131. xxii.1-19.

HUPFELD assigns v.1-13, though doubtfully, to E,, except the Jehovistic elements in v.11-12, and he gives v.14-18 to the Jehovist, writing as follows p.177,178:—

The third passage [belonging to E] is the 'Trial of Abraham,' xxii.1-19, which includes in itself the Jehovistic parallel, and is bound up with it into one whole. In this whole only the conclusion is purely Jehovistic, and brings a not very necessary addition to the story, which, however, in the view of the Jehovist may certainly contain the proper end and object of the 'Trial' itself. The rest, with its constant use of the name 'Elohim,' seems equally to form one piece. Certainly, in any case, the call of the Angel ‘out of heaven,' v.11,12, with the command to stop, and with the name 'Angel of Jehovah,' as in v.15, must be taken out as a Jehovistic element, since in it the formula of the call corresponds with the Jehovistic in v.15, (but also with xxi.17 in E). So, too, 'thou hast not withheld thy son, thy onlyone,' v.12, agrees with v.16; D, 'anything,' v.12, is elsewhere a J. formula, xxx.31, xxxix.6,9,23, xl.15; and 'fear Elohim,' v.12, is not necessarily Elohistic, see Job.i.1,8, ii.3, &c. Again, the catastrophe might be presented in a double form. —(i) negatively, in the command to do nothing to the son, because the object of the Trial was attained, (ii) positively, in the substitution of a ram for him; and one of these might, as far as any necessity is concerned, exist without the other; and this is true even of the positive form, since Abraham might be supposed, without any express command, to have regarded the sudden appearance of the ram as a divine hint, that he should offer this instead of his child, (as in the Greek myth of Iphigenia at Aulis and other similar myths.) And so, perhaps, other portions [of the section] might be taken out as due to the Jehovist. Still through this the complete well-adjusted whole would suffer loss, and the justification of such a separation is therefore very doubtful. On the other hand, I cannot conceal that the whole narrative in spirit and form seems to me to bear rather the stamp of the Jehovist, and certainly we should not think of the Second Elohist but for the name 'Elohim,' v.8,12, and ', v.1,3,9,—which fact here, as in some parts of the history of Joseph, is not supported by the internal phenomena, and perplexes criticism.

132. Thus it appears that HUPFELD is by no means confident that this section does not belong to the Jehovist, and indeed 'would not think of the Second Elohist for it, if the name was not Elohim' so persistently; and we have angel of Jehovah' in v.11. BOEHMER assigns v.1-14,19 to the Jehovist, and v.15-18 to the later Compiler,-with which view our own agrees, substantially. And for the use of Elohim,' with or without the article in this passage, we shall find parallels

enough in other Jehovistic passages (193). But the uncertainty here expressed by HUPFELD, as to whether this passage belongs to E, or J, tends strongly to confirm the suspicion already expressed, that these writers may possibly be one and the same, only writing at different periods. In fact, the passage before us may have been written by him at some point of time between his earliest insertions (E,) and his later passages, so that he uses Elohim' still predominantly, but not exclusively; or the passage as originally written by himself may have been retouched by him afterwards, when the 'Jehovah' of v.11 crept in. See also the suggestion in (136).

133. xxii.1-13,19, Jehovist.

(i) v.1, 'and it came to pass after these things,' xxii.20, xxxix.7, xl.1, xlviii.1. (ii) v.1,3,9, D', as in xxvii.28, which both HUPFELD and BOEHMER assign to the Jehovist; but, according to our view, it occurs in the following J. passages, xxii.1,3,9,xxvii. 28,xxxi. 11, xxxv.7, xlii.18, xliv.16,xlv.8, xlviii.15,15,—also E, (110.ix).

(iii) v.1, ‘and He said unto him, Abraham! and he said, Behold me!';

comp. 'and He said unto him, Jacob! and he said, Behold me!' xxxi.11; 'and He said Jacob, Jacob! and he said, Behold me!' xlvi.2. (iv) v.2, any, ‘love,' xxii.2, xxiv.67, xxv.28,28, xxvii.4,9,14, xxix.18,20,30,324, xxxiv.3, xxxvii.3,4, xliv.20.

(v) v.2, 'get thee (75) unto the land &c.,' as in xii.1, comp. xxvii.43. (vi) v.2, 'unto the land which I will (say unto thee =) tell thee of,' v.3,9,

'which Elohim had said unto him';

comp. 'in the land which I will tell thee of,' xxvi.2.

(vii) v.8, 'rise-early in the morning,' (99.xlix).

N.B. v.3, and Abraham rose-early in the morning, and saddled his ass';

comp. ' and Balaam rose-early in the morning, and saddled his ass,' N.xxii.21. (viii) v.3,19, Dip, 'arise' start, (63.xxv).

=

*(ix) v.4,13, ‘lift-up the eyes and see,' (63.xv).

(x) v.4, pinɔp, merakhok, 'from a distance,' as in xxxvii.18.

(xi) v.5, 'bow'=worship, as in xxiv.26,48,52.

(xii) v.6, ‘and Abraham took &c., and placed (it) upon

Isaac';

comp. and he took &c. placing (it) upon her shoulder,' xxi.14(E). (xiii) v.7, and Isaac said unto Abraham his father, and he said'; comp. and Elohim said to Israel . . . . and he said,' xlvi.2;

(xiv) v.9, 'and he built there the altar'; comp. xxvi.25, xxxv.7. (xv) v.9, py, 'bind,' comp. py, striped,' xxxi.8,10,12.

(xvi) v.10,

slay,' as in xxxvii.31.

(xvii) v.11, and an angel of Jehovah called unto him out of heaven, and said '; comp. and an angel of Elohim called unto Hagar out of heaven, and said,' xxi.17(E).

(xviii) v.11, 'angel of Jehovah,' as in xvi.7,9,10,11.

(xix) v.11, 'and He said, Abraham! Abraham! and he said, Behold me';

comp. and He said, Jacob! Jacob! and he said, Behold me,' xlvi.2.

(xx) v.12, 'lay no hand upon the youth';

comp. 'lay no hand on him,' xxxvii.22.

(xxi) v.12, −y, ‘do to,' (47.ix.)

(xxii) v.12, MIND, 'anything,' xxii. 12, xxx.31, xxxix.6,9,23—also E,(xl.15). (xxiii) v.12, 'thou (pron.) fearest Elohim'; comp. xxxii.11, xlii.18.

(xxiv) v.12, qiņ, 'withhold,' as in xx.6(E), and xxii.16(D). (xxv) v.19, Abraham's residence at Beersheba, as in xxi.33,34

134. xxii.14-18.

Upon v.15-18 DELITZSCH notes as follows, p.415:

The narrative, which seems to be ended, goes on yet again. The voice of the angel of Jehovah resounds yet a second time, in order to crown Abraham's faithfulness with the reward of great promises. So solemnly as here, so triumphantly, has the promise been expressed nowhere else. Jehovah swears by Himself, in order to confirm His word, as He does nowhere else in His intercourse with the Patriarchs. And, further, He 'swears' here for the first time within the Sacred History; for His promise, that no such an Universal Flood should occur again, is indeed equivalent to an oath, but, as regards the words used, is not actually an oath. The lofty 'saith Jehovah' is, besides, in the introduction of divine utterances, quite strange to the primeval history: it is the later seal of prophecy. Also the repetition of in v.17 is very expressive.

135. xxii.14-18, Deuteronomist.

The facts noted above by DELITZSCH, in the words italicised, imply that we have in v.15-18 a different writer from E, E,, or J, who have all recorded Divine utterances, yet have nowhere introduced such formulæ as these; and his recognition—writing, as he does, from the traditionary point of view as far as he can, that the lofty saith Jehovah' in v.16 is the later seal of prophecy,' suggests that this passage may be due to the Deuteronomist, whose hand we have traced already in the manipulation of the first four Books of the Pentateuch.

But if v.15-18 belongs to D, then, most probably, v.14 is also his, since the original story comes to a proper close with v.2.

(i) v.14, 'as it is said this day, In the mount Jehovah will be seen,' or rather 'Jehovah will see,' i.e. 'see for himself, provide,' with reference to Abraham's words in v.8,-a proverb like that in x.9, 'therefore it is said, as Nimrod the mighty in hunting before Jehovah,' which we have already, on quite independent grounds, ascribed to D.

(ii) v,14, big, 'this day,' very common in Deuteronomy, i.10,39, ii.18,25, iv.4,8,20,26,38,39,40, v.1,3,24,&c.—also E2(x1.7, xli.9), J(xlii.13,32, xlvii.23).

(iii) v.15, and the angel of Jehovah called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time,' imitated from v.11.

(iv) v.16, ‘by Myself have I sworn'; comp. E.xxxii.13, 'to whom Thou swarest by Thyself.'

(v) v.16, 'I have sworn,' in the mouth of Jehovah, as in D.i.35, x.11, xxxi.20, 21,23, G.xxvi.3(D), E.xxxiii.1, N.xiv.23, xxxii.11.

(vi) v.16, 'saith Jehovah,' as in N.xiv.28,-the only other instance in the Pentateuch of the employment of this very common later prophetical formula, which occurs just afterwards in the Bible in 18.ii.30, and then first in 2K.ix.26. *(vii) v.16, ¬ ¡y, 'because that,' D.i.36, Jo.xiv.14(D),—nowhere else in the Pentateuch, but not unusual in Jeremiah, xix.4, xxv.8, xxix.23,25,31, xxxv.18. (viii) v.16, 'do this thing,' as in D.xvii.5, xxiv. 18,22.

(ix) v.16, ‘hast not withheld thy son, thine only-one,' imitated from v.12. (x) v.17, 'blessing I will bless,' as in D.xv.4.

(xi) v.17, ‘bless and multiply,' as in D.vii.13.

(xii) v 17, 'multiplying I will multiply thy seed'; comp. the numerous D. statements that Jehovah hath multiplied or will multiply Israel, D.i.10, vii.13, xiii.17, xxviii.63, xxx.5, also G.xv.5(D), xvi.10(D), xxvi.4(D).

(xiii) v.17, 'as the stars of heaven,' D.i.10,x.22,xxviii.62, G.xv.5(D), xxvi.4(D), E.xxxii. 13.

*(xiv) v.17, ‘as the sand which is on the lip of the sea,' Jo.xi.4(D).

(xv) v.17, 'thy seed shall inherit the gate of his enemies,' G.xxiv.60(D)—nowhere else in the Bible.

(xvi) v.17,, 'inherit,' (79.vi).

*(xvii) v.18, 'all nations of the earth,' (98.iii).

*(xviii) v.18, 'by thy seed shall all nations of the earth bless themselves,' (98.iv). *(xix) v.18, py, 'because that,' as in xxvi.5(D),—nowhere else in the Bible, except in 2S.xii.6; but occurs in D.vii.12, viii.20, N.xiv.24.

(xx) v.18, 'hearken to (a) the voice of,' D.i.45, iv.30, viii.20,ix.23,&c. (twentythree times in Deut.), G.xxvi.5(D),-also E,(xxi. 12), J(180.ix).

136. From the above analysis we conclude with some degree of confidence that v.14-18 does really belong to the Deuteronomist, and this corresponds nearly with BOEHMER's view, who assigns v.15-18 to the Compiler of Josiah's time. But, if so, then it is plain that the writer wished to explain the name Jehovah

Jireh,' v.14, and therefore required that the name 'Jehovah' should appear somewhere near at hand in the context. May it be that E, wrote originally this passage, as HUPFEld supposes, and in v.11 wrote just exactly as he had done before in xxi.17,

' and the angel of Elohim called unto him out of heaven, and said,'

and then that the Editor has changed this 'Elohim' into 'Jehovah' in order to obtain the name which he required for his derivation in v.14?

This may be the real account of the matter, more especially as in v.8 we actually have Elohim-Jireh,' to which expression the insertion in v.14 is evidently meant to refer. The case would then be similar to that already noticed in xvi.11 (86.xii.N.B); only there the Jehovist has left the inconsistency, which the Deuteronomist may have here sought to remove.

137. xxii.20-24, Jehovist.

*(i) v.20, and it came to pass after these things,' (133.i).

*(ii) v.20, 'it was told to Abraham';

comp. and it was told to Rebekah,' xxvii.42;

'and it was told to Laban,' xxxi.22;

'and it was told to Tamar,' xxxviii.13;

'and it was told to Judah,' xxxviii.24;

'and one told to Jacob,' xlviii.2.

(iii) v.20, Milcah' and 'Nahor,' as in xi.29.

*(iv) v.23, 7, 'beget,' (5.xxvi).

(v) v.24, and her name Reumah,' (85.iii. N.B.).

N.B. The main object, apparently, both of xi.29 and xxii.20-24, is to show more distinctly that Rebekah also was of the kindred stem. Accordingly, Laban, her brother, is not here mentioned at all.

Nahor, it will be observed, has twelve sons, as Ishmael, xxv.13-15, and Jacob; and he has eight by his wife, four by his concubine, as Jacob had eight by Leah and Rachel, and four by Bilhah and Zilpah.

138. xxiii.1-20.

DELITZSCH observes on this chapter, p.423:

It is impossible to mistake here the narrative-style of the Elohist,-diffuse, delighting in repetitions, but lifelike and archaic. The occurrence of the name 'Elohim' in v.6, of course, proves nothing. But the whole mode of description