Introduction to the Old Testament | Page 4

most romantic story of
all--that of his son Joseph (xxxvii.-l.)[1] the dreamer, who rose through
persecution and prison, slander and sorrow (xxxvii.-xl.) to a seat beside
the throne of Pharaoh (xli.). Nowhere is the providence that governs
life and the Nemesis that waits upon sin more dramatically illustrated
than in the story of Joseph. Again and again his guilty brothers are
compelled to confront the past which they imagined they had buried
out of sight for ever (xlii.-xliv.). But at last comes the gracious
reconciliation between Joseph and them (xlv.), the tender meeting
between Jacob and Joseph (xlvi.), the ultimate settlement of the family
of Jacob in Egypt,[2] and the consequent transference of interest to that

country for several generations. The book closes with scenes
illustrating the wisdom and authority of Joseph in the time of famine
(xlvii.), the dying Jacob blessing Joseph's sons (xlviii.), his parting
words (in verse) to all his sons (xlix.), his death and funeral honours, l.
1-14, Joseph's magnanimous forgiveness of his brothers, and his death,
in the sure hope that God would one day bring the Israelites back again
to the land of Canaan, l. 15-26. [Footnote 1: xxxvi. deals with the
Edomite clans, and xxxviii. with the clans of Judah.] [Footnote 2: In
one version they are not exactly in Egypt, but near it, in Goshen (xlvii.
6).]
The unity of the book of Genesis is unmistakable; yet a close inspection
reveals it to be rather a unity of idea than of execution. While in general
it exhibits the gradual progress of the divine purpose on its way through
primeval and patriarchal history, in detail it presents a number of
phenomena incompatible with unity of authorship. The theological
presuppositions of different parts of the book vary widely; centuries of
religious thought, for example, must lie between the God who partakes
of the hospitality of Abraham under a tree (xviii.) and the majestic,
transcendent, invisible Being at whose word the worlds are born (i.).
The style, too, differs as the theological conceptions do: it is impossible
not to feel the difference between the diffuse, precise, and formal style
of ix. 1-17, and the terse, pictorial and poetic manner of the
immediately succeeding section, ix. 18-27. Further, different accounts
are given of the origin of particular names or facts: Beersheba is
connected, e.g. with a treaty made, in one case, between Abraham and
Abimelech, xxi. 31, in another, between Isaac and Abimelech, xxvi. 33.
But perhaps the most convincing proof that the book is not an original
literary unit is the lack of inherent continuity in the narrative of special
incidents, and the occasional inconsistencies, sometimes between
different parts of the book, sometimes even within the same section.
This can be most simply illustrated from the story of the Flood (vi. 5ff.),
through which the beginner should work for himself-at first without
suggestions from critical commentaries or introductions--as here the
analysis is easy and singularly free from complications; the results
reached upon this area can be applied and extended to the rest of the
book. The problem might be attacked in some such way as follows. Ch.
vi. 5-8 announces the wickedness of man and the purpose of God to

destroy him; throughout these verses the divine Being is called
Jehovah.[1] In the next section, vv. 9-13, He is called by a different
name--God (Hebrew, _Elohim_)--and we cannot but notice that this
section adds nothing to the last; vv. 9, 10 are an interruption, and vv.
11-13 but a repetition of vv. 5-8. Corresponding to the change in the
divine name is a further change in the vocabulary, the word for destroy
being different in vv. 7 and 13. Verses 14-22 continue the previous
section with precise and minute instructions for the building of the ark,
and in the later verses (cf. 18, 20) the precision tends to become
diffuseness. The last verse speaks of the divine Being as God (Elohim),
so that both the language and contents of vv. 9-22 show it to be a
homogeneous section. Note that here, vv. 19, 20, two animals of every
kind are to be taken into the ark, no distinction being drawn between
the clean and the unclean. Noah must now be in the ark; for we are told
that he had done all that God commanded him, vv. 22, 18. [Footnote 1:
Wrongly represented by the Lord in the English version; the American
Revised Version always correctly renders by Jehovah. God in v. 5 is an
unfortunate mistake of A.V. This ought also to be _the Lord_, or rather
Jehovah.]
But, to our surprise, ch. vii. starts the whole story afresh with a divine
command to Noah to enter the ark; and this time, significantly enough,
a distinction is made between the clean and the unclean-seven pairs of