Table Of ContentThomas L. Brodie
OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
2001
Genesis as Dialogue
OXFORD
UNIVERSITY PRESS
Oxford New York
Athens Auckland Bangkok Bogota Buenos Aires Cape Town
Chennai Dar es Salaam Delhi Florence Hong Kong Istanbul Karachi
Kolkata Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Mumbai Nairobi
Paris Sao Paulo Shanghai Singapore Taipei Tokyo Toronto Warsaw
and associated companies in
Berlin Ibadan
Copyright © 200 I by Thomas L. Brodie
Published by Oxford University Press, Inc.
198 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016
Oxford is a registered trademark of Oxford University Press
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior permission of Oxford University Press.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Brodie, Thomas L.
Genesis as dialogue: a literary, historical, and theological commentary /
Thomas L. Brodie.
p. em.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-19-513836-8
I. Bible. O.T. Genesis-Commentaries. I. Title.
BS1235·3 .B74 2001
222'.1107---<1C21
9 8 7 6 543 2 1
Printed in the United States of America
on acid-free paper
To the memory of
Theresa Gerard Zungu O.P., 1970-1995
who loved Genesis
Nkosi Sikelele iAfrika
and to the Clare hurlers
passion with a clear head
days better than dreams
Conocaimir an Id
It is not the literal past that rules us .... It is images
of the past. These are often as highly structured and
selective as myths. Images and symbolic constructs of
the past are imprinted, almost in the manner of gene
tic information, on our sensibility .... A society re
quires antecedents. Where these are not naturally at
hand, where a community is new or reassembled after
a long interval of dispersal or subjection, a necessary
past tense to the grammar of being is created by intel
lectual and emotional fiat.
George Steiner (1971, 13)
For the communities of faith that have valued the
book of Genesis, it is finally a theological statement.
The world and Israel belong to God, exist because of
God's intention, and are called to live towards God's
hope. Every scientific, historical, or literary analysis
that misses this claim misunderstands the text.
Walter Brueggemann (1985, 338)
'I
'//
A r a b I a n .:::::~.
\, \ Q, e s e \r\ r
'{ -../.. -::::.(."- -y/, ' // :::-
--~~.::-,,,,,
, ,,;'>) \IS'. 'A \ U D
'1/' ~'.
1"'\ \ \" / ' '->-- -
-'A' \ R ,-,A-I_ _ B-_' "J 1 A ~_ _ - 'n. ,"'0,". "\
\ ~
\ _ o\)t-....~ ~
II I ,..-::.~~ _~-""-- {-I". ,' 7>'
oa: \I ' ( 20, 0 , \. 40, 0 Kilometers l \-/1.... I 1 /< ( /-,-.- ,..... I 'I- _ .." t"\'~~ ~
'~;oo 200 300 Miles (, 't--/ . t'-'. - . i ./_,""'"1 />-,- -"\.. ... ~ / /
-.. I •
The lands of the Ancient Near East, From The Oxford History of the Biblical World, ed, Michael Coogan, copyright 1999 by Oxford University Press, Inc. Used
by permission.
During the days of the vast Persian Empire (ca. 550-330 BCE)-when far-flung
Greeks were accomplishing a luminous cultural revolution; when, through the
interwoven power of Persians and Greeks, the known world from the Indus to
Italy was united as never before; and when writing, already more than two
thousand years old, was moving beyond epic poetry toward new sophisticated
forms, especially toward Greek-language prose historiography-a group of Ju
deans assembled in one place, probably Jerusalem or Babylon, and took charge
of the writing of their own history. This history echoed centuries, perhaps even
millennia, but its focus was specific-Judea, especially Jerusalem. The resulting
multivolume account-from creation to the fall of Jerusalem (Genesis-Kings,
"the Primary History," spanning over 3,500 years)-did not just provide a
history for the people of Judea; it transformed history-writing and became a
landmark of world literature. Writing had reached a new level.
Such is one of this book's conclusions.
Other writers did likewise. Herodotus and Thucydides also wrote histories,
and of comparable length. And other cities, not just Jerusalem, built other
sweeping foundational narratives. Athens, by employing a well-established au
thor, Hellanicus, assured the composing of its own ancient history. So in time
did Babylon and Egypt-both relying on priest-writers. And so eventually did
Rome.
But the Jerusalem-oriented history was far more than history, more than a
variation on the Greeks. It had a unique resonance. Adapting Mesopotamian
tradition, it hearkened all the way back to creation. And, having absorbed many
of the prophets, it contained a great inner depth, a sense of reality as echoing.
The center of Jerusalem was Zion, Mount Zion; and behind Zion (Sion) lay
Sinai, Mount Sinai-one place of divine presence behind the other. The
Jerusalem-oriented history was so constructed that Mount Sinai's incomparable
mystique-God's great power and Moses' peerless leadership (Exodus
Deuteronomy)-hovered over the portrayal of Mount Zion, over the story of
Jerusalem (Samuel-Kings). And between the two stories of Sinai and Zion,
lending further perspective to both, was a centuries-long history of conquest,
failure, and judgment Ooshua-Judges). Jerusalem, therefore, might look drab
x Preface
on a given day, might suffer misery, but it was no vacuous city. Filtered through
it was an extraordinary presence which, whatever the vicissitudes of history,
was ultimately liberating and ennobling.
The flagship for this multivolume historiography was the book of Genesis.
Genesis is one of the world's great writings, but in modern times it has been
fragmented and trivialized-often reduced to a badly edited collection of
second-rate historical sources. The fragmentation is double-inside and out
side: it has been separated within itself (broken into parts, into hypothetical
sources); and, to a large extent, it has been separated from outside literature.
Thus, it has been both maimed and exiled.
The fragmenting process knows much, but it also misses much, and so be
comes destructive. It is like a wonderfully clever genderless visitor from Pluto,
which, descending to Earth through a morning mist, sees a brother and sister
walking together across the fields to school. Endowed with great perception, it
quickly catalogues the differences between the two, deduces that they belong
to different planets-one to Venus, the other to Mars-and with great effort
and care dispatches them on separate rockets to their planets of origin.
Aspects of this analogy are overdrawn, but its essence-the destructive sep
arating of things from one another and from their primary context-is depress
ingly true. The two creation texts (Genesis 1-2) are indeed very different, but
in the context of ancient literature they are also deeply complementary: together
they represent the two basic literary forms for depicting creation (Westermann,
I, 22). As such, and in their content, these creation narratives form a unity.
But much modern biblical criticism was virtually founded on the separating of
these two texts (Genesis_I-2), and biblical studies as a whole became contam
inated by the example of that foundational barbarism. Here the present writer
also has been guilty.
"Barbarism" is used here in a precise sense. Though plausibly reasoned and
nobly intended, the fragmenting of Genesis entailed the de facto destruction of
a great work of art.
However, the barbaric moment may be seen as a necessary phase. Ultimately,
modern research is not negative. On the contrary, it is now having a very
positive effect. It has led, in recent years, to two major streams of development,
and these have begun to bridge the two forms of fragmentation.
The first stream concerns the alleged fragmentation within-inside Genesis.
Genesis may indeed appear confused or broken-it has many variations-but
there has been an increasing appreciation that the variations have a positive
role: they are part of Genesis's literary art, and so the text begins to emerge as
a unity (e.g., Fokkelman, 1975; Alter, 1981; Sternberg, 1985; Brichto, 1998).
The second stream concerns the alleged fragmentation outside-the sepa
ration from other writings. Genesis is being connected increasingly with several
major bodies of literature, especially with antiquarian historiography, epic, and
prophecy. Antiquarian historiography (including Greek historiography; van Se
ters, 1992) accounts partly for Genesis's literary form or genre. Epic (mostly
Preface Xl
Mesopotamian) provides much of the plot of Genesis 1--9. And Israelite proph
ecy accounts for further aspects of the Pentateuch, especially of Genesis
(Schmid, 1976; van Seters, 1992, 1994). There is the possibility, therefore, as
never before in modern times, of restoring Genesis both to its inner unity and
to its place in world literature.
However, the two streams tend to operate in isolation. Those bridging the
inner gap, tracing Genesis's artistry and unity, generally follow a method that
is primarily literary. Those bridging the outer gap, linking Genesis with other
literatures, use a method that is primarily historical. The two methodologies
literary and historical-often remain apart.
This volume brings the streams together. While avoiding undue historical
speculation and undue literary theorizing, it seeks to synthesize what is best in
both methods.
In making this synthesis, it is necessary to take account of a further new
development. In the 1980s and especially in the 1990S, Genesis suddenly
emerged as an arresting psychodrama. There was a flood of books on the psy
chological aspect, as well as a television series. This awareness of Genesis's
psychological dimension is a positive development, provided the book is not
thereby reduced to psychology-as it was previously reduced to history, and
as it has sometimes been reduced to clever literary technique. Genesis is not
small. It is indeed a form of history; and it is psychological; and it also uses
literary technique. But it is much more.
Based on such developments, this study proposes three main ideas.
First, regarding content: Genesis is primarily about human existence. Among
Genesis's three main levels of interest-concerning individuals, groups, and
humans in general-it is the third level, regarding human existence in general,
which is primary and which governs the overall work. Thus, Genesis is indeed
a form of history; it serves as prologue to the Primary History and includes the
literary form of antiquarian historiography. But it is more than history; under
the mantle of antiquarian historiography it synthesizes several literary genres.
Genesis is didactic and encyclopedic. Thus, it is concerned not only with an
tiquarian history but even more so with human existence. The Jacob narrative,
for instance, is not an antiquarian curiosity. While full of historical echoes, it
is primarily a sophisticated portrayal of the progress and pitfalls of human life.
Jacob is indeed the founder of Israel, the father of the twelve, but he is also,
at one level, an open-ended model for all humans. His is a primordial biogra
phy-the first in the Bible. And in that biography the sense of life is not
negative. At the end, when, against all odds, the aged Jacob comes before the
great Pharaoh, the patriarch's ironic words effectively summarize life-short
and difficult, but surrounded by blessing (47=7-10).
Second, regarding structure: Genesis consists of twenty-six diptychs. Building on
older insights that several Genesis texts occur in pairs and that Genesis is
somehow binary or dialogical, this study makes a basic observation: The entire
book is composed of diptychs-accounts which, like some paintings, consist of
