Lesson 1, Topic 1
In Progress

Gen.12-50: Structure and Interpretation of the Fathers’ Stories

The usual structure of the fathers’ stories with the division into Abraham,  Jacob and Joseph does not correspond to the original structure. The  heading in 25:19 “This is the toledoth (genealogy) of Isaac” indicates  that from here to the death of Isaac (35:28) there is actually an Isaac  family history, which is then replaced 27:2 with the heading “This is the  toledoth of Jacob”, which reaches to the death of Jacob in Gen. 50  (vRad, p. 211). This is true even though Isaac is actually reported in  more detail only in Gen. 26. vRad points out (p. 286) that as long as the  eldest of the line lived, the clan traded under his name. This structure  does more justice to the confessional paternal triad Abraham – Isaac – Jacob than the one common today, which is based on the content of the  stories. This is the original structure: 

Gen. 12 toledoth of Abraham 

Gen. 25 toledoth of Isaac 

Gen. 27 toledoth of Jacobs 

However, we will stick to the structure that is common today. 

The stories of the Fathers have had to endure a partly adventurous  history of their interpretation in the last centuries. After the “classical”  Genesis commentary of Delitzsch, which interprets the stories of the fathers  in a way that emphasizes the history of salvation, there were numerous  other approaches. Here are some keywords from the informative  summary by Westermann, Genesis 12 – 50, p.2ff: 

  1. J. Wellhausen explains the story of the fathers as a back projection  from the time of the kings into the time of the patriarchs. Comment: The  much older parts of the fathers’ stories speak against it. 
  2. With the mythical interpretation and the discovery of the Babylonian  mythology of the “Panbabylonists” Abraham was explained to “a human  image of the moon god” Comment: unbelievable, to which nonsense atl.  “science” can lead.
  3. The tribal interpretation sees behind every narrative an image of a  tribal development. If, for example, Rachel dies at the birth of Benjamin,  this means in plain language that the tribe of Rachel ceased to exist as  soon as the tribe of Benjamin arose as an independent tribe. Comment:  Here an interpretation possibility which is certainly correct in the  individual case is zoomed up to the sole general key of the  interpretation. 
  4. The form- and tradition-historical interpretation of the individual stories  comes to the “critical” conclusion that all stories are fantasy creations.  Comment: it is unthinkable that meaningless fantasy creations without  historical and religious reference would be faithfully handed down over  centuries. 
  5. The interpretation of the fathers’ stories from the fathers’ religion  assumes that the God of Abraham was only the God of a clan and only  later identified with the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob. Comment:  The assumption that אל (el) denotes a clan god, which is necessarily the basis here, has long since been refuted by the finds from Ugarit. There  אל denotes a Canaanite high god. 
  6. The interpretation of the history of the Fathers with the help of  archaeology has then surprisingly been able to prove the truth of many  places and names of the stories of the Fathers, which in the meantime  have been hastily declared to be “legends” or “myths”, as historical.  Comment: So after all. 
  7. 7. The focus of the subsequent research is now no longer primarily on  the source separation, but on the exploration of oral layers lying before  it. Comment: on the one hand a really exciting fiddling, which can enrich  the more exact understanding of a history of the Fathers very much; on  the other hand, however, the danger to poke blindly with sticks in the fog  and to lose oneself in old-philological meticulousness, instead of letting  the Scriptures come to the fore as word of God to us. In fact, the stories of the Fathers are nothing other than the narrative unfolding  of the ancient confession of faith: “a wandering Aramean was my father who went to Egypt” (Dt. 26:5). They  represent a very weighty emphasis of the Pentateuch. All parts of the  prehistory from the creation of the world to Abraham fill 10 printed pages  in the Luther Bible. For the only three to four generations of the stories of  the fathers, Genesis then allows itself an opulent 44 printed pages. The  Abraham stories are the most important and significant theologically. 

The OT research widely assumes that the individual stories were  originally independently retold orally and then put into a larger overall  context and written down by the editor of the Fathers’ Tales. 

The narrator has connected these individual stories very impressively  under a general theme. Just as prehistory has as a continuous red  thread the invasion of sin and its multiplication, the story of the fathers  has as its content the blessing and the promise belonging to it. Thereby  a double promise is always mentioned: the promise of the numerous  descendants and the promise of the land. 

The basic blessing that runs throughout the Fathers’ stories is the blessing  of Abraham: “I will bless you … and you shall be a blessing” (12:1-3).  The other words of blessing can be seen as its variations: 

  • 12:1-3 Basic blessings and promises to Abraham. 
  • 13:16; 15:5; 17:5ff; 18:18; 22:17 Repetition/renewal of the blessing. 
  • 26:4. 24 and 35:11: Passing on to Isaac and Jacob. 

Everywhere in the stories of the fathers one finds the blessing and  promising God. Therefore, one can understand the stories of the fathers  quite correctly also as stories of blessing or as stories of promise! This is  suggested not least by the fact that the stories of the fathers begin with  the basic blessing of Abraham and end (apart from the “epilogue” in  chapter 50) with the heavyweight blessing of Jacob.