chosenness: Onmy Election theyou,” Book will come into the ark, you, and your sons, and your wife, and the wives of your sons with you” ( 6:18).69 As such, Noah becomes the next elect70 figure in the Genesis saga. He is Humanity 2.0, a
through whom the funneled human lineage will continue. The de-creational torrent is detailed in 7:11-8:13, in which God surely “eliminated every living thing which was upon the face of the ground” (7:23).71 ʾĔlōhîm commands Noah to exit the ark with his family along with the menagerie of preserved beasts (8:15-17). The divinely chosen Noah is blessed by God, along with his sons, and is commanded to “be fruitful and multiply,” thereby lookingEmmanuel back to God’s universal blessing upon humanity in Nicholas Mariakis
HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research 1:28 (9:1, 7). 9:9-17 describes the establishment of the Noahic Covenant, which is decreed for Professor D. Andrew Teeter not only Noah but for all his descendants and “all flesh which is upon the land” (9:9, 17).72 9:6 also reaffirms that each human being bears the divine likeness, for all are in the “image of God” (( )צלם אֹלהים1:28). Additionally, Levenson states, “The relatedness of the members of the hu69
והקמתי את־בריתי אתך ובאת אל־התבה אתה ובניך ואשתך ונשי־בניך אתך
Carol M. Kaminski, Was Noah Good: Finding Divine Favor in the Flood Narrative (London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2014), 13. Writing of the reason for Noah’s election, Kaminski writes, “According to J, Noah is not righteous at the time he is shown divine favour, thus the reason for his election is a mystery based ultiBody Pages } mately in God’s sovereign choice. In contrast to53 J, however, the priestly writer understands Noah’s election to be based on his prior righteousness,” 13. 70
71
יקום, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 879. וימח את־כל־היקום אשר על־פני האדמה
72
ויאמר אלהים אל־נח זאת אות־הברית אשר הקמתי ביני ובין כל־בשר אשר על־הארץ Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
16
man family to each other and to God is underscored and formalized” by means of this “eternal covenant.”73 Moreover, Levenson notes the Rabbinic tradition in which the Noahide laws “serv[e] as the functional equivalent of natural law, specifying the seven commandments incumbent upon all humanity.”74 Following the institution of the Noahic Covenant, the narrative turns to the immediate and anticipated decline of Humanity 2.0. Noah’s drunkenness provides an opportunity for Ham to look upon “the nakedness” of his father,On which results inin thethe swift cursing his son Canaan A Theology of Chosenness: Election Book of of Genesis
(9:21-26).75 The texts describes what his role will be – “And [Noah] said, ‘Canaan is cursed, a ser vant of servants he will be to his brothers” (9:25).76 Canaan’s lineage, the group called by his name, is what Joel Kaminsky deems the “anti-elect.”77 This is his third broad category in the Hebrew Bible’s election scheme. He refers to these anti-elect people as “the Other,” which are “deemed to be enemies of God.”78 Chapter 9 also includes the following striking point that highlights human unity – the narrator states that the sons’ lineage was dispersed upon “the whole land,” thus setting up chapter 10 onward (9:18-19).
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research 73 Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” 147. Professor D. Andrew Teeter
Levenson, 148. The Noahide laws are detailed in: David Novak, The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism: The Idea of Noahide Law. 2nd ed. (New York: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 201), 11. Novak describes the earliest source: “The first explicit presentation of the Noahide laws is found in the Tosefta, a work dated to the late second century. The text reads: ‘Seven commandments were the sons of Noah commanded: (1) concerning adjudication (dinim), (2) and concerning idolatry (avodah zarah), (3) and concerning blasphemy (qilelat Ha-Shem), (4) and concerning sexual immorality (giluy arayot), (5) and concerning bloodshed (shefikhut damim), (6) and concerning robbery (hagezel), (7) and concerning a limb torn from a living animal (ever min ha-hy).’” 74
The rationale for Canaan’s cursing is subject to debate and multiple interpretations, notes Cassuto. Additionally, the writer of Genesis A finds a contextually-grounded solution in Genesis 9, remarking that Ham could not be cursed because he was already blessed (Frag. 1-3, Col. II, line 7; cf. 9:1, 27). Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part One, 153-155. 75
76
53 Body Pages } ויאמר ארור כנען עבד עבדים יהיה לאחיו
Joel S. Kaminsky, “Election Theology and the Problem of Universalism,” Horizons in Biblical Theology, 33 (1) (2011): 38. 77
78
Kaminsky, 38. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
17
{ Chapter 10:1-32 } Genesis 10:1 features the third anthropological tôlēdôt formula, detailing the generations of Noah’s sons (cf. 5:1; 6:9). Noah’s scions repopulate the once flood-ravaged land. “These are the families of the sons of Noah and their generations,” writes the author, and “From these, the nations separated in the land after the flood” ( 10:32).79 Each son’s lineage becomes a gôy ()גוי, a naa
tion (10:5, 20, 31-32). This Table of Nations looks both forward and backward. It looks forward
of Chosenness: On Election in thedistant Bookancestors of Genesis towards A theTheology human project’s future, and backward to the people’s (the primordial couple), and further behind these two towards the creational imperative of 1:28 (blessed fruitfulness and multiplication – with a possible veiled reference to Israel’s “subduing” of Canaan). 1:28 may anticipate the dispersing peoples in chapter 10. Japheth’s line spreads out from the coastlands (10:2-5). Ham’s line includes noteworthy nations which lie outside the boundaries of the favored elect: from Cush’s son Nimrod comes Babel, “in the land of Shinar” – Nimrod later builds Assyria and Nineveh (10:6-12; cf. Judg. 10:6); from Ham comes Egypt whose descendants, the Casluhim, are the progenitors of the Philistines – a point which the narrator emphasizes (10:6, 10; cf. 15:4; Exod. 7:5; Judg. 10:6); Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis from Ham comes Canaan, who is the forebearer of who becomes the Jebusites, the Amorites, and HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter the Girgashites (10:6, 15). These nations disperse into the territory towards Sodom and Gomor-
rah, and moreover, these peoples will feature in the land committed to Abraham (10:15-19; 15:18-21). Of the Hamite lineage, Allen P. Ross writes, “the preoccupation with the Canaanites in the land of promise shows the concern of the writer to fit the Table to the message of the book: the fulfillment of God's promise to bless Israel as a nation in that land, and to bless those nations that bless her, and curse those who are antagonistic to her.”80 Shem’s line is the last de53 Body Pages } 79
אלה משפחת בני־נח לתולדתם בגויהם ומאלה נפרדו הגוים בארץ אחר המבול
Allen P. Ross, “The Table of Nations in Genesis 10: Its Content: Part 3 of Studies in the Book of Genesis,” The Bibliotheca Sacra, 138 (549) (1981): 31. 80
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
18
tailed (10:21-31). His son Arpachshad features conspicuously in chapter 11. He is the genealogical vector through whom Israel's election comes. Lastly, concerning the envisaged unity of humanity as depicted in the Table of Nations, Blenkinsopp’s commentary on chapter 10 is particularly instructive. He writes, The unity of the human race is expressed symbolically in the number 70 which – omitting the Philistines (Gen. 10:14), as a later gloss – is the sum total of the names of the personified territories and peoples in the list. To this seventyfold macrocosm corresponds the microcosm of the 70 Israelites in Egypt (Gen. 46:27; Exod. 1:5; Deut. 10:22) and their 70 A Theology of Chosenness: elders (Exod. 24:1; Num. 11:16).81 On Election in the Book of Genesis Ross acknowledges that the Table evidences this human unity while also recognizing its nuanced complexity. “The pattern of the Table is segmented rather than linear,” he writes, and “it is designed to show blood ties, treaties, alliances, and other connections between existing peoples.”82 Despite non-elect status, the peoples in chapter 10 nevertheless flourish per 1:28. { Chapter 11:1-26 } Chapter 11:1-9 narrates the Tower of Babel episode. The inhabitants of all the land are said to possess “one language and one [set of ] words,” and this collective ability to communicate with one another enables the people to congregate (11:1-2).83 Narratively, the location is set in Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Shinar, which traces back to Nimrod’s multipart kingdom of Babel, Erech, Accad, and Calneh Professor D. Andrew Teeter (10:9-10). These non-elect peoples plan and begin to architect and engineer “a city and a tower with its top in the skies,” intending to make “for themselves a name” (11:3-4). Such a proposal contrasts against 4:26, of calling on the name of YHWH (while perhaps anticipating 12:2, YHWH’s plan to make great Abram’s name). The telos for this grand civic project is that the people not be scattered across the land, which appears to contravene God’s creational imperative of 53 Body Pages } 81
Blenkinsopp, 156.
82
Ross, 31.
83
שפה אחת ודברים אחדים Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
19
1:28 ( 11:4). Brodie takes notice of this as well.84 YHWH’s response comes in verses 5 through 9. a
God sees their oneness and singular tongue, and proceeds to scatter the people across the land. The Deity confounds ( )בללtheir language (11:9). Such, in effect, forces a differentiation of nonelect people groups. Gerhard von Rad observes this separating too, as the “scattered” people are “broken up into a great number of individual nations”85 dispersed away from Babel. Iain Provan writes his views of the narrative’s relevance:
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
The Table of Nations and the ‘Babel incident’ together provide the immediate backdrop for the story of Genesis that follows from Genesis 11:27 onwards. The peoples of the ancient world have now been assigned their proper places; we await the entrance of Abraham, descendant of Shem, which in Hebrew actually means ‘name.’ 86 Now, the nations have been driven outward, fulfilling God’s creational intent and looking onward towards the election of Abram, whose name will be made great by YHWH (12:2). The narrative in 11 then proceeds to the tôlēdôt formula of Shem’s chosen line, which closes with Terah, the father of Abram, Nahor, and Haran (11:10-26). The Abraham Cycle: Genesis 11:27 – 25:18 { Chapter 11:27-12:1-20 }
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading Research87 which includes Lot, the son The Abraham cycle begins with Terah’s tôlēdôt and in 11:27-32, Professor D. Andrew Teeter of Haran. The family resides in Ur of the Chaldees (the land of their “relatives” or “kindred”; môledet; )מולדתprior to venturing towards Canaan (the land of the anti-elect; cf. Lev. 18:3; Zeph. 2:5). They settle in Haran, thus framing the call of Abram in the following chapter. It is significant that the chosen line has shared affinity with the nation of the Chaldeans, which looks back to 1:27-28 and 9:6, echoing the universality of the human creation. Additionally, as some 84
Brodie, 197.
85
von Rad, Genesis: A Commentary, 150.
53 Body Pages }
Iain Provan, Discovering Genesis: Content, Interpretation, Reception, Discovering Biblical Texts (DBT), (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2016), 130. 86
87
Provan, 166. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
20
commentators note, “Ur and Haran were thriving centers of moon worship; thus it is probable that the theological milieu in which Abram lived for a good bit of his life was one in which the cult focused its adoration on moon worship.”88 The soon-to-be divinely-elected father of Israel comes from a non-elect people, demonstrating that in God’s economy, election is not predicated strictly upon genetics. Similarly, Kaminsky rejects viewing “election as simply an assertion of ethnic superiority.”89 Moreover, in these final verses of 11, the reader learns that Sarai, Abram's wife, is infertile, a curious twist to Genesis’ divine (11:30).in Instead of being and multiA Theology of Chosenness: Ondrama Election the Book of fruitful Genesis plied (1:28; cf. 9:6-7), the yet elect family is subject to infertility, elevating the drama to unfold.
God’s summoning of Abram marks the next phase of YHWH’s special redemptive program. Here, the Deity begins afresh with Humanity 3.0. The first three verses of chapter 12 contain the crucial initial iteration of the divine oath towards Abram: YHWH said to Abram, “Go from your land, and from your relatives, and from the house of your father to the land that I will reveal to you. And I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make great your name – and you will be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, and those who debase you, I will curse. And they will bless themselves in you, all the families of the earth” (12:1-3 ). a
ויאמר יהוה אל־אברם לך־לך מארצך וממולדתך ומבית אביך אל־הארץ אשר אראך Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis והיה ברכה ואעשך לגוי גדול ואברכך ואגדלה שמך HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research (12:1-3 ) ואברכה מברכיך ומקללך אאר ונברכו בך כל משפחת האדמה a
Professor D. Andrew Teeter
Here, in this election episode of Abram the patriarch, several salient points can be distilled from the promise that forecasts the direction of the developing Genesis narrative. First, God directs Abram away from the land of Haran and apart from his kin group, but the Deity does not specify to the future patriarch to where he is leading him (though the destination is hinted in 11:31 – Canaan – the location is key with respect to election). Second, YHWH informs Abram, who is currently childless, that he will become a significant people (cf. 11:30). His name
53 Body will likewise be remarkable and God shall bless Pages him. }In turn, Abram will be a blessing. Third, 88
Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17 (Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1990), 268.
89
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 35. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
21
those who bless Abram will somehow partake in these divine blessings. The text anticipates that some groups, however, will opt instead for a measure of animus against YHWH’s elect. Joel S. Baden notes the interpretive difficulty of these lines and sees the inflected forms of gādal ( )גדלand bārak ( )ברךfrom verses 2 and 3, respectively, as cohortatives, which yields something less like an absolutely divine guarantee and something more akin to a compact. He writes,
Theology Chosenness: Onprimarily Election the Book YA HWH 's speechof here can be read not as ain promise but as of an Genesis agreement: Abraham will go from his homeland; as he does so, YHWH will bless him in standard ways; Abraham will behave in such a way as to be worthy of blessing, both in terms of YHWH's blessing of him and the nations citing him as an example; and YHWH will bless those who bless Abraham and curse those who curse him. This puts YHWH and Abraham in the position of partners in a joint undertaking…one in which both sides are equally responsible for fulfilling their set of actions.90
As the Abraham cycle progresses, the text does suggest the weight of this elect personage’s responsibility vis-à-vis the nations. Moreover, Baden regards the niphal of bārak in verse 3 to be operating reflexively rather than passively.91 Levenson also notes that “the form of the verb indicates reciprocity or reflexivity,” calling attention to 12:3b as “Probably the most controversial Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter
Joel S. Baden, “The Morpho-Syntax of Genesis 12:1-3: Translation and Interpretation,” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly 72, no. 2 (2010): 224, 237. 90
Baden, 232, 233. Cf. Joel S. Baden, The Promise to the Patriarchs (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 80, 83, 85; In “Hithpael and Niphal in Biblical Hebrew: Semantic and Morphological Overlap,” he writes, 91
“As has long been noted, the phrase ‘all the nations of the earth will bless themselves by you’ and its variants appears with both the niphal and the hithpael of the verb ברך. The distribution, moreover, is equal: the niphal appears in Gen. 12:3; 18:8; 28:14, while the hithpael is used in Gen. 22:18; 26:4; Jer 4:2. Because of this distribution, the meaning of the niphal in these formulae has been debated at great length. Given the rarity of the passive use of the hithpael, as noted above, as well as the fact that the three examples from Genesis are the only attestations of the niphal of ברךin the Bible, it seems more plausible to read these niphal forms as reflexive, Pages } rather than assume either that the hithpaels are53toBody be read as passive or that the promise formulae were intentionally written differently in their various occurrences.” Joel S. Baden, “Hithpael and Niphal in Biblical Hebrew: Semantic and Morphological Overlap,” Vetus Testamentum 60, no. 1 (2010): 36. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
22
clause in the call and commission of Abram.”92 Ed Noort, in his piece, “Abraham and the Nations,” concurs with the reflexive understanding held by Baden and Levenson.93 Benjamin J. Noonan balks at such an interpretation of these verbal forms, regarding “the Niphal stem (Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 28:14) [to be] best translated as medio-passive (‘be blessed’ or ‘become blessed’), not reflexive.”94 The difficulties of rendering this particular niphal notwithstanding, what is clear from 12:1-3 is that the elect Abram, as part of the divine arrangement, is instructed to be a blessing. “You willAbeTheology a blessing”of (ברכה )והיהsays Y HWH , and those will in, turn reChosenness: On Election inwho the bless BookAbram, of Genesis ceive blessing from the LORD – “And I will bless the one who blesses you” ()ואברכה מברכיך. The scenario at hand is one in which this elect individual somehow yields positive benefits towards the other image-bearers with whom he interacts and has relations. Following YHWH’s direction, the seventy-five-year-old Abram, with his wife Sarai, depart for Canaan along with his nephew Lot and the goods and persons that they accumulated in Haran (12:4-5). At the time of the caravan’s arrival in the land at Shechem, the narrator makes apparent that at that juncture, “the Canaanite was in the land” ( ( )והכנעני אז בארץ12:6d). Brodie a
95 The text appears to be drawing the regards this revelation as an unanticipated Nicholas “dissonant Emmanuelnote.” Mariakis
HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research reader back to 9:25-27 to the cursing of the anti-elect Canaan. In verse 7, YHWH says to the fuProfessor D. Andrew Teeter ture father, “To your seed I shall give this land,” thus seemingly looking ahead to the coming
conquest of the territory and ostensibly backward to the promised “seed” in 3:15.96 Though Abram is, even at this stage in the narrative, depicted as a specially elect figure, the “Shechem Jon. D. Levenson, Inheriting Abraham: The Legacy of the Patriarch in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Library of Jewish Ideas (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012), 24. 92
93 Ed Noort, “Abraham and the Nations,” edited by Martin Goodman, Geurt Hendrik Van Kooten, and J. Van Ruiten, in Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham (Leiden: Brill, 2010), 30.
53 Body Pages }
Benjamin J. Noonan, “Abraham, Blessing, and the Nations: A Reexamination of the Niphal and Hitpael of ברךin the Patriarchal Narratives,” Hebrew Studies 51 (2010): 89-90. 94
95 96
Brodie, 217.
לזרעך אתן את־הארץ הזאת Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
23
event,” writes Brodie, “sends a message: despite the promise, Abram's life is not facile; already he has to deal with unexpected people and with uncertainty.”97 Nevertheless, Abram offers his allegiance to YHWH in the form of altars at both Shechem and between Bethel and Ai (12:7-8). In the following pericope, 12:10-20, Abram and Sarai sojourn in Egypt on account of a heavy famine across the land. This is the first mention of a food shortage or famine ( )רעבin Genesis, which seems to recall 3:17-18, the cursing of the land on account of Adam’s eating from the
A tree Theology of Chosenness: OninElection in the Book of Genesis prohibited ( 2:9; postlapsarian agriculture Genesis is not always as bountiful as the picture a
envisaged inside the garden). Though YHWH had told Abram in 12:7 that he will grant his “seed” or “offspring” the land of Canaan, in the Egyptian stopover, Abram nonetheless fears for his life (like Cain) and entreats Sarai to tell others that the two are siblings (12:13). Sarai is subsequently taken into Pharaoh’s quarters to become his marriage partner (12:15, 19), but “YHWH plagued Pharaoh with great plagues, and his house, on account of Sarai the wife of Abram” (12:17).98 It seems that the likely referent for this unfortunate turn of events for the Egyptian king and his homestead is God’s assertion in 12:3b, “those who debase you, I will curse” ()ומקללך אאר. Though Sarai was brought into Pharaoh’s court to become his consort only due to Abram’s failure Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis to acknowledge his marital union his half-sister, HDSwith 3999-11: Reading the andEgyptian Research king is nevertheless punished Professor D. Andrew Teeter for apparently debasing the marriage of the elect figure. Commenting on 12:10-20, Sarita D. Gallagher writes, “While the potential curses of Genesis 12:3 are not listed in the text, those witnessed in the Abimelech and Egyptian Pharaoh narratives are decidedly destructive. Where God’s blessing brings life, God’s curse brings disease (Gen. 12:17) and the absence of life and fruitfulness (20:18).”99 Such is despite “Abraham direct-
97 98
Brodie, 217.
53 Body Pages }
וינגע יהוה את־פרעה נגעים גדלים ואת־ביתו על־דבר שרי אשת אברם
Sarita D. Gallagher, “Blessing on the Move: The Outpouring of God's Blessing through the Migrant Abraham,” Brill: Mission Studies 30, no. 2 (2013): 156. 99
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
24
ly plac[ing] them in a situation of unwitting wrongdoing.”100 Following Pharaoh’s textually unexplained discovery of the perceived cause of his woes,101 Abram is then expelled from Egypt (12:19-20). Writing of 12:10-20, Bergant notes the distinct correspondences to both the end of Genesis in the Joseph cycle and to the Exodus account. She writes, This story contains many of the features of the account of a much later sojourn in Egypt undertaken by the sons of Jacob. In both cases, the people go to Egypt because of famine (Gen. 42:5). They are oppressed while living there (Exod. 1:11) and are only released by Pharaoh when unbearable plagues strike the Egyptians (Exod. 9:14). They leave the land A Theology Chosenness: On Election in102the Book of Genesis loaded with giftsoffrom the Egyptians (Exod. 12:35-36). As 12:7 (and 1:28) may indeed be forecasting the Canaanite conquest, so too may 12:10-20 be anticipating the Egyptian exodus along with the cursing of the Egyptians who are not elect.103 { Chapter 13:1-18 } The chapter’s opening describes Abram’s departure from the land of Egypt along with his nephew Lot (13:1-2). At this juncture, “Abram exceedingly prospered in livestock, in silver, and in gold” (13:2), which appears to connect to his elect and blessed condition from 12:2.104 After calling upon YHWH, where he built his second altar (between Bethel and Ai), the narrative once again highlights the book’s strife motif (13:5-10). Contention arises between the herders of both Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading Research Abram and the non-elect Lot, which prompts their and separation and thus sets up the events of Professor D. Andrew Teeter 18:16 through 19:38. Abram settles in Canaan, which is to be the land of the elect, while Lot ventures towards Sodom (13:12). YHWH again speaks with Abram, reiterating crucial aspects of the divine election arrangement in 12:1-7. Here, the LORD tells Abram that the land will be granted to him and to his 100
Gallagher, 156.
101
Perhaps Sarai divulged to Pharaoh her marriage to Abram (12:18)? The narrator does not say.
102
Bergant, 53.
53 Body Pages }
However, as Professor Jon D. Levenson rightly notes, some Egyptians are indeed YHWH-fearers (Exod. 9:20; this information is from the defense of this thesis on June 17, 2021). 103
104
ואברם כבד מאד במקנה בכסף ובזהב
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
25
seed or offspring in perpetuity (13:15, 17). Moreover, Abram’s seed will be “akin to the dust of the earth” ()כעפר הארץ, which is all the more striking given that Sarai and Abram are still without a child (13:16). Abram departs, settling by the “tall trees of Mamre” ( )באלני ממראin Hebron (13:18).105 Commenting on this passage, Cassuto notes that “this presages that it is at Hebron that a kingdom would be established that would have dominion over the whole land. The Divine announcement made to Abram now was fulfilled in David, who founded his monarchy in He-
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
bron” (2 Sam. 5:3).106 The Chronicler, in 1 Chronicles 1:34 and 2:1-15, links David’s lineage to Abraham and Jacob through Judah, thus connecting to the royal blessing of Judah in Genesis 49:10 (cf. Ruth 4:18-22). If Cassuto is correct, then it appears the writer of Genesis is associating the election of Abraham and his posterity through to the Davidic monarchy and Israel’s unified rule of the land of Canaan. { Chapter 14:1-24 } Genesis 14 contains important theology regarding the concept of election and of the elect’s relationship with the non-elect. The opening of the chapter, verses 1-16, detail the battle beMariakis tween Amraphel king of Shinar,Nicholas Arioch Emmanuel king of Ellasar, Chedorlaomer king of Elam, and HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Tidal king of Goiim – five rulers against four of Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of GomorProfessor D.–Andrew Teeter rah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the unnamed king of Bela/Zoar (14:1-3). Though the four potentates rebelled, the five kings bring forth an offensive and subsequently plunder Sodom and Gomorrah along with Lot and his possessions (14:4, 11-12). An escapee of the conflict finds and informs Abram the ʿibrî ( ( )עברי14:13; cf. 10:21, 24a
25; 11:14-15). Abram is currently still dwelling by the “tall trees [or oaks] of Mamre the Amorite” ( ( )באלני ממרא האמרי14:13). Mamre is53brothers with} Eshcol and Aner, two non-elect persons Body Pages a
105
אלון, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 18.
Umberto Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part Two, From Noah to Abraham, Genesis VII9-XI32. Translated by Israel Abrahams ( Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1964), 368. 106
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
26
who are “keepers of a covenant with Abram” ( ( )בעלי ברית־אברם14:13). Though the narrative is a
quite sparse in terms of details, the text seems to here be looking back to 12:3. Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner are not portrayed as elect, but they are in covenant with Abram. As such, they seemingly fit into the category of those seeking to bless themselves through Abram or desiring to bless Abram (and who thus receive blessing by YHWH) (12:3). The text appears to be evoking such an association. Gallagher observes this as well, writing, “While the relationship between Abraham
Theology of Chosenness: Election in itthe Book ofthat Genesis and the A Amorite brothers is not expandedOn upon in the text, is implied their allegiance
bound them together in a treaty of mutual protection,” which fits under the rubric of “Bless those who bless you” in 12:3.107 Next, in verses 14 through 17, the text tells of Abram’s pursuit of the aggressor kings and the future patriarch’s subsequent victory (and return of Lot along with his possessions, the women, and people). Abram achieves this victory with his “trained men, born in his household” ( )חניכיו ילידי ביתוnumbering three-hundred and eighteen in total.108 These individuals, born outside of the elect lineage, will be later factored in the development of the Abrahamic Covenant in chapter 17.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis Following Abram’s intervention and rescue, 14:17-24 details Abram’s encounter with the HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter rather clouded figure of Melchizedek, whom the text describes in 14:18 as the “king of Salem” ( )מלך שלםand as a “priest to God Most High” ()כהן לאל עליון. This enigmatic royal-priestly figure proceeds to bless both Abram and “God Most High” (14:19-20). Brodie notes Abram’s reaction, writing, “Abram, responding, pays tithes to Melchizedek – the first foreigner to receive blessings through Abram”109 (the aforementioned Amorite brothers, notwithstanding). Though Abram summarily rejects the priest-king’s gifts in 14:21, the narrative nonetheless depicts this 53 Body Pages } 107
Gallagher, 153.
108
חניך, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 335.
109
Brodie, 225. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
27
figure as blessing Abram and as serving as a legitimate priest in service towards the same God as Abram. The compound term ʾĒl ʿElyôn ( )אל עליוןdoes not occur prior in Genesis, and this appellation for God is later used in the Song of Moses in Deuteronomy 32:9, in David’s song of rescue in 2 Samuel 22:14, and throughout the Psalter (e.g., 7:18, 9:3; et al.).110 W. Randall Garr, commenting on this pericope in Genesis 14, writes, For in the course of his encounter with Melchizedek, Abram learned of – and received a blessing in the name of – the creator deity El Elyon (Gen. 14:19). More importantly, he A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis drew two new theological conclusions from this encounter: (1) El Elyon is identical to the deity he had known as YHWH (v. 22bα < 12:8, 13:4); and (2) like El Elyon, YHWH is “creator of heaven and earth” (14:22bβ < v.19bβ).111
Indeed, Abram repeats the words of Melchizedek from 14:19. The priest-king refers to ʾĒl ʿElyôn as “the one who owns heaven and earth” ()קנה שמים וארץ, and Abram uses ʾĒl ʿElyôn with regard to YHWH. The implications for the theology of Genesis are key. Kaminsky, writing of “The non-elect in narrative texts,” takes note of “Foreign figures who are treated with great respect,” which he sees including, “among others: Melchizedek, king of Salem (Gen. 14:17-20).”112 This unique priest-king may not be portrayed as elect within Genesis’ purview but is surely regarded as Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis a genuine and faithful YHWHHDS worshipper (cf. Reading Ps. 110).and Research 3999-11: Professor D. Andrew Teeter { Chapter 15:1-21 }
Though YHWH manifests himself to Abram in chapter 12 and makes known to him divine intentions of land, blessing, and nationhood, it is in chapter 15 where the first explicit covenant occurs between the LORD and Abram (15:18; cf. 6:18). Though the chosen couple continue childless, God promises Abram his own heir (15:4). His offspring will be like the shimmering 110
Though in Deuteronomy 32:9, 2 Samuel 22:14, and }some passages in the Psalms, אלis omitted. 53 Body Pages
W. Randall Garr, “Abraham’s Election in Faith,” edited by Gary A. Anderson, and Joel S. Kaminsky, in The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson, Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity; v. 19 (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2013), 38. 111
112
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 124. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
28
stars in the heavenly expanse above (15:5). Moreover, Abram will indeed possess the land of Canaan (with the current inhabitants including the Amorites and the Canaanites) for God brought him from Ur of the Chaldees for this very purpose (15:7, 19-21). That stated, the elect Abram’s future scions will face great hardship in another foreign land says YHWH, though they shall depart with great possessions (15:12-16). Abram is granted this revelation in a “deep sleep” ()תרדמה, which appears to be an intentional intertextual connection back to the first human in
Theology of Chosenness: Election in theAbram Bookisofportrayed Genesis Genesis A 2:21. Though the first human failsOn to heed God’s words, differently. “And he trusted in YHWH,” tells the narrator, “and it was accounted to him as righteousness.”113 Garr writes, Abram “behaves in a manner consistent with the hiphil verb form,” and though “Perhaps his faith is not perfect or flawless,” he continues, “It is nonetheless exemplary enough to earn him elected status in the Hebrew Bible and beyond.”114 Genesis, however, does not appear to present any personage as “earn[ing]” an “elected status.” Nevertheless, in chapter 15, Abram’s faithfulness is indeed in keeping with his elected standing. { Chapter 16:1-16 } The narrative once again highlights human strife, this time due to Abram’s and Sarai’s Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Hagar Research plot to bring forth offspring via their Egyptian servant (16:1-2). Hagar conceives, and Professor D. Andrew Teeter with Abram’s approval, is quickly ejected from the homestead. In effect, Hagar is un-blessed by Sarai (16:4-6). Bergant comments that this “story exposes the cruel treatment of the foreigner.”115 Hagar, in her exile, is met by the angel of YHWH and told to return, and in due course, will become a surrogate mother for the infertile Sarai. However, YHWH’s prophecy of this firstborn child’s future does not look promising with respect to election (16:7-15). For “he will be a wild donkey of a human being” ( )יהיה פרא אדםwho will be marked by discord with others, which 53 Body Pages } 113
והאמן ביהוה ויחשבה לו צדקה
114
Garr, 39. Emphasis added in the latter quotation.
115
Bergant, 59. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
29
contravenes the basic impulse of 12:1-3 ( 16:12).116 Nevertheless, the messenger of YHWH will a
multiply Hagar’s seed beyond numbering ( 16:10, 12, 15). Of course, the narrative swiftly reveals a
in chapter 17 that Ishmael is not the elect and promised offspring, but rather, the “‘unchosen’ son.”117 { Chapter 17:1-27 } Although Abram (now renamed “Abraham” [ ]אברהםby Ēl Šadday []אל שדי, 17:1, 5)
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis a
entreats God that Ishmael might serve as the elect child – such an arrangement is not part of God’s plan (17:5, 18-19). In 17:19, God speaks thus to the incredulous Abraham – “And God said, ‘Truly, Sarah118 your wife will bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac, and I will establish my covenant with him as a covenant forever and to his offspring following him.’”119 The enduring covenant is for Isaac and for his seed onward. Such election is clearly in accord with God’s agenda and not that of Abraham, despite the patriarch’s exalted status within Genesis’ narrative world (cf. 17:4, 7). Also key in this chapter is the instating of the “sign of [the] covenant” ()לאות ברית Emmanuel ( 17:11). This sign of the covenant Nicholas is circumcision, albeit Mariakis the text of chapter 17 does not elucidate HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research how circumcision functions semiotically ( 17:10-14). Commenting on this passage, Michael V. Professor D. Andrew Teeter a
a
Fox assesses the nature and purpose of this species of sign, noting that the Hebrew Bible employs the following three types of divine signs: 1. Proof signs, whose purpose is to convince the onlooker of the truth of a certain proposition which might be in doubt…2. Symbol signs, which stand for or represent something else by virtue of resemblance or conventional association [e.g., ‘Ezekiel’s model siege of
116
פרא, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 825.
117
Provan, 143.
118
Now Sarah as of 17:15.
53 Body Pages }
ויאמר אלהים אבל שרה אשתך ילדת לך בן וקראת את־שמו יצחק והקמתי את־בריתי אתו לברית עולם לזרעו אחריו 119
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
30
Jerusalem’]…[and] 3. Cognition signs, whose purpose is to awaken knowledge of something in the observer.120 For Fox, circumcision operates as a cognition and “mnemonic” sign, and akin to “the rainbow, it is a reminder to God, not man, and as we have seen, P believes in the need for reminders to God.”121 Indeed, though this sign might serve to awaken the memory of God, the somatic and irreversible nature of circumcision should also act as a reminder to those receiving it – that they are within the elect covenant family.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Additionally, though the reader might be inclined to think that this sign of the covenant is strictly for the elect Abraham’s own progeny, the Genesis text quickly dispels this. The sign is for “every male” among Abraham’s generations, whether born within his home or even from males acquired for a price. In verse 12, God says, “And a son of eight days among you will be circumcised; every male of your generations born in your household, including one purchased with silver from any son of a foreigner who is not from your seed.”122 Writing of this verse, Brodie states, “Rather as God’s covenant to Noah was all-inclusive, involving the saving of all creatures (6:18–21), so now God’s covenant to Abram is far-reaching. It includes a multitude of nations (hence Abram’s new name) and also those within Abram’s household who are foreigners and slaves (17:4–6, 12– Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading andofResearch 123 13).” The narrative proceeds to state that “all the men his house” ()וכל־אנשי ביתו, whether Professor D. Andrew Teeter born within it or acquired as servants, became circumcised (17:23, 27). This appears to include all
of Abraham’s men from 14:14.124 As such, God’s economy in Genesis is wide and inclusive, encompassing even the non-elect and those who partake of the covenantal mark even if such an
Michael V. Fox, “Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision in the Light of the Priestly ’ôt Etiologies,” Revue Biblique 81, no. 4 (October 1974): 562-563. Emphasis added. 120
121 122 123
Fox, 569, 595. Emphasis added.
53 Body Pages } ובן־שמנת ימים ימול לכם כל־זכר לדרתיכם יליד בית ומקנת־כסף מכל בן־נכר אשר לא מזרעך הוא
Brodie, 233.
Assuming no deaths among the three-hundred and eighteen between 14:14 and 17:27 – though the text does not inform the reader of any. 124
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
31
individual is a nēkār ()נכר, a “foreigner.” Lastly, the covenant develops as God promises the following to Abraham – “You shall be father of a multitude of nations” ()והיית לאב המון גוים ( 17:4), and, “kings shall come from you” ( ( )מלכים ממך יצאו17:6). The latter looks forward to a
a
Genesis 49:10 and perhaps to David onward (cf. 2. Sam. 5:3; 1 Chron. 1:34, 2:1-15). { Chapter 18:1-20:18 }
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election the with Booktwo of other Genesis Genesis 18 features a meeting between the LORDin (along figures) and Abraham (18:1-3). Abraham and his wife provide hospitality for their visitors (18:4-8), and YHWH proceeds to inform Abraham that Sarah will indeed bear a son in one year’s time (18:10). The aged Sarah, however, is incredulous at the divine promise, but the LORD will fulfill his intention (18:9-15). YHWH will make the once childless Abraham into “a great and powerful nation” ()לגוי גדול ועצום, and furthermore, “All the nations of the land will bless themselves in him” ( 18:18).125 Both are slightly reworded recapitulations of the promises from 12:2a and 12:3b a
(“And all the families of the land will bless themselves in you”).126 Chapter 18 here provides Nicholas additional nuance concerning Emmanuel Mariakis God’s election of Abraham and HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research the divine purpose thereof. “For IProfessor have known him forTeeter this reason,” says the LORD, “that he D. Andrew might command his sons and his household after him, and they will keep [the] way of YHWH to do righteousness and justice” ( 18:19a). The verse continues, stating, “For this reason YHWH will a
bring upon Abraham that which he spoke concerning him” ( 18:19b).127 God “knows” or has a
elected Abraham that he might command his sons and his household following him to guard the way of YHWH, and to do righteousness along with justice. Verses 18 through 19 occur in the context
125
ונברכו בו כל גויי הארץ
126
ונברכו בך כל משפחת האדמה
53 Body Pages }
כי ידעתיו למען אשר יצוה את־בניו ואת־ביתו אחריו ושמרו דרך יהוה לעשות צדקה ומשפט למען הביא יהוה על־אברהם את אשר־דבר עליו 127
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
32
31
individual is a nēkār ()נכר, a “foreigner.” Lastly, the covenant develops as God promises the following to Abraham – “You shall be father of a multitude of nations” ()והיית לאב המון גוים ( 17:4), and, “kings shall come from you” ( ( )מלכים ממך יצאו17:6). The latter looks forward to a
a
Genesis 49:10 and perhaps to David onward (cf. 2. Sam. 5:3; 1 Chron. 1:34, 2:1-15). { Chapter 18:1-20:18 } Genesis 18 features a meeting between the LORD (along with two other figures) and Abraham (18:1-3). Abraham and his wife provide hospitality for their visitors (18:4-8), and YHWH proceeds to inform Abraham that Sarah will indeed bear a son in one year’s time (18:10). The aged Sarah, however, is incredulous at the divine promise, but the LORD will fulfill his intention (18:9-15). YHWH will make the once childless Abraham into “a great and powerful nation” ()לגוי גדול ועצום, and furthermore, “All the nations of the land will bless themselves in him” ( 18:18).125 Both are slightly reworded recapitulations of the promises from 12:2a and 12:3b a
(“And all the families of the land will bless themselves in you”).126 Chapter 18 here provides additional nuance concerning God’s election of Abraham and the divine purpose thereof. “For I have known him for this reason,” says the LORD, “that he might command his sons and his household after him, and they will keep [the] way of YHWH to do righteousness and justice” ( 18:19a). The verse continues, stating, “For this reason YHWH will a
bring upon Abraham that which he spoke concerning him” ( 18:19b).127 God “knows” or has a
elected Abraham that he might command his sons and his household following him to guard the way of YHWH, and to do righteousness along with justice. Verses 18 through 19 occur in the context
125
ונברכו בו כל גויי הארץ
126
ונברכו בך כל משפחת האדמה
127 כי ידעתיו למען אשר יצוה את־בניו ואת־ביתו אחריו ושמרו דרך יהוה לעשות צדקה ומשפט למען הביא יהוה על־אברהם את אשר־דבר עליו
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
of the three figure’s investigation of the sins of Sodom and Gomorrah (18:16-22). The remainder of the chapter features a dialogue between Abraham and YHWH in which the future patriarch appears to exercise two aspects of the purpose for his divine calling. That is, to bless the peoples around him – and to do justice – whereby Abraham supplicates for the deliverance of Sodom, the city in which his nephew resides (18:22-33). Sodom proves to be beyond redemption in chapter 19. With the help of two divine messengers, A Lot, his wife,ofand his daughtersOn areElection escorted away from the of pending devastation Theology Chosenness: in the Book Genesis
(19:1-22). Lot’s wife, however, ignores the supernal command to not look back upon the city and promptly dies (19:17, 26). Lot’s daughters (whose husbands perished in the conflagration of Sodom) are now fearful of childlessness and inebriate their father in order to preserve offspring for themselves (19:32-38). This incest then births what eventually becomes the anti-elect Moabites and Ammonites (19:38). Zephaniah 2:9 intertextually links to this pericope and likens Moab to Sodom and Ammon to Gomorrah (cf. Num. 21:29; Judg. 11:4-28). Additionally, writing of this passage, Levenson adds the following important commentary in Inheriting Abraham: [Lot] is not part of Israel but instead fathers (however inadvertently) two nations of his own, Moab and Ammon. Whereas the story of Abram’s migrations begins with Lot’s inNicholas Emmanuel clusion, by the end the latter has been excluded;Mariakis he is not the heir to the promise after all, HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research or even a member of the chosen family. But his exclusion does not imply his rejection. He D. Andrew Teeter is not among the family of Professor the elect, but neither is he among the damned, as if those were the only two categories.128 Indeed, though Lot is not divinely chosen, he is not portrayed as destined to perdition. Abraham, in the following narrative in chapter 20, replays events from nearly a quartercentury earlier. As the future patriarch was less than forthright with Pharaoh concerning the true relationship between himself and Sarai in 12:10-20, so too is he not entirely straightforward with king Abimelech of Gerar. In 12:19, Abram is quoted as saying, “she is my sister” (( )אחתי הואcf.
53 Body Pages } 12:13). Likewise, he speaks this identical phrasing in 20:2 and 20:5. In both accounts, Abraham 128
Levenson, Inheriting Abraham, 42. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
33
is fearful of being killed (12:12; 20:11; cf. Cain), and his anxieties thus bring affliction instead of blessing (12:17; 20:17). The elect Abraham, however, misreads his hosts, thinking, “There is no fear of ʾĔlōhîm in this place”129 – however, as Brodie notes, “The royal servants all fear God, as does Abimelech their king; they are the antithesis of Sodom” ( 20:11).130 Again, the text of Genea
sis portrays non-elect peoples as proper God-fearers, while the elect Abraham ostensibly dishonors the creator and undervalues his divine commissioning.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
{ Chapter 21:1-25:18 }
Finally, after many years and vicissitudes, the chosen (though infertile) couple of Abraham and Sarah bring forth the promised covenant seed. God’s oaths in 12:1-3, 15:1ff, 17:1ff, and 18:13-14 are proving faithful. They name the male child Isaac, and the elect infant is given the sign of the divine covenant within the prescribed time of eight days from birth (21:3-4; cf. 17:12). The events of chapter 16 are reprised, and given the recursive131 nature of Genesis and the Hebrew Bible overall, that Sarah once again ejects the Egyptian servant Hagar in verses 8 through 21 comes with little or no surprise to the attuned reader. Nevertheless, in accord with the promise to Hagar in chapter 16 from the “God whoEmmanuel sees” ( ראיMariakis )אל, Ishmael will himself become a “great Nicholas
HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter nation” ( ( )לגוי גדול21:18; cf. 16:10). This identical phraseology is used of Abraham in 18:18, a
whose offspring will likewise become a great nation. As Walter Brueggemann notes of the halfEgyptian child, “Astonishingly, God blesses Ishmael. He is not Abraham’s ticket to Israel’s future, but he is a legitimate heir who will be fruitful, multiply, and be great. God's powerful promise is
129
אין־יראת אלהים במקום הזה
130
Brodie, 258.
53 Body Pages }
Recursive nomenclature derived from lectures by Professor David Andrew Teeter, HDS 1102: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament 1: Pentateuch and Former Prophets, HDS 1103: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament 2: Latter Prophets and Writings, and HDS 1630: The Book of Daniel (class lectures, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA). 131
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
34
not confined to the claims of Israel's covenant tradition.”132 Moreover, though Ishmael is not part of the elect lineage, Genesis does not consider him outside of relational boundaries with the creator-God: “And ʾĔlōhîm was with the youth, and he matured” ( 21:20a).133 a
In 21:25-34, the narrative turns to Abraham’s association with the non-elect Abimelech (cf. 20:1ff). The two form a covenant in 21:27 and 32, which is evidence of the king’s desire to do good to Abraham. Indeed, in 21:23b, Abimelech has graced Abraham with ḥesed ()חסד, with
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
kindness or goodness, and seeks the same in return. “It is with this understanding of treaty between Abraham and Abimelech,” writes Gallagher, “that the transference of the blessing of God can be witnessed. As with later Pentateuchal covenants, the cutting of a covenant with God’s chosen people placed one under the protection and blessing of their God.”134 As such, this narrative appears to intentionally look back to 12:3, and YHWH’s promise concerning the non-elect nations. “And I will bless the one who blesses you” ()ואברכה מברכיך, says the LORD. The text summarily shifts to what is arguably one of the more difficult and puzzling narratives in Genesis. That is, God’s test and command that Abraham sacrifice the promised son as Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis writes in The Death and Resurrecan ʿōlâ ()עלה, a “whole-burnt offering” ( 22:1-2). As Levenson HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter tion of the Beloved Son, a
The announcement that “God put Abraham to the test” cannot, however, be interpreted… as a signal to the reader (though not to Abraham) that the aqedah is only a test…This being the case, Abraham's willingness to heed the frightful command may or may not demonstrate faith in the promise that is invested in Isaac, but it surely and abundantly demonstrates his putting obedience to God ahead of every possible competitor. And if this is so, then if Abraham had failed to heed, he would have exhibited not so much a lack of faith in the promise as a love for Isaac that surpassed even his fear of God. He would, in other words, have elected Isaac his own son over Isaac the beloved son in the larger providential drama, the son whose very existence, from the moment of the angelic annun53 Body Pages }
132
Walter Brueggemann, “Expository Articles: Genesis 17:1-22,” Interpretation (Richmond) 45, no. 1
133
ויהי אלהים את־הנער ויגדל
134
Gallagher, 159.
(1991): 58.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
35
ciation of his impending birth, has run counter to the naturalness of familial life. The aqedah, in short, tests whether Abraham is prepared to surrender his son to the God who gave him.135 Election, then, in Genesis, appears to require a commensurate level of obedience to the creatorGod who elects his chosen personages. Abraham’s compliance with the divine mandate results in God’s further blessing of him and of multiplying his offspring like the “stars of the sky” ( ( )ככוכבי השמים22:17). Moreover, the LORD tells Abraham, “And your seed will take possesa
of enemy,” Chosenness: On Election the Bookwith of Genesis sion of A theTheology gate of his which seems to forecastinhostilities anti-elect nations (22:17).136 Additionally, God says to the patriarch in 22:18, “All the nations of the land will bless themselves in your offspring,” thus looking back to 12:3 and 18:18.137
The following chapters, 23 and 24, begin the transition away from the elected couple and towards their offspring. Genesis 23 details the sorrowful passing of Sarah and Abraham’s acquisition of a burial cave (and land) within the territory of Canaan. As 17:8 describes, Canaan is the land of promise (23:1ff). Chapter 24 features the meeting and union of Isaac and Rebekah, the elected couple who will transfer the Abrahamic blessing to subsequent generations. However, of particular import in 24 vis-à-vis election and to the faith of those outside the Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis line of the Abraham is the narrative of Abraham’s servant. This figure, who was presumably cirHDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter cumcised and made part of the covenant (cf. 17:23, 27), prays for God’s sovereign intervention to supply a suitable mate for the elect son, Isaac (24:12-14). Following his interaction with Rebekah, the servant worships YHWH. (24:26; cf. 24:48, 52). Derek Kidner, commenting on the reaction of the servant, writes, “Success, which inflates the natural man, humbles the man of God. This servant’s first thought is for the Lord, his second for his employer (27b), and his final one, with un-
135
53 Body Pages Jon. D. Levenson, The Death and Resurrection of the }Beloved Son (New Haven: Yale University Press,
136
ירש, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 439. וירש זרעך את שער איביו
1993), 126. 137
והתברכו בזרעך כל גויי הארץ Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
36
affected delight, for himself: ‘he led me – me – straight to the house…’”138 Genesis once again elevates the faithfulness of those outside of the direct patriarchal genetic lineage. The final narrative before the Jacob through Joseph cycles describes the passing of Abraham and the transition of the divine blessing onto Issac (25:1-18). Though Abraham provides gifts for the sons of his paramours, the text reports the patriarch providing primarily for his second-born, but chosen son. “And Abraham gave to Isaac all that was his,” writes the narrator ( 25:5).139AThe focus on the elect son notwithstanding, “The overall is to great blessTheology of Chosenness: On Election in theeffect Book ofsuggest Genesis a
ing,” comments Brodie.140 He continues, writing, “The sense of blessing is heightened by the emphasis on gifts: while Abraham ‘gave’ all he had to Isaac, he also ‘gave gifts’ to the sons of the concubines…Thus the concubines’ children have a share of the blessed gifts that go to Isaac.”141 25:12-18 closes with the tôlēdôt of Ishmael, the firstborn but non-elect child (cf. Cain). The Jacob Cycle: Genesis 25:19 – 35:22 { Chapters 25:19-28:22 } The drama of election continues with the births of Jacob and Esau, the offspring of Isaac and Rebekah. Though divinely-favored, the couple nonetheless initially experiences the hardship Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis of childlessness (an affliction HDS once 3999-11: familiar toReading Isaac’s and nowResearch passed mother) which is ameliorated Professor D. Andrew Teeter following Isaac’s prayer to YHWH (25:20-21). Though Esau is the firstborn son of the twins, he will not be the elect seed. The LORD, in an oracle in 25:23 prior to their births, tells Rebekah that the “greater will serve [the] lesser” ( ( )ורב יעבד צעיר25:23-26).142 Possibly paralleling the Cain a
and Abel episode in 4:1-8, in which the younger Abel appears to likely be the elect child, here Derek Kidner, Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary, Vol. 1, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1967), 158. 138
139
ויתן אברהם את־כל־אשר־לו ליצחק53 Body Pages }
140
Brodie, 286.
141
Brodie, 286.
142
צעיר, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 859. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
37
God chooses the younger among the twins. This also recalls Ishmael’s rejection as the elect seed. Moreover, as there was disunity between the children of Adam and Eve, the oracle appears to portend division between Esau and Jacob – “two peoples will be divided from your womb.”143 Such division is perhaps anticipated and hinted by their parents’ respective favoring of one son over the other, as “Isaac loved Esau,” the text states, “though Rebekah loved Jacob.”144 The younger Jacob contributes to this enmity, later exploiting the elder Esau to gain the elder's bĕkōrâ ()בכרה,
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
his birthright ( 25:28-34; cf. 27:36).145 The bĕkōrâ is generally regarded “as a form of primogenia
ture,” writes Kaminsky, “that is, the right to inherit a double share of the father’s estate (Deut. 21:15-17).”146 The elect Jacob, though younger, here obtains firstborn benefits by means of his unseemly manipulation of Esau. The elder sibling is not entirely innocent, however, for he is said to have “despised his bĕkōrâ” (( )ויבז עשו את־הבכרה25:34). Before the Genesis narrative fully transitions its focus upon Jacob, the text once again restates the patriarchal promise. As YHWH appeared to Abraham, the Deity manifests himself to the elect son Isaac to reaffirm the šĕbûʿâ ()שבועה, the oath, which he swore to Isaac’s father Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis ( 26:2-5).147 Here, the LORD promises to bless Isaac, multiply his seed like stars, and provide lands HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter (plural) – and again confirms, verbatim, the promise from 22:18 that the nations will bless thema
selves in the elect’s progeny ( 26:4; cf. 26:24-25).148 Though Abraham was elected, specially chosen a
by divine fiat, God reminds Isaac that his father responded in a posture proper to his calling. “ [For] Abraham listened to my voice,” says the LORD, “and he observed my ordinances, my
143
מעה, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 588. ושני לאמים ממעיך יפרדו
ויאהב יצחק את־עשו כי־ציד בפיו ורבקה אהבת את־יעקב Body Pages } 145 Jacob convinces Esau to transfer the53 birthright in exchange for a meal. 144
146
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 45.
147
cf. 12:2-12:7; 13:14-13:16; 15:5-15:18; 17:6-17:8; 18:8; 22:17-22:18.
148
cf. 12:3; 18:8; 22:18; 26:4; 28:14. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
38
commandments, my statutes, and my instruction” ( 26:5).149 Nevertheless, the chosen Isaac is a
flawed like Abraham, and repeats the same deceptive misgivings of his father (26:6-33; cf. 12:1020; 20:2-8). For example, instead of blessing his non-elect neighbors in Gerar, he places them in divine jeopardy vis-à-vis Rebekah (26:10). Subsequently, Isaac and the people covenant together (26:33). Chapter 27 features one of the more difficult narratives in Genesis with respect to divine election A andTheology its relationof to Chosenness: human volition.On Isaac, advanced in in age unsure he will pass, Election theand Book of when Genesis seeks to bārak ()ברך, to bless his favored son, the elder Esau ( 27:1-4). Rebekah, overhearing the a
conversation between the two men, then conspires with Jacob that he might wrest the blessing by employing clever subterfuge. She insists Jacob pretend to be the elder son in order to acquire the blessing due to the elect child (27:5-13). Jacob acquiesces to Rebekah’s ploy and proceeds in the elaborate ruse, successfully gaining the patriarchal blessing and fulfilling the divine oracle from 25:23-26. “The oracle,” writes Fishbane, “provides Rebekah with the foreknowledge that her younger son will prevail, thus clarifying her motivation in the deception of Isaac, and mitigating its apparent immorality.”150 Additionally, though God has specially chosen Jacob from the womb, Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis “It is, in short, Rebekah's preference for JacobReading rather than for Esau that mediates the provHDS 3999-11: andIsaac’s Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter idential design,” comments Levenson.151 Jacob engenders the wrath of vengeful Esau who becomes intent on his younger brother’s death (27:26-45). Levenson notes that the “closest biblical analogy to Cain's rage” is that of Esau, the “older brother who, this time also not without justice, feels himself wronged.”152 Such prompts Jacob’s escape and extended sojourn in Haran, but not before Jacob reiterates the patriarchal promise to Jacob (27:42-28:5). God then appears to Jacob in a dream in the following nar149
Body Pagesאשר־שמע } וישמר משמרתי מצותי חקותי ותורתי53בקלי אברהם עקב
150
Fishbane, 12.
151
Levenson, The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son, 63.
152
Levenson, 75. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
39
rative and ratifies the promise and Jacob’s elect position therein (28:10-22). YHWH vows to protect Jacob and promises to grant him the land he is sleeping on along with inestimable offspring who will inherit that land (28:13-22). Here, the niphal iteration of the nations’ reflexive blessing occurs once again, underscoring its importance vis-à-vis Israel’s election (28:14; cf. 12:3; 18:8). { Chapters 29:1-35:22 } Genesis 29 through 31 details Jacob’s exile in Mesopotamia. While in Canaan, Jacob had
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
remained unmarried, and his father instructed him to find a mate in Paddan-Aram from among the daughters of his uncle Laban (28:1-2, 8).153 Despite being the elect son called to carry on the patriarchal blessing, Jacob endures twenty years of vicissitudes in Laban’s household, suffering a sundry mix of hardships: he was deceived by his uncle into marrying Leah, a woman he did not want (29:23-27); manipulated into serving Laban fourteen years to marry Leah’s sister Rachel, the woman he did love (29:18; 26-30); was amidst domestic strife amongst his wives and presumably suffering together with Rachel in her barrenness (29:31; 30:1-2; 30:14-17); and, enduring a total of twenty years of harsh physical working conditions as well as bearing with Laban’s unscrupulous business practices (30:35-36; 31:15; 40-41). In spite of these tribulations, while in exNicholas Emmanuel Mariakis ile in Mesopotamia, Jacob seesHDS the birth of eleven sons and andResearch one daughter (29:31-30:23). The fam3999-11: Reading Professor D. Andrew Teeter ily departs – an exodus – anticipating fulfillment of God’s promise in 28:15 to bring Jacob back to Canaan. Jacob and company indeed leave for his home country, but he dreads retribution from his estranged brother, Esau (32:1-8).154 Jacob prays for safety, retelling God’s election promise back to him (albeit the oath is phrased differently in 28:13-15 and 32:13 recalls the seed-as-sand metaphor from 22:17). In the following narrative, 32:22-32, Jacob wrestles with God (not realizblessed the }Deity – who renames him from Yaʿăqōb ing it is YHWH; cf. 28:16), until Jacob is 53 Bodyby Pages 153
In Genesis, Canaanite women are improper partners for propagating the elect line (28:1, 6, 8).
154
Jacob thus fears for his life like Cain, Abraham, and Isaac before him. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
40
()יעקב, a “supplanter,”155 to Yiśrāʾēl ()ישראל. God here says of the elect Jacob and his new name, “For you persevered with God and with men, and you have succeeded” ( 32:29).156 Jacob a
and the unfavored elder brother reconcile in chapter 33, which anticipates the conclusion of Genesis (and recalls the alternatively tragic end to the Cain and Abel episode). Jacob arrives in Canaan, and like Noah, Abraham and Isaac before him, constructs an altar, naming it ʾ Ēlʾ Ĕlōhê Yiśrāʾēl ()אל אלהי ישראל, “God, the God of Israel” ( 33:20, cf. 8:20; a
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
12:7-8; 13:4; 26:25). Jacob builds another altar in Bethel at the command of ʾĔlōhîm (35:1, 3, 7; cf. vv. 13-14). The chosen thus exhibit their devotion to God with cultic appurtenances. Furthermore, the elect Jacob commands his household to dispose of the “alien gods” ( )אלהי הנכרamong them, indicating fidelity to the creator-God alone (35:2, 4). Once again, the patriarchal promise is reiterated to Jacob, whereby he is instructed to be fruitful and multiplied, and as such, will become a “nation and an assembly of nations” (( )גוי וקהל גוים35:11). Here, the election promise of kingship within the chosen family’s line is repeated (35:11; cf. 17:6; 49:10). Further, as the text stated prior, the land will be granted to Jacob and to his offspring (35:12). Chapter 35:16-22, the final Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis verses of the Jacob cycle, detailHDS Rachel’s sad passing while birth to Benjamin (35:16-21), as 3999-11: Reading andgiving Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter well as the firstborn Reuben’s sexual impropriety with Bilhah, Jacob’s concubine (35:22). The Joseph Cycle: Genesis 35:23 – 50:26 { Chapter 35:23-47:27 } The Joseph cycle, a sequence that substantially contributes towards Genesis’ view of election, begins with a brief genealogy of Jacob’s twelve sons and Jacob’s reunion with his widower father Isaac (which adumbrates 46:29-30; 35:23-27). Isaac passes and is buried by Esau and Ja53 Body Pages }
155
יעקב, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 784–785.
156
שרה, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 975. כי־שרית עם־אלהים ועם־אנשים ותוכל Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
41
cob, who have reconciled (35:28-29). The tôlēdôt of Esau, the non-elect son, begins with a negative appraisal, for he “took his wives from among the daughters of Canaan” (unlike Jacob; 36:2; cf. 26:34-35; 28:1, 6, 8).157 Important for this section concerning election, and the benefits and responsibilities thereof, is that in 36:31 the narrator speaks of the time “before a ruler [viz., a king] ruled over the sons of Israel” – which looks back to God’s monarchic promise to Jacob in 35:11 – and ahead to Judah’s royal lineage in 49:10, as well as towards the Davidic throne158 (13:18; 2 159 Sam. 5:3;Acf.Theology Joseph’s rulership in 37:5-11; 41:43ff). of Chosenness: On Election
in the Book of Genesis
In chapter 37, the narrative turns to Jacob’s first son with Rachel, the son whom he loved
above each of his other sons (37:3; cf. Isaac’s favoring of Esau in 25:28). The text then describes Joseph’s dreams that presage his rulership over his kin, which suggests an elevated, elect station (37:5-11). The juvenile, however, is at odds with his brothers, for “Not only does he bring back a negative report about how poorly some of them are doing their job (Gen. 37:2),” notes Kaminsky, “but he also taunts his brothers with his dreams.”160 Joseph, like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob before him, is a flawed human being. The brothers unsurprisingly retaliate, first seeking to slay the teenager, but instead seek to sell him into bondage – where he is taken to Egypt into the service of Potiphar (37:12-36). As Jacob Nicholas deceived Emmanuel his own father with garments, so too do the brothers Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research deceive Jacob with Joseph’s robe, faked to suggest a deadly animal attack (37:29-25).161 Professor D. Andrew Teeter
157
עשו לקח את־נשיו מבנות כנען
158
Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part Two, From Noah to Abraham, 368.
159
לפני מלך־מלך לבני ישראל
160
Kaminsky, 59.
The deceptive-clothing motif resurfaces in the subsequent narrative, which details Judah’s impropri53 Due BodytoPages } failure to provide his youngest son as a mate eties towards his daughter-in-law Tamar (38:1ff). Judah’s for widowed Tamar, she resorts to feigning herself as a cultic sex-worker, beguiling Judah to provide her offspring (38:11-19). When Tamar’s pregnancy shows, Judah demands her gruesome death by fire – but when she demonstrates that Judah is the father, Judah repents, thus setting up his trajectory in 43:8-10, 44:14-44, and 49:8-12. 161
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
42
Even though in servitude, “YHWH was with Joseph” (( )ויהי יהוה את־יוסף39:2), and “YHWH blessed the house of the Egyptian on account of Joseph” (39:5).162 The latter verse suggests an elect position for Joseph (regarding the former statement, God was similarly “with” unchosen Ishmael in 21:20). Verse 5 may be looking to 12:3 (God’s blessing of those who bless the elect), as “Joseph found favor in [Potiphar’s] eyes and he served him.”163 Potiphar established Joseph over the affairs of his home (39:4-5). Joseph, acting in accord with his apparent elect sta-
A Theology Chosenness: On Election in the thesexual Bookadvances of Genesis tus, resolves to not be anofun-blessing to Potiphar – and refuses of his master’s
tenacious wife (39:6-20). The rejected Egyptian spouse frames Joseph, accusing him of rape (using his garment as purported evidence), which results in Joseph’s imprisonment. Albeit, in 39:21, like 39:2, “YHWH was with Joseph” ()ויהי יהוה את־יוסף, causing him success, and he likewise finds “favor” with his superior (39:21-23). Joseph is then promoted to lead the prisoners (39:22). Chapters 40 through 41 are pivotal in Joseph’s narrative arc. God grants him the capacity to interpret other’s dreams, which the reader learns are predictive in character. Joseph foresees the restoration and deaths of his prison-mates, respectively, namely Pharaoh’s cupbearer and baker (40:1ff). Two years later, Joseph is still imprisoned, but is summoned by Pharaoh (at the suggesNicholas Emmanuel Mariakis tion of the cupbearer) following the3999-11: monarch’s puzzling of seven stout and seven slender HDS Reading anddreams Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter cattle and ears of grain (41:1-15). As in 40:8, Joseph acknowledges that interpretations are granted from the divine realm (41:16). Joseph’s God-given ability to interpret the dreams (seven and seven years of pending feasting then famine), and his offering of an administrative solution, leads Pharaoh to promote Joseph to second in the kingdom ( 41:17-44). Joseph is to oversee the logistia
cal supervision of food collection and distribution for not merely the Egyptians, but for “the whole earth,” or “all the land” ( ( )וכל־הארץ41:17-44, 46-49, 53-57). Additionally, while executa
53 Body } ing his governmental role, Pharaoh provides for Pages the bachelor an Egyptian bride, Asenath, who 162
גלל, Brown, Driver, Briggs, 164. ויברך יהוה את־בית המצרי בגלל יוסף
163
וימצא יוסף חן בעיניו וישרת אתו Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
43
bears Joseph two sons, Manasseh (the temporal firstborn) and Ephraim (41:45, 50-52). These sons, born of woman from a non-elect nation, will feature prominently in chapter 48. The narrative that comprises 42:1 through 47:31 features a tapestry of extraordinarily rich interactions between Joseph and his brothers. The elder siblings venture from famine-stricken Canaan to purchase grain in Egypt, but unbeknownst to them, are met by their younger brother who applies clever subterfuge to manipulate their exchanges (42:1ff). Upon their first meeting of the concealed Joseph, the siblings bow – and Joseph then recalls his teenage dreams – the A Theology of elder Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
dreams being the direct impetus for the brothers’ plot of betrayal in 37:19ff (42:6, 9; cf. 37:5-11). The siblings return to Canaan without Simeon, whom Joseph detains as collateral until their youngest sibling Benjamin is brought (42:20, 24). Jacob balks, but Judah offers himself as a pledge for Benjamin, a crucial upturn in the fourth-born son’s character arc (43:8-9). On their third visit, Joseph has Benjamin framed for theft (cf. Potiphar’s wife) and confines him (44:1ff). This elicits the brothers’ return to, and confrontation of Joseph, along with Judah’s intention to sacrifice himself in the younger’s stead. Meir Sternberg, in his detailed analysis of this portion of the Joseph cycle, writes, “having discovered their character, Joseph discloses his identity.”164 The brothers reconcile and return to Canaan toNicholas bring Jacob and to Mariakis resettle in Egypt, which looks to YHWH’s Emmanuel HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research prophecy in 15:13 (the oppression Professor of Abram’sD.seed in a foreign Andrew Teeter land) (45:25-47:27). However, for now, in Egypt the family prospers and becomes “fruitful and exceedingly multiplied” (47:27; cf. 1:22, 28; 9:1; 28:3, 35:11). { Chapter 48:1-50:1-26 } The blessings of fruitfulness and multiplication that are constitutive of God’s election promises are then restated by Jacob to Joseph (48:3). The aged patriarch meets Joseph’s and Asenath’s children, assumes them as his own, and his}blessing to them (48:5-16). These children 53 extends Body Pages are depicted as being covenantal heirs, but as half-Egyptian, are partially from non-elect ancestry 164
Meir Sternberg, The Poetics of Biblical Narrative (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), 308. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
44
(cf. Num. 26:2, 28). As the blessing continues, in keeping with the sibling inversion motif indicative of Genesis, Jacob provides a greater blessing for the younger Ephraim instead of the elder Manasseh ( 48:17-20). Joseph attempts to correct what he perceives is his father’s mistake, but a
Jacob responds, “I know my son, I know” ( ( )ידעתי בני ידעתי48:19). Kaminsky notes the usage of a
yādaʿ ( )ידעor lōʾ yādaʿ ( )לא ידעin pivotal portions of the Joseph cycle, arguing, “these key word pairs hint to the reader…how God’s providential hand has been guiding life’s events.”165
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Such is consistent with election in Genesis, as God is depicted as thoroughly sovereign in his affairs (e.g., 15:13 // 47:27). This providence is made explicit in 50:15-21, whereby the brothers fear Joseph’s retaliation, but Joseph refuses, acknowledging God’s purposes behind their betrayal many years prior: “But you all, you had intended evil against me – God had intended to do good, as it is today – for the living of many people” ( 50:20).166 God thus orchestrates his beneficent purpose, a
using human actors who espoused contrary motivations, to bless both the elect and the nations. Genesis’ penultimate chapter features Jacob’s poetic blessing over his twelve sons (49:1ff). Though the entire family line is understood as elect, that is, they form the chosen nation or people,167 Joseph’s and Judah’s blessings are of notable interest. Between verses 22 through 26, the Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS and Research text describes Joseph as being “set 3999-11: apart fromReading his brothers” ()נזיר אחיו, and he is the only son Professor D. Andrew Teeter who is explicitly said to be both blessed by God and who receives blessing ( )ברכהfrom God (49:25-26). The Chronicler, reflecting on Genesis 49, understood Joseph to have elect, firstborn status. He writes, “the birthright belonged to Joseph” (( )והבכרה ליוסף1 Chron. 5:2). Yet, in versKaminsky, 70. E.g., 38:16, Judah not recognizing Tamar; 39:6, Potiphar not concerning himself with anything in his home; 42:23, Joseph’s brothers not realizing Joseph understands their speech; 43:22, the brothers not knowing how their money was returned to their bags; 44:15, Joseph questioning the brothers regarding Joseph’s claim to practice divination. 165
166
53 Body Pages } ואתם חשבתם עלי רעה אלהים חשבה לטבה למען עשה כיום הזה להחית עם־רב
As in 17:7 – “And I will establish my covenant between me, and between you, and between your seed following you, and their generations, as a covenant forever – to be to you God and to your seed following you.” והקמתי את־בריתי ביני ובינך ובין זרעך אחריך לדרתם לברית עולם להיות לך לאלהים ולזרעך אחריך 167
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
45
es 8 through 12, the repentant and transformed Judah is granted to be the vector through whom the future royal dynasty comes (cf. 17:6; 35:11; 1 Chron. 2:1-15). Both of these sons, then, appear to be given particularly special status in Genesis’ election scheme. Conclusions: The Nature and Purpose of Election in Genesis Of election, the book of Genesis yields much theological fruit across its fifty chapters. As the doctrine is progressively revealed across the text, its nuanced complexities lend themselves to
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
a number of different potential organizational schemes (and there is a seeming inevitable overlap of the various categories and sub-categories the doctrine occupies). One apparent and viable configuration for distilling Genesis’ election content is to arrange the material according to its nature and purpose with regard to the respective vantage points of God and humanity. { The Deity and Election } The Deity as Creator – The divine nature of YHWH-God and his vertical relationship to the created order in Genesis should not be taken for granted. The book of Genesis presents the Deity as one who is a fashioner of the world and all that it contains (1:1-2:1ff). He personally crafts the human (2:7). The GodNicholas of Genesis is not impotent Emmanuel Mariakis nor distant and uninvolved, but HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research rather, the text presents the Deity as preeminently powerful and immanently immersed. He is Ēl Professor D. Andrew Teeter Šadday ()אל שדי, the almighty God ( 17:1; 28:3; 35:11; 48:3; cf. 49:25). These attributes underlie a
YHWH-God’s ability to enact his divine will in terms of election. The Deity as Sovereign – God-as-creator presumes that the Deity is sovereign, yet this unrestricted autonomy is made apparent across Genesis as demonstrated by God’s will to choose. Election is by God’s divine choice (as much as creation is). God elects and establishes his covenant or oath with Noah, Abraham, and Isaac (6:18; 9:9-17; 15:18; 53 Body Pages } 17:2-21; 26:3). Election, being under the purview of divine providence, is a divine act and may come about in Genesis through unusual and sovereign methods – for example, the miraculous conception and birth of elect Isaac (11:30; Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
46
18:9-10; 21:1-2). Ishmael was conceived according to ordinary human passions (Abram’s complex relational dynamic with the mother notwithstanding), but God willed to elect the humanly impossible child. Additionally, though God is the creator of all humankind, and all people are divine image-bearers (1:26-27; 9:6), Genesis’ Deity particularly elects some individuals or peoples over others. Isaac is specially chosen over Ishmael, as Israel is specially chosen over the other nations. The Nature of Divine Election – There are several predominant aspects to the essence of election A in the book of of Genesis. In this firstOn book of the Hebrew Bible, election is revelatory, and Theology Chosenness: Election in the Book of Genesis God unveils his intentions and fulfills his purposes in terms of what will occur according
to his plans. Integral to God’s carrying out of these divine objectives is the timing of election. For example, foreordination is indicative of God’s ways, and election means the creator-God will bring to fruition that which he has earlier decreed. The election of the covenant child Isaac was ordained a quarter-century before his birth in time and space (12:2; 21:1-3), and similarly, Jacob was elected by divine oracle while he and his slightly older twin brother were still in utero (25:2223). Yet, the acquisition of elect status – from Jacob’s human vantage point – was not procured until at least forty years later (27:1ff). In dreams, Joseph was depicted as receiving obeisance, but this was manifested in reality onlyNicholas many years later (37:5-11; 41:43ff). Inherent to such foreordiEmmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research nation in Genesis is the variable timing between God’s election Professor D. Andrew Teeter promise (or prognostication) and its eventual fulfillment in each specific case. Additionally, human agents in Genesis are often not made privy to God’s election itinerary. YHWH did not initially provide Abram a timetable as to when his elect seed would come (12:2). Only after many years of waiting did Abraham receive word when God was going act in the process of election. In 18:10, God gives Abraham one year of notice until the birth of Isaac, and the Deity does not appear to the elect son until at least forty years later (cf. Jacob; 25:20; 53 Body Pages } 26:24). Indicative of these appearances is that election in Genesis entails relationality. The Deity interacts in special ways with the elect, whether through speaking (12:1), via messenger (22:11, 15;
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
47
32:2-3), in dreams (28:12-15; 31:11; 37:5-11), or physically (32:25-33; cf. 2:7).168 Lastly, God may break into one’s world unexpectedly in order to carry out his election agenda. Abram, for example, is not said to be seeking YHWH when the Deity chooses him (12:1ff). Overall, God’s election schemes in Genesis are opaque until they are made known. Relatedly, in Genesis, God may be absent narratively but still working behind the scenes to fulfill his election purposes.169 Finally, despite the ostensible unfairness and arbitrariness of the doctrine, the book of Genesis A nevertheless to view God’s election agenda positive terms. Just as ʾĔlōhîm Theologyappears of Chosenness: On Election ininthe Book of 170 Genesis crafts a creation that is good (1:31), so too are his election plans good. Though readers may object to the Deity’s means and methods in the text – such as allowing an elect personage like Joseph to undergo extraordinarily severe tribulation – the text affirms God’s good motives behind allowing even Joseph’s betrayal (50:20; cf. 45:5-7). Additionally, despite the fact that Joseph’s jealous brothers meant to harm the teenager, God employed their betrayal to orchestrate the preservation of nations. From Genesis 3 onward, the created world is tarnished, and God must sovereignly operate in less-than-ideal circumstances and with respect to genuine human volition. Moreover, Genesis’ election model is intentionally covenantal. The sovereign Deity estab-
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis lishes his election relationships via bĕrît with Reading Noah (6:18; 9:9) and the patriarchs (e.g., 15:18-19; HDS 3999-11: and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter 17:1ff; 26:3-4; 50:24). Furthermore, God repeatedly reaffirms his election covenant (15:18-19 //
17:1ff; 26:3-26:4 // 35:9-35:12), which is predicated upon election promises such as land, seed, blessing, and kingship (12:1-3; 13:14-16; 15:1ff; 17:1ff; et al.).
Though God interacts in special modes with the elect, the Deity also does so in Genesis with the non-elect as well, notes Professor David Andrew Teeter (e.g., 20:3; 31:24; 41:7; this information is from the defense of this thesis on June 17, 2021). 53 Body Pages } 168
169
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 70.
Professor D.A. Teeter rightly and helpfully points out that election is complex and that some interpreters find Genesis’ election model troubling (this information is from the defense of this thesis on June 17, 2021). 170
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
48
{ Humanity and Election } Humanity – Humanity occupies a special place in God’s created order. Each man and woman is fashioned in the image of the divine (1:26-27; 9:6), and as such, there exists a shared ontology across all people groups. All persons intrinsically are, in principle, capable of relationship with YHWH, which Genesis presumes (4:26). Of course, the category of anti-elect complicates the matter, albeit Genesis does not strip even these persons of their divine likeness. Moreover, humanity isAdepicted as stemming from a mutual (3:20; 10:1ff), which establishes Theology of Chosenness: On corporeal Electionlineage in the Book of Genesis a “universal context”171 for Israel’s election narrative that unfolds throughout Genesis.
Categories of Election – Genesis presents several broad categories pertaining to the doctrine of election. Indeed, even the basic classification of chosen or elect is nuanced in Genesis. In the Primeval History, for example, the national election of Israel appears to be at play in chapters 1 and 2, while the individual election of personages such as Abel and Noah occur in 4 and 6:8ff. In the patriarchal narratives, God elects the individual Abram, who serves to become the father of the elect nation of Israel (12:2-3). Not all children of the elect are regarded equally, however. God passes over Ishmael to appoint Isaac (17:18-19), as he passes over Esau to select Jacob (25:23). Jacob’s progeny, though, presents Nicholas a slightlyEmmanuel different paradigm. Mariakis Not only is Joseph depicted as a HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research specially elect figure (37:2ff), but by chapterD. 49,Andrew Judah is highly esteemed and is represented in Professor Teeter royal terms (vv. 8-12). Here, two sons receive specially chosen status. In addition to the elect, Genesis’ narrative describes two other groups, the non-elect and the anti-elect.172 These classifications apply to individuals as well as to people groups. Cain,173 along with Ishmael, are ideally understood as non-elect individuals, though they are part of specially chosen families, or rather, families that have specially chosen parents (4:1-5; 17:18-19). Lot is 53 Body Pages } 171
Schnabel, “Israel, the People of God, and the Nations,” 35.
172
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 4.
173
Kaminsky, 24. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
49
among the non-elect,174 as are entire people groups in the Table of Nations (10:1ff; 11:31ff). Moreover, of Jacob’s sons, Joseph and Judah are uniquely chosen over and amongst their brothers, though the whole of the twelve are specially chosen as the tribal ancestors of Israel (Gen. 49:28). Even within a chosen group, there are gradations of election in Genesis. As a further matter, the enigmatic Melchizedek, priest-king of Salem, represents another nuance of non-elect figures (14:18-24). This personage, outside of the Abrahamic line, is shown as a faithful YHWH worshipper. Yet, additionally, as a priestin (the with of theGenesis label “priest”), he A Theology of Chosenness: On Election thefirstBook
occupies a special ministerial role towards the creator-God, which is later filled by the Levitical priesthood (Exod. 29:1ff; cf. Deut. 21:5). Later in the Hebrew Bible, the important Psalm 110 elevates this mysterious royal-priestly character by setting him in comparison to a comparably puzzling, yet lofty, monarchal figure who analogously serves as a priest like Melchizedek. The class of anti-elect includes those who are specifically cursed, such as Ham’s son Canaan (9:25-27). From this son descend the Canaanites (10:6, 15-19), a group that Genesis does not esteem. As part of his covenantal elective promise, YHWH intends to grant the land of Canaan to Abram and his posterity (17:8). Chapters 10:15-19 and 12:6 inform the reader that the Canaanite peoples were inhabiting aforementioned Nicholasthe Emmanuel Mariakisland in 17:8, which portends the HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research pending conquest in Joshua. Genesis anticipates peoples Teeter who will actively oppose the elect nation Professor D. Andrew (22:17; 24:60). As such, these nations better fit into an anti-elect scheme than a non-elect one. Regarding the nature of election, Genesis does not present the doctrine as entailing exclusive soteriological benefits. Both the elect and the non-elect are capable of relationship with God in Genesis. Not only did the primeval world universally worship YHWH (4:26),175 but covenantal outsiders such as Abimelech can be genuine God-fearers,176 and foreigners can be included within the Abrahamic Covenant by receiving the covenantal sign (17:12-14). Election in Genesis is 53 Body Pages } 174
Levenson, Inheriting Abraham, 42.
175
Levenson, “The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism,” 148.
176
Brodie, 258. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
50
not necessarily predicated on genetics – and the common descent of humanity, along with collective divine-image-bearing – militates against such a view (1:26-27; 9:6). Nevertheless, Genesis presents an election model in which covenantal promises may be passed to the children born of approved Mesopotamian parentage (24:4; 28:2-5). Canaanite women are considered unworthy spouses (though the text does not state this is because they are genetically Canaanite) (24:3, 37; 28:1). Despite Genesis’ interest in parental pedigree, God’s election blessings are passed onto Joseph’s A child Ephraim,of theChosenness: child of his Egyptian wife Asenath (41:45-52; Theology On Election in the Book of48:13-20). GenesisGod thus
strategically employs physical ancestry in election but may do so in a nuanced way. Ephraim, the younger of the two boys, represents another aspect of election in Genesis, the inversion of the younger over the older. Jacob is specially chosen over Esau, as Joseph is over his brothers (25:23; 37:5-11; cf. Rachel over Leah). The text provides no explicit rationale for such twists. Election in Genesis requires covenantal faithfulness and devotion to the creator-God alone. Though the early world called upon YHWH (4:26), the text subtly shows the reader that some are deviating from the unique worship of the creator-God. For example, Laban employs tĕrāpîm (( )תרפים31:19ff), the Egyptians are engaged in their national cult (47:22, 26), and Jacob comNicholas Emmanuel Mariakis mands his household to turnHDS from3999-11: their foreign godsand (35:2). The elect are depicted otherwise. Reading Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter Abel, Noah, and Abraham onward are unique worshippers of YHWH-God ( Jacob’s initial trepidation in 28:20-22 notwithstanding), which is often manifested in Genesis in the building of cultic altars (8:20; 12:7-8; 13:4; 22:9; et al.). Loyalty to the LORD may be tested, as in God’s command to Abraham to offer up Isaac (22:1ff).177 Further, the faithful like Jacob may pray to remind God to be loyal to his promises (32:12-13; cf. Isaac’s prayer on behalf of barren Rebekah; 25:20-21). Additionally, the election of Abraham and his posterity absolutely mandates covenantal fidelity by accepting and passing on the 53covenantal Body Pagessign } (17:10ff; 21:4).
177
Levenson, The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son, 126. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
51
Though Genesis presents election as a divine prerogative, the book does not resolve the interplay between human choice and God’s sovereignty. As Kaminsky observes, “the way in which such election unfolds is ultimately bound up in a complex set of human motives and actions that are done freely by humans, but nevertheless orchestrated by God to bring his plans to fruition.”178 Relatedly, although the elect are called to faithfulness, it seems difficult to sustain the notion that election in Genesis is at all earned. Besides Jacob’s unethical usurpation of the patriarchal blessing, each elect in Genesis from Noah through Judah and in Joseph portrayed with varying deAfigure Theology of Chosenness: On Election the isBook of Genesis
grees of character impediments (9:21; 37:2; 38:1ff). Given the aforementioned explicitly foreordained nature of election in some cases in Genesis, it thus seems best to see election as predicated primarily upon divine prerogative. Furthermore, per this divine agenda, the elect in Genesis are not shielded from sliding gradations of suffering, whether from the pain of childlessness, harsh oppression by one’s own family, or from unjust accusations (11:30; 31:41; 39:7ff; et al.).179 { The Purposes of Election } God elects – but why? For what reasons does YHWH-God specially choose some individuals or a nation of people? In terms of the Primeval History, it appears quite plausible that GeneNicholas Emmanuel Mariakis sis indeed has in mind the election Israel in chapters and 2. Sabbath, conquest, dietary restricHDSof3999-11: Reading 1and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter tions, and the tabernacle and temple all seem to be in view,180 along with an analogical comparison between the formation of humanity vis-à-vis Israel. Further, as God dwells with the primordial couple, so too does God dwell amongst Israel in the tabernacle and temple, respectively. Several chapters later, Noah is purposed as a new humanity in order to preserve both human and faunal life in the context of de-creation and judgment upon a world vexed by moral turpitude.
53 Body Pages } 178
Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 75.
179
Kaminsky, 63, 52.
180
Clifford, “Election in Genesis 1,” 7ff. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
52
The patriarchal narratives that follow articulate another new humanity or program in Abram, the father of the nation of Israel. His election entails promises of blessing (part of which is material in scope); individual and national offspring; monarchy (perhaps Davidic);181 and the claiming of the land of Canaan, the territory of the anti-elect. As God brought judgment upon the inhabitants of the primeval land by a massive deluge, Israel will eventually bring God’s judgment upon the anti-elect, which is hinted at in 15:16 (Deut. 7:1ff; et al.). Judgment comesofupon the unethical, andElection thus it should comeBook as no of surprise that ethics is A Theology Chosenness: On in the Genesis
an integral aspect of election in Genesis.182 Noah, unlike those washed away in the flood, is a
man of righteous and blameless standing (6:9; despite his flaws – 9:21). Abraham is specially chosen that he might follow in YHWH’s stead by doing “righteousness and justice” and teaching his progeny to do the same (18:19). Reflecting on the Joseph narrative, Shai Held sees an other-directed beneficence indicative of election.183 The elect are called to be a blessing, which both Abram and Isaac fail to do with respect to Pharaoh and Abimelech – and which both Simeon and Levi fail to do (after the sexual assault of Dinah) when slaughtering the men of Shechem (by duping them into a false sense of security via the sign of the covenant; 34:1ff). As the elect are intended to comport themselves Nicholas righteously and to beMariakis a blessing, the surrounding nations will Emmanuel HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research bless themselves in the elect. Moreover, as D. God covenants Professor Andrew Teeterwith the elect, the elect may form covenants with the nations around them (21:27, 32). Ultimately, the elect are to be in right relationship amongst themselves184 and with those around them.
181
Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part Two, From Noah to Abraham, 368.
That stated, ethics is an integral aspect of being a divine image-bearer (1:26-27) – and thus, Genesis expects moral integrity from all persons, notes Professor J.D. Levenson (e.g., 6:5; 18:20; this information is from the defense of this thesis on June 17, 2021). 53 Body Pages } 182
Shai Held, “Election and Service: What Joseph Learned.” In The Heart of Torah, Volume 1, 83-87. By Shai Held and Yitz Greenberg (Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2017), 86. 183
As Kaminsky writes of the elect, “if one hopes to see God’s face and thus receive God’s blessing, one must be reconciled with one’s brother.” Kaminsky, Yet I Loved Jacob, 57, 74. 184
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
53
Lastly, an indispensable aspect of election in Genesis is proper worship. Though the collective primeval world called upon the name of God, of YHWH, Genesis depicts a global landscape that is beginning to unravel in terms of its character as well as its devotion to the creator-God. The elect are chosen by God and called to be wholly devoted to him as they move about the world and fulfill his purposes.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter
53 Body Pages } ___________
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
54
Bibliography Alter, Robert. The Art of Biblical Narrative. New York: Basic Books, 1981. Anderson, Bernhard W. “From Analysis to Synthesis: The Interpretation of Genesis 1-11.” Journal of Biblical Literature 97, no. 1 (March 1978): 23–39. Anderson, Gary A. The Genesis of Perfection: Adam and Eve in Jewish and Christian Imagination. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2001. Anderson, Gary A., Joel S. Kaminsky. The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson. Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity; v. 19. Notre Dame: University Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis ofANotre Dame Press, 2013. Anderson, Gary A., Michael E. Stone, and Johannes Tromp. Literature on Adam and Eve: Collected Essays. Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha. Leiden: Brill, 2000. Arnold, Bill T; Williamson, H.G.M., eds. Dictionary of the Old Testament: Historical Books –A Compendium Of Contemporary Biblical Scholarship. Downers Grove: IVP, 2005. Arnold, Bill T. Introduction to the Old Testament. Introduction to Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014. Assis, Eliyahu. Identity in Conflict: The Struggle Between Esau and Jacob, Edom and Israel. Siphrut 19. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2016. Baden, Joel S. “Hithpael and Niphal in Biblical Hebrew: Semantic and Morphological Overlap." Vetus Testamentum 60, no. 1 (2010): 33-44. Emmanuel Mariakisand Interpretation.” The Catholic ______“The Morpho-Syntax of Nicholas Genesis 12:1-3: Translation HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Biblical Quarterly 72, no. 2 (2010): 223-37. Professor D. Andrew Teeter ______ The Promise to the Patriarchs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013. Benno, Jacob. The First Book of the Bible: Genesis. New York: Ktav Publishing House, 1974. Biddle, Mark E. “The ‘Endangered Ancestress’ and Blessing for the Nations." Journal of Biblical Literature 109, no. 4 (1990): 599-611. Bergant, Dianne. Genesis. Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 2013. Blenkinsopp, Joseph. Creation, Un-Creation, Re-Creation: A Discursive Commentary on Genesis 1-11. London: Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2011. ______ “Yahweh and Other Deities: Conflict and Accommodation in the Religion of Israel.” In53 Body Pages } terpretation 40, no. 4 (October 1986): 354–66. Brodie, Thomas L. Genesis as Dialogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
55
Brown, Francis; Driver, Samuel Rolles; Briggs, Charles Augustus, Enhanced Brown-Driver-Briggs Hebrew and English Lexicon. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1977. Brueggemann, Walter. “Expository Articles: Genesis 17:1-22.” Interpretation (Richmond) 45, no. 1 (1991): 55-59. ______Reverberations of Faith: A Theological Handbook of Old Testament Themes. Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 2002. Cassuto, Umberto. A Commentary on the Book of Genesis: Part One, From Adam to Noah, Genesis IVI. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1961.
TheologyonoftheChosenness: theto Book of Genesis Genesis ______AACommentary Book of Genesis:On PartElection Two, Fromin Noah Abraham, VII9-XI32. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, Hebrew University, 1964. Chapman, Stephen. “Food, Famine, and the Nations: A Canonical Approach to Genesis,” in Genesis and Christian Theology, 323-333. Edited by Nathan MacDonald, M. W. Elliott, and Grant Macaskill. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2012. Clifford, Richard J. “Election in Genesis 1.” In The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson, 7-22. Edited by Gary A. Anderson, and Joel S. Kaminsky. Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity; v. 19. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2013. Clines, David. J. A. The Theme of the Pentateuch. Second Edition with an Afterward, JSOT Sup 10. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1997. Collins, John J. “A Symbol Of Otherness: Circumcision and Salvation In The First Century.” In Seers, Sibyls & Sages in Hellenistic-Roman Judaism, 211-235. Edited by John J. Collins. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis Leiden: Brill, 1997. HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter Cott, Jeremy. “The Biblical Problem of Election.” Journal of Ecumenical Studies 21, no. 2 (Spring 1984): 199–228. Dahlberg, Bruce T. “The Unity of Genesis,” in Literary Interpretations of Biblical Narratives, 126-134. Edited by James Stokes Ackerman and Kenneth R.R. Gros Louis. Vol. 2. Nashville: Abingdon, 1982. Dean, David Andrew. “Covenant, Conditionality, and Consequence: New Terminology and a Case Study in the Abrahamic Covenant.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 57, no. 2 ( June 2014): 281–308. Delitzsch, Franz. A New Commentary on Genesis. Clark's Foreign Theological Library; New Ser., v. 36-37. Edinburgh: T&T Clark,53 1899. Body Pages } Eichler, Barry L. “On Reading Genesis 12:10–20.” In Ehillah Le-Moshe: Biblical and Judaic Studies in Honor of Moshe Greenberg, edited by Mordechai Cogan, Barry L. Eichler, and Jeffrey H. Tigay, 23-38. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1997. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
56
Fabry, Heinz-Josef. “צ ָלע.” ֵ In Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, edited by G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, and Heinz-Josef Fabry, 400-405. Vol. 12. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, 1974. Fishbane, Michael. Text and Texture: Close Readings of Selected Biblical Texts. New York: Schocken Books, 1979. Fox, Michael V. “Sign of the Covenant: Circumcision in the Light of the Priestly ’ôt Etiologies.” Revue Biblique 81, no. 4 (October 1974): 557–96. Fretheim, Terence E. New Interpreters Bible: Genesis to Leviticus, edited by Leander E. Keck. Vol. 1.A(Nashville: Press, 1994), 384. TheologyAbingdon of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis ______“The Jacob Traditions.” Interpretation (Richmond) 26, no. 4 (1972): 419-36.
Gallagher, Sarita D. “Blessing on the Move: The Outpouring of God's Blessing through the Migrant Abraham.” Brill: Mission Studies 30, no. 2 (2013): 147-61. Garr, W. Randall. “Abraham’s Election in Faith.” In The Call of Abraham: Essays on the Election of Israel in Honor of Jon D. Levenson, 23-43. Edited by Gary A. Anderson, and Joel S. Kaminsky. Christianity and Judaism in Antiquity; v. 19. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 2013. Geyser-Fouche, Ananda, and Carli Fourie. “Inclusivity in the Old Testament.” HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies 73, no. 4 (2017): 1-9. Goodman, Martin; Van Kooten, Geurt Hendrik; Van Ruiten, J. Abraham, the Nations, and the Hagarites: Jewish, Christian, and Islamic Perspectives on Kinship with Abraham. Leiden: Brill, 2010. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Hays, Daniel. An Exegetical and Theological of the Abrahamic Covenant in a Canonical ConProfessorStudy D. Andrew Teeter text. Fort Worth: Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1992. Hamilton, James M. “The Seed of the Woman and the Blessing of Abraham.” Tyndale Bulletin (1966) 58, no. 2 (2007): 253-73. Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis: Chapters 1-17. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1990. Held, Shai. “Election and Service: What Joseph Learned.” In The Heart of Torah, Volume 1, 83-87. By Shai Held and Yitz Greenberg. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 2017. Houten, Christiana Van. The Alien in Israelite Law. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Supplement Series; 107. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991. 53 Body Pages } Kaminski, Carol M. Was Noah Good: Finding Divine Favor in the Flood Narrative. London: Bloomsbury T&T Clark, 2014.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
57
Kaminsky, Joel S., and Joel N. Lohr. “Election in the Bible.” Oxford Bibliographies. 2021. DOI: 10.1093/OBO/9780195393361-0250 Kaminsky, Joel S. “Did Election Imply the Mistreatment of Non-Israelites?” The Harvard Theological Review 96, no. 4 (2003): 397-425. ______“Election Theology and the Problem of Universalism.” Horizons in Biblical Theology, 33 (1) (2011): 34-44. ______Yet I Loved Jacob: Reclaiming the Biblical Concept of Election. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2007.
Theology of Chosenness: On Election theEthnic BookIdentity of Genesis Kennedy,AElisabeth Robertson. Seeking a Homeland: Sojourninand in the Ancestral Narratives of Genesis. Biblical Interpretation Series. Boston: Brill, 2011.
Kidner, Derek. Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary, Vol. 1, Tyndale Old Testament Commentaries. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1967. Kugel, James L. The Bible as It Was. Cambridge: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1997. Levenson, Jon. D. Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence. San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1988. ______Inheriting Abraham: The Legacy of the Patriarch in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Library of Jewish Ideas. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012. ______ The Death and Resurrection of the Beloved Son. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1993. ______“The Universal Horizon of Biblical Particularism.” In Ethnicity and the Bible, 143-170. NicholasInterpretation Emmanuel Mariakis Edited by Mark G. Brett (Biblical Series; v. 19). Leiden: Brill, 1996. HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research D. Andrew Teeter Lohr, Joel N. Chosen and Unchosen:Professor Conceptions of Election in the Pentateuch and Jewish-Christian Interpretation. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2009. Lyons, William John. “The Eternal Liminality of Lot.” In Universalism and Particularism at Sodom and Gomorrah: Essays in Memory of Ron Pirson, 3. Edited by Diana Lipton. Ancient Israel and Its Literature. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012. Matthews, Victor H. “Book of Genesis.” Oxford Bibliographies. 2010. DOI: 10.1093/OBO/ 9780195393361-0044 McCabe, Elizabeth A. “Answers to Unresolved Questions: A Closer Look at Eve and Adam in Genesis 2-3.” In Women in the Biblical World: A Survey of Old and New Testament Perspectives, 1-19. Edited by Elizabeth A.53McCabe. Lanham: UPA, 2009. Body Pages } Mermelstein, Ari. “When History Repeats Itself: The Theological Significance of the Abrahamic Covenant in Early Jewish Writings.” Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha 27, no. 2 (2017): 113-42. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
58
Mettinger, Tryggve N.D. The Eden Narrative: A Literary and Religio-Historical Study of Genesis 23. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007. Miller, James C. “Ethnicity and the Hebrew Bible: Problems and Prospects.” Currents in Biblical Research 6, no. 2 (2008): 170-213. Morris, Paul. “Exile from Eden: Jewish Interpretations of Genesis.” In A Walk in the Garden: Biblical, Iconographical and Literary Images of Eden, 117–166. Edited by Paul Morris and Deborah F. Sawyer. Sheffield: JSOT, 1992. Neff, Robert W. “The Birth and Election of Isaac in the Priestly Tradition.” Biblical Research 15, no. 15 (1970): 5-18.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Noonan, Benjamin J. “Abraham, Blessing, and the Nations: A Reexamination of the Niphal and Hitpael of ברךin the Patriarchal Narratives.” Hebrew Studies 51 (2010): 73-93. Novak, David. The Election of Israel: The Idea of the Chosen People. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. ______The Image of the Non-Jew in Judaism: The Idea of Noahide Law. 2nd ed. New York: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 2011. Oded, Bustenay. The Table of Nations (Genesis 10). Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft, 98 (1) (1986): 14-31. Orlinsky, Harry. “Nationalism-Universalism and Internationalism in Ancient Israel.” In Translating and Understanding the Old Testament, 206–236. Edited by Harry Frank and William Reed. Nashville: Abingdon, 1970. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis Otzen, Benedikt. “יָ ַצר.” In Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, edited by G. Johannes BotHDS 3999-11: Reading and Research terweck, and Helmer Ringgren, 257-265. Vol. 6. Grand Rapids, MI: W.B. Eerdmans, Professor D. Andrew Teeter 1990. Provan, Iain. Discovering Genesis: Content, Interpretation, Reception. Discovering Biblical Texts (DBT). Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2016. Rendtorff, Rolf. The Old Testament: An Introduction. Translated by John Bowden. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1991. Ross, Allen P. “The Table of Nations in Genesis 10: Its Content: Part 3 of Studies in the Book of Genesis.” The Bibliotheca Sacra, 138 (549) (1981): 22-34. Anderson, Bernhard W. “From Analysis to Synthesis: The Interpretation of Genesis 1-11.” Journal of Biblical Literature 97, no. 1 (March 1978): 23–39. 53 Body Pages } Schearing, Linda. “Adam and Eve.” Oxford Bibliographies. 2015. DOI:10.1093/OBO/ 9780195393361-0104
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
59
Schnabel, Eckard J. “Israel, the People of God, and the Nations.” Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 45, no. 1 (2002): 35-57. Schneider, Tammi J. “In the Beginning and Still Today: Recent Publications on Genesis.” Currents in Biblical Research 18, no. 2 (2020): 142-59. Shafer, Byron E. "The Root Bḥr and Pre-Exilic Concepts of Chosenness in the Hebrew Bible.” Zeitschrift Für Die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 89, no. 1 (1977): 20-42. Skinner, John. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Genesis. 2nd ed. International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments v.1. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1930.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Ska, Jean Louis. Introduction to Reading the Pentateuch. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2006. Sohn, Seock-Tae. The Divine Election of Israel. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 1991. Spina, F. A. The Faith of the Outsider: Exclusion and Inclusion in the Biblical Story. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2005. Sternberg, Meir. The Poetics of Biblical Narrative. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985. Stone, Timothy. “Joseph in the Likeness of Adam: Narrative Echoes of the Fall,” in Genesis and Christian Theology, 62-73. Edited by Nathan MacDonald, M. W. Elliott, and Grant Macaskill. Grand Rapids: W.B. Eerdmans, 2012. Stordalen, Terje. “Man, Soil, Garden: Basic Plot in Genesis 2-3 Reconsidered.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 17, no. 53 (1992): 3-25. Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis Old Testament Library. Philadelphia: Westminster von Rad, Gerhard. Genesis: A Commentary. HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Press, 1972. Professor D. Andrew Teeter Teeter, David Andrew. “Genesis 1,” HDS 1102: Introduction to the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament 1: Pentateuch and Former Prophets, class lecture, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, September 24, 2020. Twersky, Geula. “Genesis 49: The Foundation of Israelite Monarchy and Priesthood.” Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 43, no. 3 (2019): 317-33. Wallace, Howard N. The Eden Narrative. Leiden: Brill, 1985. Walsh, Jerome T. “Genesis 2:4b-3:24: A Synchronic Approach.” Journal of Biblical Literature 96, no. 2 ( June 1977): 161–77. 53 Body Pages } Weinfeld, Moshe. The Promise of the Land: The Inheritance of the Land of Canaan by the Israelites. Taubman Lectures in Jewish Studies; 3. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
60
Westermann, Claus; Jenni, Ernst. Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 1997. Wills, Lawrence M. Not God's People: Insiders and Outsiders in the Biblical World. Religion in the Modern World. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2008. Williamson, Paul R. Abraham, Israel and the Nations: The Patriarchal Promise and Its Covenantal Development in Genesis. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2000. Wyschogrod, Michael. The Body of Faith: Judaism as Corporeal Election. New York: Seabury Press, 1983.
A Theology of Chosenness: On Election in the Book of Genesis
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis HDS 3999-11: Reading and Research Professor D. Andrew Teeter
53 Body Pages }
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis
A Thesis for the Master of Theology Program in Hebrew Bible / Old Testament
Nicholas Emmanuel Mariakis