NIVAC Bundle 1: Pentateuch

By John H. Walton, Peter E. Enns, Roy Gane and Daniel I. Block

The NIV Application Commentary helps you communicate and apply biblical text effectively in today's context.

To bring the ancient messages of the Bible into today's world, each passage is treated in three sections:

• Original Meaning. Concise exegesis to help readers understand the original meaning of the biblical text in its historical, literary, and cultural context.
• Bridging Contexts. A bridge between the world of the Bible and the world of today, built by discerning what is timeless in the timely pages of the Bible.
• Contemporary Significance. This section identifies comparable situations to those faced in the Bible and explores relevant application of the biblical messages. The author alerts the readers of problems they may encounter when seeking to apply the passage and helps them think through the issues involved.

This unique, award-winning commentary is the ideal resource for today's preachers, teachers, and serious students of the Bible, giving them the tools, ideas, and insights they need to communicate God's Word with the same powerful impact it had when it was first written.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Zondervan
• Release date: Nov 3, 2015
• ISBN: 9780310530022

John H. Walton

John H. Walton (PhD, Hebrew Union College) is professor emeritus of Old Testament at Wheaton College Graduate School. He is the author or coauthor of numerous books, including Old Testament Today, with Andrew E. Hill; volumes on Job and Genesis in the NIV Application Commentary series; the six-volume Lost World series; and Genesis 1 as Ancient Cosmology. He was also coeditor, with Craig Keener, of the ECPA 2017 Bible of the Year winner, the NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible.

Book preview

NIVAC BUNDLE 1: PENTATEUCH

THE NIV APPLICATION COMMENTARY

From biblical text . . . to contemporary life

JOHN H. WALTON

PETER ENNS

ROY GANE

DANIEL I. BLOCK

ZONDERVAN

NIVAC Bundle 1: Pentateuch

Genesis—Copyright © 2001 by John H. Walton

Exodus—Copyright © 2000 by Peter Enns

Leviticus, Numbers—Copyright © 2004 by Roy Gane

Deuteronomy—Copyright © 2012 by Daniel I. Block

Requests for information should be addressed to:

Zondervan, 3900 Sparks Dr. SE, Grand Rapids, Michigan 49546

All Scripture quotations, unless otherwise indicated, are taken from The Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV®. Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.

Any Internet addresses (websites, blogs, etc.) and telephone numbers printed in this book are offered as a resource. They are not intended in any way to be or imply an endorsement by Zondervan, nor does Zondervan vouch for the content of these sites and numbers for the life of this book.

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. By payment of the required fees, you have been granted the non-exclusive, non-transferable right to access and read the text of this e-book on-screen. No part of this text may be reproduced, transmitted, downloaded, decompiled, reverse engineered, or stored in or introduced into any information storage and retrieval system, in any form or by any means, whether electronic or mechanical, now known or hereinafter invented, without the express written permission of Zondervan.

Genesis ePub Edition: ISBN 978-0-310-86620-6

Exodus ePub Edition: ISBN 978-0-310-52074-0

Leviticus, Numbers ePub Edition: ISBN 978-0-310-87301-3

Deuteronomy ePub Edition: ISBN 978-0-310-49201-6

ePub Bundle Edition: ISBN 978-0-310-53002-2

Contents

How to Use This Commentary

NIV Application Commentary: Series Introduction

---

Genesis

---

Exodus

---

Leviticus, Numbers

---

Deuteronomy

How to Use This Commentary

Thank you for purchasing the HarperCollins Christian Publishing eBook version of The NIV Application Commentary.

What is the difference between an eBook and a print book?

eReaders recognize text as one fluid string and are formatted in a single column. eReaders currently do not support the more complex layout seen in print version books. Therefore, some content may not appear in the same place as in the original print version, but it is structured consistently and uses hyperlinks to navigate between related content.

How do I use the eBook Table of Contents?

*Important Note: Be sure to consult your device manufacturer’s User’s Guide for device-specific navigation instructions.*

Selecting an entry in the Table of Contents takes you to that location in the eBook. Selecting the title of that specific entry or using your device’s Back button or function takes you back to the main Table of Contents.

How do I navigate the content?

The eBook version of The NIV Application Commentary includes introductory materials, commentary, footnotes, and indexes, organized by each Bible book discussed.

Introductory materials are hyperlinked directly to the content-specific location in the main text.

• Select the hyperlinked entry in the article or list to go to its location in the main text.

• Select the hyperlinked entry in the main text to go back to the article or list in the Table of Contents or use the device’s Back button or function to go back to the last selection.

Footnotes in the Commentary are marked with small, hyperlinked numbers ¹ to access comments and citations.

• Select the hyperlinked number in the main text to the corresponding footnote.

• Select the hyperlinked number to the left of the footnote to go back to the main text or use the device’s Back button or function to go back to the last selection.

Indexes includes hyperlinks directly to the content-specific location in the main text.

• Select an Index from the Table of Contents.

• Select the hyperlinked letter of the alphabet A to go to a corresponding list of entries.

• Use the device’s Next Page/Previous Page button or function to scroll through the entries.

• Select the hyperlinked page number 1 to go to the main text.

• Select the footnote entry marked with n1 to the corresponding footnote.

• Use the device’s Back button or function to go back to the last selection.

NIV Application Commentary

Series Introduction

THE NIV APPLICATION COMMENTARY SERIES is unique. Most commentaries help us make the journey from our world back to the world of the Bible. They enable us to cross the barriers of time, culture, language, and geography that separate us from the biblical world. Yet they only offer a one-way ticket to the past and assume that we can somehow make the return journey on our own. Once they have explained the original meaning of a book or passage, these commentaries give us little or no help in exploring its contemporary significance. The information they offer is valuable, but the job is only half done.

Recently, a few commentaries have included some contemporary application as one of their goals. Yet that application is often sketchy or moralistic, and some volumes sound more like printed sermons than commentaries.

The primary goal of the NIV Application Commentary Series is to help you with the difficult but vital task of bringing an ancient message into a modern context. The series not only focuses on application as a finished product but also helps you think through the process of moving from the original meaning of a passage to its contemporary significance. These are commentaries, not popular expositions. They are works of reference, not devotional literature.

The format of the series is designed to achieve the goals of the series. Each passage is treated in three sections: Original Meaning, Bridging Contexts, and Contemporary Significance.

Original Meaning

THIS SECTION HELPS you understand the meaning of the biblical text in its original context. All of the elements of traditional exegesis—in concise form—are discussed here. These include the historical, literary, and cultural context of the passage. The authors discuss matters related to grammar and syntax and the meaning of biblical words.¹ They also seek to explore the main ideas of the passage and how the biblical author develops those ideas.

After reading this section, you will understand the problems, questions, and concerns of the original audience and how the biblical author addressed those issues. This understanding is foundational to any legitimate application of the text today.

Bridging Contexts

THIS SECTION BUILDS a bridge between the world of the Bible and the world of today, between the original context and the contemporary context, by focusing on both the timely and timeless aspects of the text.

God’s Word is timely. The authors of Scripture spoke to specific situations, problems, and questions. The author of Joshua encouraged the faith of his original readers by narrating the destruction of Jericho, a seemingly impregnable city, at the hands of an angry warrior God (Josh. 6). Paul warned the Galatians about the consequences of circumcision and the dangers of trying to be justified by law (Gal. 5:2–5). The author of Hebrews tried to convince his readers that Christ is superior to Moses, the Aaronic priests, and the Old Testament sacrifices. John urged his readers to test the spirits of those who taught a form of incipient Gnosticism (1 John 4:1–6). In each of these cases, the timely nature of Scripture enables us to hear God’s Word in situations that were concrete rather than abstract.

Yet the timely nature of Scripture also creates problems. Our situations, difficulties, and questions are not always directly related to those faced by the people in the Bible. Therefore, God’s word to them does not always seem relevant to us. For example, when was the last time someone urged you to be circumcised, claiming that it was a necessary part of justification? How many people today care whether Christ is superior to the Aaronic priests? And how can a test designed to expose incipient Gnosticism be of any value in a modern culture?

Fortunately, Scripture is not only timely but timeless. Just as God spoke to the original audience, so he still speaks to us through the pages of Scripture. Because we share a common humanity with the people of the Bible, we discover a universal dimension in the problems they faced and the solutions God gave them. The timeless nature of Scripture enables it to speak with power in every time and in every culture.

Those who fail to recognize that Scripture is both timely and timeless run into a host of problems. For example, those who are intimidated by timely books such as Hebrews, Galatians, or Deuteronomy might avoid reading them because they seem meaningless today. At the other extreme, those who are convinced of the timeless nature of Scripture, but who fail to discern its timely element, may wax eloquent about the Melchizedekian priesthood to a sleeping congregation, or worse still, try to apply the holy wars of the Old Testament in a physical way to God’s enemies today.

The purpose of this section, therefore, is to help you discern what is timeless in the timely pages of the Bible—and what is not. For example, how do the holy wars of the Old Testament relate to the spiritual warfare of the New? If Paul’s primary concern is not circumcision (as he tells us in Gal. 5:6), what is he concerned about? If discussions about the Aaronic priesthood or Melchizedek seem irrelevant today, what is of abiding value in these passages? If people try to test the spirits today with a test designed for a specific first-century heresy, what other biblical test might be more appropriate?

Yet this section does not merely uncover that which is timeless in a passage but also helps you to see how it is uncovered. The authors of the commentaries seek to take what is implicit in the text and make it explicit, to take a process that normally is intuitive and explain it in a logical, orderly fashion. How do we know that circumcision is not Paul’s primary concern? What clues in the text or its context help us realize that Paul’s real concern is at a deeper level?

Of course, those passages in which the historical distance between us and the original readers is greatest require a longer treatment. Conversely, those passages in which the historical distance is smaller or seemingly nonexistent require less attention.

One final clarification. Because this section prepares the way for discussing the contemporary significance of the passage, there is not always a sharp distinction or a clear break between this section and the one that follows. Yet when both sections are read together, you should have a strong sense of moving from the world of the Bible to the world of today.

Contemporary Significance

THIS SECTION ALLOWS the biblical message to speak with as much power today as it did when it was first written. How can you apply what you learned about Jerusalem, Ephesus, or Corinth to our present-day needs in Chicago, Los Angeles, or London? How can you take a message originally spoken in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic and communicate it clearly in our own language? How can you take the eternal truths originally spoken in a different time and culture and apply them to the similar-yet-different needs of our culture?

In order to achieve these goals, this section gives you help in several key areas.

(1) It helps you identify contemporary situations, problems, or questions that are truly comparable to those faced by the original audience. Because contemporary situations are seldom identical to those faced by the original audience, you must seek situations that are analogous if your applications are to be relevant.

(2) This section explores a variety of contexts in which the passage might be applied today. You will look at personal applications, but you will also be encouraged to think beyond private concerns to the society and culture at large.

(3) This section will alert you to any problems or difficulties you might encounter in seeking to apply the passage. And if there are several legitimate ways to apply a passage (areas in which Christians disagree), the author will bring these to your attention and help you think through the issues involved.

In seeking to achieve these goals, the contributors to this series attempt to avoid two extremes. They avoid making such specific applications that the commentary might quickly become dated. They also avoid discussing the significance of the passage in such a general way that it fails to engage contemporary life and culture.

Above all, contributors to this series have made a diligent effort not to sound moralistic or preachy. The NIV Application Commentary Series does not seek to provide ready-made sermon materials but rather tools, ideas, and insights that will help you communicate God’s Word with power. If we help you to achieve that goal, then we have fulfilled the purpose for this series.

The Editors

1. Please note that in general, when the authors discuss words in the original biblical languages, the series uses a general rather than a scholarly method of transliteration.

GENESIS

THE NIV APPLICATION COMMENTARY

From biblical text . . . to contemporary life

JOHN H. WALTON

Contents

General Editor’s Preface

Author’s Preface

Abbreviations

Introduction

Outline

Bibliography

Text and Commentary on Genesis

Summary Overview of Genesis 1:1–2:3

Genesis 1:1–5

Genesis 1:6–13

Genesis 1:14–31

Genesis 2:1–3

Genesis 2:4–25

Genesis 3:1–7

Genesis 3:8–24

Genesis 4:1–16

Genesis 4:17–5:32

Genesis 6:1–4

Genesis 6:5–8:22

Genesis 9:1–29

Genesis 10:1–11:26

Genesis 11:27–12:20

Genesis 13–15

Genesis 16:1–18:15

Genesis 18:16–19:38

Genesis 20–21

Genesis 22

Genesis 23:1–25:18

Genesis 25:19–27:46

Genesis 28:1–22

Genesis 29:1–31:55

Genesis 32:1–33:20

Genesis 34:1–36:43

Genesis 37:1–47:26

Genesis 47:27–50:26

Scripture Index

Subject Index

Hebrew Word Index

Ancient Literature Index

Author Index

Allusions, Analogies, and Illustrations Index

Notes

General Editor’s Preface

WHEN WE THINK OF GOD, we typically want to jump immediately to what God can do for us. God saves us, we remember. We are grateful. But is this self-centered starting point really the most effective way of thinking about God? Reading this excellent commentary on Genesis by John Walton leads one to question whether the above assertion is the best starting point. Walton stresses that it certainly wasn’t the starting point for Abram and his family. Or better, perhaps, it wasn’t the starting point for God as he revealed himself in the book of Genesis.

In Genesis, the starting point was revelation. Especially after the Tower of Babel it became evident that people had forgotten who God was. They needed reminding. The moves God made were essentially concerned with putting himself in front of the world’s peoples. He covenanted with Abram and his family for them to represent God by the way they lived according to the law they embraced. This covenant is about revelation (what God wants for us), not salvation (what we get from God).

Of course, in the end revelation leads to redemption and salvation. You can’t have one without the other. But the order is important. Get the order wrong and religion falls prey to all kinds of temptations—self-centeredness, human religion, individualism, and false gods. God wanted to remind his creation that he was still around: Then you will know that I am Yahweh.

Forgetfulness of God is still a problem. Today it may take a little different form; instead of asking who God is, we are more likely to ask whether God is. But we are still fixed in a sometimes unhealthy way on salvation—what we can get—instead of first opening ourselves to revelation. Because of this we suffer various losses.

The first thing lost is a sense of the distinction between Creator (God) and created (us). We have come to think of the doctrine of revelation as referring to the content of Scripture. Revelation is that, of course. But before it is that, revelation is about God making himself known through creation, through the Holy Spirit, through the mighty acts we celebrate in worship. At the heart of all these revelations is a Revealer; recognizing that reminds us that we are creations of that Creator God—mini-revelations ourselves, I suppose.

The second thing lost is a proper sense of synergy between community and individual. The common wisdom holds that our Western culture is too individualistic. You could conceivably make the argument that some Third World and indigenous people groups are too communalistic (at least human rights advocates sometimes argue that). Salvation, in focusing on the fates of both communities and individuals, tempts us to overemphasize one or the other. Revelation, on the other hand, shifts the focus away from both onto God and insists that both the community and the individual find their true meaning only when in relationship with God.

The third thing lost is the realization that both faith and action are necessary in the Spirit-led life. In insisting on this, John Calvin called to our attention the parable of the lost treasure. The treasure may be lost in the field, Calvin said, and it is a point of faith to recognize that God put it there. But once we realize it is there, it is up to us to act, to go find it. Revelation insists that the treasure, the only treasure, is the one God put in the field.

Finally, an emphasis on salvation to the exclusion of revelation paradoxically leads us to forget the mystery of salvation. We live in a society that worships the problem-solving approach to life. In such a climate, it is easy to reduce the process of salvation to a problem-solving technique that you and I can master. Salvation is not achieved through a technique. Salvation is a miracle. Salvation is a mystery. Salvation is a gift of God.

A proper reading of Genesis reminds us of who God is and what God did. Only when we get those two things straight can we faithfully embrace what God does for us.

Terry C. Muck

Author’s Preface

I AM GRATEFUL to a number of friends, students, colleagues and even family members who have read parts of the manuscript and made suggestions. There were times when I wondered if my colleagues at Moody would begin avoiding me since I was always on the prowl for responses, or illustrations and anecdotes. But they were always gracious and often provided helpful information. These include Jon Laansma, Andrew Schmutzer, Michael McDuffee, Michael VanLaningham, Michael Wechsler, William Marty, Tom Cornman, and Gregg Quiggle. Besides all of these faculty colleagues, two former students, Emily Haluska and Mark Mitten, read sections and offered helpful feedback.

There were additional occasions on which I sought out professional help from experts in fields on which the commentary had to encroach. In this regard I am grateful to Professor Howard Van Till and my pastor, Rev. Bruce Eberline, for their ready assistance.

As is always the case, editors prove invaluable, and I want to express my gratitude to those who have guided me through this process. The list includes prominently Dr. Robert Hubbard and the general editor, Dr. Terry Muck, as well as Dr. Tremper Longman and Zondervan’s in-house editors, Jack Kuhatschek and Verlyn Verbrugge.

There was many a day that I came home from the office bursting with what I had been working on all day. Thus Genesis often overflowed all over our dinner table. My wife, Kim, read countless drafts of countless chapters and always had important insights into revisions that could enhance the work. Likewise, it was not unusual for my kids—Jon, Josh, and Jill—to become involved in the conversation and contribute productively to it. I am especially thankful for numerous dog-walks during which Jon and I would discuss some of the important issues of the text. One never ceases to wonder at the clear-sighted perspective that teens can bring to a discussion.

Finally, there are two people who have gone far beyond the calls of duty and friendship. Jim Dykema, a seminary-trained layperson in our church, read every chapter and helped me to see what communicated and what did not. His awareness of scholarship coupled with his sensitivity to the person in the pew combined to provide me the opportunity to fine-tune the material to the audience I have tried to reach.

I have saved for last my colleague at Moody, Dr. Rosalie deRosset. Her knowledge and expertise in literature on many occasions gave me the leads I needed to put together the Contemporary Significance section. The attentive reader will see her footnoted a number of times throughout the text, but these meager footnotes do not begin to do justice to the sheer volume of ideas she provided. The Contemporary Significance section of the commentary forced me to read far more broadly than is my habit. It was Dr. deRosset’s guidance that assured my reading would be productive. She has my enduring gratitude and admiration.

Abbreviations

AB Anchor Bible

ABD Anchor Bible Dictionary. Edited by D. N. Freedman. 6 vols. New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Alleg. Interp. Philo, Allegorical Interpretation

ANET Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Edited by J. B. Pritchard. 3d ed. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1969.

Ant. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities

AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament

ARMT Archives royales de Mari, transcrite et traduite

As. Mos. Assumption of Moses

b. Babylonian Talmud

BA Biblical Archaeologist

BBR Bulletin for Biblical Research

BDB Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, Edited by F. Brown, S. R. Driver, C. A. Briggs. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1962.

BSC Bible Student’s Commentary

BT The Bible Translator

BWL Babylonian Wisdom Literature. Edited by W. G. Lambert. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press, 1960.

CAD The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Edited by E. Reiner et al. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1956–.

CAH Cambridge Ancient History

CBQMS Catholic Biblical Quarterly Monograph Series

COS The Context of Scripture. Edited by W. W. Hallo and K. L. Younger. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1997.

DDD Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible. Edited by K. van der Toorn, B. Becking, and P. W. van der Horst. Leiden: Brill, 1995.

EA El-Amarna tablets. According to the edition of J. A. Knudtzon. Die el-Amarna-Tafeln. Leipzig, 1908–1915. Reprint, Aalen, 1965. Continued in A. F. Rainey, El-Amarna Tablets, 359–379. 2d rev. ed. Kevelaer, 1978.

ExpTim Expository Times

GKC Gesenius’ Hebrew Grammar. Edited by E. Kautzsch. Translated by A. E. Cowley. 2d ed. Oxford: Clarendon, 1946.

GTJ Grace Theological Journal

HALOT Koehler, L., W. Baumgartner, and J. J. Stamm. The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament. Translated and edited under the supervision of M. E. J. Richardson. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1994–1999.

HSM Harvard Semitic Monographs

HSS Harvard Semitic Studies

HTR Harvard Theological Review

HUCA Hebrew Union College Annual

IBC Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching

IBHS An Introduction to Biblical Hebrew Syntax. B. K. Waltke and M. O’Connor. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1990.

IDB The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by G. A. Buttrick and K. R. Crim. 4 vols. Nashville: Abingdon, 1962.

IEJ Israel Exploration Journal

Interp Interpretation

JANESCU Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Society of Columbia University

JAOS Journal of the American Oriental Society

JETS Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society

JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies

Joüen A Grammar of Biblical Hebrew. Edited by P. Joüen. Trans. and rev. T. Muraoka. 2 vols. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1991.

JPSTC Jewish Publication Society Torah Commentary

JR Journal of Religion

JSOT Journal for the Study of the Old Testament

JSOTSup Journal for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series

JSS Journal of Semitic Studies

KJV King James Version

LXX Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament)

NAC New American Commentary

NASB New American Standard Bible

Ned. Nedarim

NICOT New International Commentary on the Old Testament

NIDOTTE New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology and Exegesis. Edited by W. VanGemeren. 5 vols. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997.

NIV New International Version

NJPS New Jewish Publication Society translation of the Hebrew Bible

NKJV New King James Version

NLT New Living Translation

NRSV New Revised Standard Version

Or Orientalia

OTL Old Testament Library

SAOC Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations

SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature Dissertation Series

SBLWAW Society of Biblical Literature Writings from the Ancient World

SBTS Sources for Biblical and Theological Study

SJOT Scandinavian Journal of the Old Testament

TDOT Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament. Edited by G. J. Botterweck and H. Ringgren. Translated by J. T. Willis, G. W. Bromiley, and D. E. Green. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1974–.

TLOT Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament. Edited by E. Jenni, with assistance from C. Westermann. Translated by M. E. Biddle. 3 vols. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1997.

TynBul Tyndale Bulletin

VT Vetus Testamentum

VTSup Vetus Testamentum Supplements

WBC Word Biblical Commentary

WTJ Westminster Theological Journal

Introduction

It is not too difficult to be biblical if you don’t care about being relevant; it is not difficult to be relevant if you don’t care about being biblical. But if you want to be both biblical and relevant in your teaching, it is a very difficult task indeed.

Howard Hendricks

Methodology

IF A READER has no idea why an author is writing or what that author is trying to accomplish, there is little hope that effective communication will take place. The author of Genesis has made choices. He had to select what information to include. He had to decide how to communicate that information effectively to his audience and how to provide it with the emphasis that would serve his purposes. He had to guide his literary art with discretion so that it would contribute productively to his purpose.

Our belief in inspiration suggests that God’s hand was behind all of these choices. We are not content to consider the book of Genesis as simply the work of a human author. Yet it is the assumption of this commentary that God’s purpose is carried out through the human author’s purpose. As a result, that author should be considered the link to the authoritative Word of God. We understand God’s inspired message when we understand the human author’s message. God’s communication is to Israel through the author of Genesis, but we believe that the book constitutes a part of God’s revelation of himself, so its vitality remains undiminished for us today. Though that message transcends culture, the form it was given in is, to some extent, culture-bound. The task before us as interpreters is to try to dissipate the culturally induced fog so that we can establish a strong authority link to God’s revelation through the communication of that revelation by his chosen spokesman. The anticipated result is that we will be able to interpret the details of the text in relation to the author’s purpose rather than tailoring our interpretation to whatever modern debates have captured our attention.²

The problem of the greatest magnitude is that we cannot cross-examine the author or even begin to get inside his head. None of us is immune to the syndrome of hearing what we want to hear. We are all inclined to superimpose our culture and our expectations on a text. In the case of a biblical text, the problem becomes acute because we also tend to superimpose our theology on a text and even excuse that imposition by attributing the meaning we want to derive from it to the divine author if we do not find it on the human level. This is problematic if we lack a methodology to establish independently what the divine author intended. If God had a message that he did not give through the human author, where did he give it?

Usual answers to this question identify the source of additional authoritative insight as coming from other sections of the canon, from the community that we identify as the church, or through personal insight granted by the Holy Spirit. To address these in the detail they deserve would take us too far afield and transform this commentary into a hermeneutics book. Here it can only be said that the method followed in this commentary will be to attribute determinative meaning and authority to the purpose of the author as well as it can be discerned. We will assume a level of integrity to the communication that transpired between the author and his audience—that is, that he was intentionally communicating something meaningful and that he had every reason to expect his audience would understand what he meant. We will assume that although there may be more truth than the author knew, the truth he did know and communicate was authoritative and inspired.

It is therefore the human author’s communication that will be our target as we seek out God’s Word. At times we will be able to identify other layers of meaning that transcend the human author, but it is the initial context that serves as the foundation for any other layers. This foundational layer is the most ignored, the most difficult to penetrate, and the most important, so it will be our primary focus.

Though we cannot reconstruct all that may have been going on in the author’s mind, we can try our best to take our place among those in his audience, assume that he communicated to his audience successfully, and benefit from that communication in the way that anyone in his audience would have. This process includes two parts: the way he says what he says (literary analysis), and the way we hear what we hear (cultural adaptation).

Literary Analysis

WE ASSUME THAT a biblical author, including the author of Genesis,³ is not simply pasting together a jumbled combination of unrelated sources or random thoughts. Rather, he is writing intelligently with a purpose, and each narrative and each segment of text (whatever the genre) is intentionally chosen to contribute in some way to that purpose. Some interpreters may identify several overlapping purposes or a main purpose with subpurposes, but the point remains that literary integrity is to be assumed for the book and therefore that the parts each contribute to the whole. The logic of this literary intentionality may not be the logic we would use or easily recognize, but it is the interpreter’s duty to try to identify the structures and devices, whether conscious or subconscious, employed by the author.

This literary analysis needs to take place at every level of the text, from discourse analysis down through syntactical, grammatical, and lexical analysis. As a result, we might ask why the narrator in Genesis 37 chose to include the detail of Joseph getting lost and asking for directions. Or we might inquire as to why the Joseph narrative is interrupted by the Judah and Tamar story (Gen. 38). These are matters for literary analysis to decide.

Cultural Adaptation

THERE IS A POPULAR board game called Taboo. Each card contains a word that one person on the team has to get the other members of the team to say. The catch is that the card also lists five other words that may not be used in the attempt. Invariably, and by design, these five words are the ones that would most easily lead to the mystery word. Over years of experience, the results of games have demonstrated what anyone could predict with a little thought: The more shared experiences a team has, the more successful they will be. Thus, if the word were key, a husband/wife team might hit the word immediately by saying what you misplaced this morning, whereas people who don’t know each other so well might take longer to find the information that will lead to the right answer. This illustrates how important shared knowledge is to communication.

When I first began teaching in the early 1980s, I could refer in passing to the incident at Kent State and feel assured that my students would know what I was talking about. By the 1990s that was no longer the case. As another example, I can still make reference to the Berlin Wall or to the Iron Curtain and assume my students need no further explanation. Within a decade, however, that will no longer be true. Effective communication requires a body of agreed upon words, terms, and ideas. Moreover, when that common core of understanding exists, the author need not bother to explain himself or herself to the understanding audience against the chance that an uninformed person might be listening in.

This is illustrated in the traffic reports that are given in Chicago every ten minutes. Since I am a regular commuter, the traffic reports that offer times of travel from various points and stretches where one might encounter congestion are meaningful to me. When it is reported that it is a thirty-six-minute trip from the cave to the junction and that it is congested from the slip to the Nagle curve, I know exactly what to expect. When out-of-town guests visit, however, this information only confuses them. They do not know what the slip or the cave is (nor can they find them on a map); they don’t know how far these places are from one another, and they don’t know that on a good day one can go from the cave to the junction in about eight minutes. If the traffic reporter made the report understandable to the out-of-town visitor, it would be too tiring to be of any use to the regular commuter it seeks to serve.

Since communication requires a common ground of understanding, both speaker and audience must do what they can to enter that common ground. For the speaker this often requires accommodation to the audience. Unlike Humpty-Dumpty in Alice in Wonderland, we cannot make words mean whatever we want them to. Language itself is a cultural convention, and since God chose to use language to communicate, he also bound himself to a culture. This condescension, by definition, required accommodation.

For the audience, by contrast, reaching this common ground may require seeking out additional information or explanation. If someone outside of the language/culture matrix wanted to take advantage of what was communicated within the culture/language matrix, adaptation would be required. For example, twice every year in most of the United States we encounter the phenomenon known as daylight saving time. If someone from another culture came to the U.S. and heard the phrase daylight saving time, no amount of lexical study would alert them to what it referred to. They would need a quick lesson in cultural adaptation. As another example, one October we had a German exchange student staying in our home. All of the Halloween decorations around the neighborhood were quite befuddling to him, and it took some time to try to explain Halloween to him.

These are issues that go beyond language to culture. In the same way, if we are going to understand communication that took place between members of Israelite culture, we are going to have to adapt to some of the communication elements that were part of the culture and worldview of ancient Israel. The Bible has plenty of Iron Curtain, daylight saving time, and Halloween type examples that they do not explain and we do not intuitively understand. The dangers are summarized nicely by Clark Pinnock:

A strong emphasis on the divine inspiration of the text naturally tends to overshadow the obligation to read the Bible in its own human and historical setting in order to grasp its truth. It encourages readers to seek the pure divine message to themselves here and now and to assume they will grasp its meaning best by reading the text in the most natural way, which means, in a way congenial to the assumptions of the reader, maximizing the danger of text manipulation.⁴

The danger, then, is that we may unconsciously impose our ideas, culture, or worldview on the text. Likewise, we cannot become frustrated and annoyed that it takes some work to interpret the text. How often I have heard the response, Oh, so only you experts can read the Bible, now? I would think that if God wanted me to know who he was, he wouldn’t make it so difficult! That is like a missionary saying, If God wants me to reach this people group, he will help them all learn English. Successful interpreters must try to understand the cultural background of the ancient Near East just as successful missionaries must learn the culture, language, and worldview of the people they are trying to reach.

A major part of this adaptation comes through awareness of how our values may differ from the values others hold. Sociologists have developed models by which we can assess value orientation. Consider the following example from Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck as adapted by R. Simkins:

At one time a man had a large flock of sheep and goats, but eventually most of them died in different ways. Which response to this situation do you prefer?

A. You just can’t blame a man when things like this happen. There are just so many things that can and do happen, and a man can do almost nothing to prevent such losses when they come. We all have to learn to take the bad with the good.

B. The sheep and goats died because the man had not lived his life right—had not done things in the right way to keep harmony between himself and the forces of nature (i.e., the ways of nature like the rain, winds, snow, etc.).

C. It was probably the man’s own fault that he lost so much of his flock. He probably did not use his head to prevent the losses. It is usually the case that people who keep up on new ways of doing things, and really set themselves to it, almost always find a way to keep out of such trouble.⁵

In the ancient world, people would have answered in accordance with one of the first two categories. The dominant way of thinking in the modern Western world is represented in option C. This contemporary Western value orientation results in a worldview characterized by the following assumptions:

1. People are fundamentally different from all other creatures on earth, over which they have dominion.

2. People are masters of their destiny; they can choose their goals and learn to do whatever is necessary to achieve them.

3. The world is vast, and thus provides unlimited opportunities for humans.

4. The history of humanity is one of progress; for every problem there is a solution, and thus progress need never cease.⁶

These are aspects of our worldview that we may need to set aside in part or in whole when reading Genesis, because they were not part of Israel’s worldview. But after we identify some of the elements of our worldview and set them aside, how do we find out what Israel’s worldview was? No document exists that delineates Israel’s worldview because Israel was what sociologists call a high context society; that is, their society was characterized by a rich common culture that was assumed by all members of the society and that defined their identity. In contrast, a low context culture contains a mixture of people from all different backgrounds and ethnic identities, thus requiring a more visible articulation of worldview and values.⁷ Simkins draws out the significance of this distinction for reading and understanding text:

The Bible was produced by a high context society for high context readers. It assumes a rich culture that the biblical writers felt no need to describe. It is not surprising, then, that the Bible lacks any explicit articulation of the Israelites’ worldview and values toward the natural world. Their worldview and values were simply assumed by all members of the society; they formed the presupposition of the biblical writers rather than the subject of their discourse. Consequently, we cannot expect to discover their worldview and values from a low context reading of the biblical texts.

If we hope to glean their unexpressed worldview and values from the biblical texts, then we must become acquainted with the ancient Israelite culture that is assumed by the texts. In other words, we must read the Bible from the high context perspective in which it was written.⁸

This goal can be achieved through the use of comparative studies. Comparative studies examine the literature and archaeology of the ancient Near East in order to reconstruct from them the behavior, beliefs, culture, values, and worldview of the people.

Comparative Studies

COMPARATIVE STUDIES GIVE us the tools to make the cultural adaptation. Familiarity with the literature of the ancient Near East helps us to become informed about ancient culture and worldview. There are ways of thinking of which we are hardly even aware that distinguish us from the ancient world. John Pilch provided a very helpful list identifying some of the important differences:⁹

When we use the literature of the ancient Near East in comparison with the Bible, we are not trying to identify or suggest a literary trail or relationship. Rather, we are trying to recover the ancient worldview. By catching a glimpse of how they thought about themselves and their world, we sometimes discover ways that the Israelites would have thought that are totally different from how we think. Since most readers have little familiarity with the literature of the ancient Near East, the following paragraphs will attempt to offer a general introduction to the types of literature, the pieces of literature, and the kinds of information they provide.

Mythology

THIS IS THE MOST troubling category for those who take the Bible seriously. We get a little defensive if anyone compares Genesis to mythology. We think of mythology as make-believe stories of Greek and Roman gods acting in ways that are undignified, perverse, selfish, or even ridiculous. Comparison of the Bible to these pagan fairy tales strikes us as a diabolical distortion of Holy Writ—a paradox of highest proportion. To find any fruitful comparison, however, we must get beyond the superficial level of the content of mythology to its function in culture.

Mythology in the ancient world was like science in our modern world—it was their explanation of how the world came into being and how it worked. The gods had purposes, and their activities were the causes of what humans experienced as effects. In contrast, our modern scientific approach attempts to understand cause and effect based on natural laws.

Mythology is thus a window to culture. It reflects the worldview and values of the culture that forged it. For ancient Israelite culture, many of the writings we find in the Old Testament performed the same function as mythology did in other cultures—it gave the Israelites a literary mechanism for preserving and transmitting their worldview and values. When we read the mythology of the ancient Near East, we discover how these ancient peoples thought about themselves, their world, and their gods. When we read Genesis, we see how Israelites thought about themselves, their world, and their God. Whether the Israelite views were the same as their neighbors, as they sometimes were, or diametrically opposed, there is value in the comparison.

The mythological literature of the ancient Near East is relevant to all of Genesis because it provides an understanding of how people thought about deity in the ancient world. It is more specifically relevant to Genesis 1–11 because the narratives in those chapters have parallels in the mythology of the ancient Near East. We will refer to many mythological texts in the pages of this commentary, but four deserve particular attention in this introduction.¹⁰

1. The Tale of Adapa. The main character is Adapa, a priest of Ea—the patron god of Eridu (near the Persian Gulf). Adapa is known in Mesopotamian history as the first of seven antediluvian sages who brought the skills of civilization to humanity. When the south wind tips over his boat, he responds (apparently by means of an incantation) by breaking the wing of the south wind. For this act he is summoned before the god of the heavens, Anu. Ea instructs Adapa not to eat food there and tells him how to appease Anu. Adapa does as instructed but is later informed that the food was food of life. Adapa, by his refusal, loses his opportunity to gain immortality.

2. The Atrahasis Epic. The lower deities become tired of their work and rebel. Their solution is to create the human race to do the work. As people proliferate, their noise (probably including both violence and pleas to the gods) becomes overwhelming. The population is reduced by plague, famine, and drought, but the problem remains unresolved. Finally a flood is sent. Atrahasis, king of Shuruppak, is told of the coming destruction and builds a boat in which animals and birds are saved. It is assumed that other people were saved as well, but breaks in the text obscure the details.

3. The Gilgamesh Epic. This epic is composed of twelve tablets documenting Gilgamesh’s search for immortality. The tale begins by describing the greatness of King Gilgamesh as well as the burden he is to his people in the town of Uruk. The gods respond to the complaints of the people by creating Enkidu to distract Gilgamesh from his oppressive ways. The initial encounter between Gilgamesh and Enkidu results in their bonding together in a friendship of mutual admiration and respect. They undertake adventures together, including the quest to the cedar forest to combat the dreaded Huwawa, the gods’ guardian of the forest. After the defeat of Huwawa, the goddess Ishtar is impressed with Gilgamesh and propositions him. When he rejects her advances, she goes into a rage and demands that Gilgamesh and Enkidu be punished for the slaughter of Huwawa. As retribution, the bull of heaven is sent against them, and it is also killed.

The gods now decide that one of the two champions must die, and Enkidu is chosen. His death leads Gilgamesh to explore the whole issue of human mortality. He therefore undertakes a quest for eternal life. His quest leads him beyond the end of the world to the home of Utnapishtim, a one-time mortal who gained immortality. Utnapishtim’s story is the flood account, where he is saved from the destruction of the flood by building a boat. All humans were supposed to be destroyed in the flood, but the god Ea betrayed his oath and gave Utnapishtim advance notice. After the flood when the chief god Enlil discovers that someone has survived, Utnapishtim is granted eternal life. This path to immortality is not open to Gilgamesh, but Utnapishtim tells him of a rejuvenating plant growing at the bottom of the sea. Gilgamesh finds the plant, but it is eaten by a serpent before he can taste of it. He returns to Uruk determined to make the best of his life.

4. Enuma Elish: The Epic of Creation. This composition, recorded on seven tablets, tells of Marduk’s ascension to the head of the Babylonian pantheon. Tablet 1 begins with a cosmogony/theogony leading up to a description of the birth of Marduk. It describes the discontent between the wild and demanding younger gods and the sedate older gods, who are seeking tranquil equilibrium, peace, and quiet. Eventually the goddess Tiamat, one of the older gods representing the primordial sea, becomes the leader of the young rebels. In tablet 2, the older gods seek a champion but are unsuccessful until Marduk accepts the challenge. He agrees to oppose Tiamat if his victory will result in his becoming head of the pantheon. Tablet 3 brings acceptance of his proposal, and in tablet 4 Marduk is armed and the battle is enjoined. Tiamat is defeated by powerful incantations, and her corpse is used to construct the cosmos. In tablet 5 Marduk organizes the cosmos and the divine realm and is proclaimed king of the gods. People are created in tablet 6, using the blood of Kingu, the partner of Tiamat in the rebellion. The availability of people to do the work that the younger gods had been obliged to do relieves the tension among the gods. The composition ends with the proclamation of Marduk’s fifty names.

Studies of these and other documents result in the following comparisons:¹¹

Personal and Royal Archives

ARCHAEOLOGICAL EXCAVATIONS HAVE unearthed numerous important archives of the ancient Near East. Some, such as the Nuzi texts, preserve family records that include contracts of adoption, marriage, real estate transactions, and inheritance. Documents such as these help us to understand ancient family life and therefore offer insight into the details of family life that pervade the patriarchal narratives. Most archives, however, are public archives connected to temple or palace. Some of the most famous are from cities such as Ebla, Mari, Emar, Amarna, and Ugarit. They generally contain a variety of documents, from literary texts and royal inscriptions to international correspondence, treaties, and economic texts.

Epics

A FEW EPICS have already been mentioned in the mythology segment. Several others from Egypt are less mythological and should receive special mention.

1. The Tale of Sinuhe. In his first-person narrative, Sinuhe, an official in the court of Amenemhet I, tells of his flight from Egypt, a long period of self-imposed exile, and his reconciliation to the court. The account opens with the death of Amenemhet. Sinuhe overhears some information concerning the struggle for succession and concludes that he needs to flee for his life. His escape is successful, and he travels through Palestine to Byblos. There he is accepted in good standing into the court and marries the daughter of the prince of Retenu. There is a lengthy description of his accomplishments, offices, and good deeds. When Sinuhe is old, the pharaoh hears of him and summons him to return. Sinuhe is received with great honor, and a pyramid is constructed for him.

2. The Report of Wenamun. Wenamun was an official of the temple of Amun. This is his first-person account of a trip to Byblos for the purpose of purchasing lumber. Most of it reports the negotiations between Wenamun and the king of Byblos.

Hymnic and Wisdom Literature

THOUGH THESE ARE very different types of literature, they both make similar contributions to the study of Genesis. Both offer significant insight into the theological beliefs and worship practices of the people, helping us understand what they thought about the gods and their relationship to the gods. They indicate what the expectations of the gods were and how the gods needed to be approached.

Miscellaneous

A FEW ADDITIONAL texts will round out the list of those that have the most significant impact on studies in Genesis.

1. Sumerian king list. As its name suggests, this is a list of kings whose opening section gives the names, cities, and lengths of reign of eight rulers who reigned before the Flood. The length of reign ranges from 18,000 years to 43,200 years. The rulers after the Flood have greatly reduced tenures but are still in the hundreds.

2. Gudea cylinders. These two Sumerian cylinders tell the story of Gudea, ruler of Lagash, constructing a temple for Ningirsu. It gives detailed information about the process involved with constructing a temple from the initial idea and receiving of divine approval and instructions, through the actual construction and dedication processes.

3. Omen texts. Omens constituted one of the most significant components of the ancient worldview. Omens were read from many different sources, including the celestial bodies, the viscera of sacrificed animals, dreams, the behavior of animals or insects, and the abnormal appearance or malformations of newborn animals.

The following chart summarizes some of the results from analysis of this literature.

Key Theological Distinctions Between Israel and Her Neighbors

12

Purpose and Structure

Methodology

THERE IS LITTLE that is more important about a biblical book than its purpose, which is either explicit or implicit. If it is explicit, then one only has to find it and read it (e.g., Josh. 21:43–45). If it is implicit, it must be inferred by the interpreter based on literary criteria and logical observations concerning cohesion. That is, if we assume that all of the parts are included with a purpose and make a contribution to that purpose, it should be possible to arrive at it through observing how the parts cohere. Additionally, the use of various literary and rhetorical devices should elucidate the structure of the book, which in turn should lead to the purpose.

In Genesis, the first clue to its structure is both a guide and a problem. There exists a universally recognized division between chapters 1–11 and chapters 12–50. This is a guide in that it helps us to see an important structural element in the book. It is a problem in that the interpreter has to identify a purpose for the book that can account for both these disparate parts.

The second observation is likewise both a guide and a problem. The book features eleven toledot formulas (NIV: This is the account of . . .), as follows:

These are a guide in that they reveal divisions in the text through a ready-made structure from the hand of the author. They are a problem in that (a) the meaning of toledot is disputed, and (b) it is disputed whether the toledot introduce sections or conclude sections. It is also confusing why, for instance, two are associated with Esau and none with Abram.

Beyond these basic structural elements, there have been numerous suggestions about internal structuring.¹³ Moreover, the interpreter also must cope with a number of difficult sections in the book. How do the genealogies contribute to the author’s purpose? How is it that chapter 10 speaks of the distribution of languages before chapter 11 relates the differentiation