Vayera (Part 3) - Genesis 18:1-22:24

Preface

As I noted in the previous post, there is a story in the Book of Genesis (chapter 18) about Abraham being visited by three men. Somehow, this transformed into three angels, and for Christians, the Holy Trinity.

I have also mentioned in a previous blog, the Torah is an anthology, a collection of short stories, some of which are fragmented. And these fragments have been put together in a way that is often non-linear. In the previous example (an introduction to the "binding of Isaac"), a fragment, which referred to something for which there was no previous narrative, started a chapter.

In this post, I will introduce a story that has a different type of fragmentation. Although, like that other example, it too demands that the beginning of the story be rewritten in order to connect to the chapter that follows it.

An Overview of the First Fragment

The story in Genesis 18:1-16 goes like this:

After having cut his own genitals and those of his family and workers/slaves, Abraham was trying to keep out of the sun, sitting down and recovering in his tent. It is then that YHVH was seen by Abraham. (The Rambam wrote that this teaches us the importance of visiting the sick).

It is at this point that a sitting down Abraham saw three men ("enoshim") standing/positioned right in front of him (most translations incorrectly say "above him" when it should be "very close to him" as in "almost upon him".

This gives us YHVH, those three men, and Abraham as a group. 

These men were likely known by Abraham, since he calls one of them "my lord", which is a a form of "sir" that is also used in modern Hebrew when addressing a man.

Note: The problem with translating YHVH as "LORD" is that every time one sees "lord", one may confuse it with YHVH. "My lord" is used throughout the Tanach between humans as a mark of respect. For example, those who knew Abraham called him "my lord"- see Genesis 23:6). 

Abraham then hurries to get water and appetizers for these three men, who them begin to eat. (YHVH abstains).  Abraham then orders Sarah to make some bread and gave a young man a live calf to prepare for a feast. (This indicates that they were there for a long time!)

The three guests then ask (in the plural) about Sarah "Where is she?" Remember, this is the woman that he was ordering just a few moments before. Abraham tells them that she's in the nearby tent. (This explains why they didn't see her).

Then, in the singular, one male of the group (YHVH, the men, or Abraham) says that He will return in a year, by which time, Sarah will give you a son. (Since none of the three men returns when Sarah gives birth, we can assume that "He" is YHVH, who has been standing nearby all of this time).

Sarah laughs, thinking that Abraham was too old, and YHVH questions Abraham about her lack of faith, changes what Sarah said (a common occurrence in the Torah), and reiterates that when He returns in a year, there will be a son.

Sarah then lies to YHVH, saying "I didn't laugh", and YHVH tells her that she did. (Apparently the idea of an omniscient God was still foreign to them.) It should be noted that YHVH was right there with the three guests, Abraham, Sarah, and their retinue. He was not in the heavens watching this, and was actually seen. This is an important point.

The story ends with the three guests leaving and Abraham escorting them like any proper host does to ensure their safety.

End of story.

The Second Fragment

In the next verse, we have YHVH in the heavens, wondering if he should tell Abraham what he is going to do, and decides to descend and see what is going on is Sodom and Gomorrah. It is outside of the town that he meets Abraham who had sent the men to Sodom. Abraham was standing before YHVH. Again, this is a physical interaction between these two.

YHVH then tells Abraham of his plan to destroy the place where Abraham's nephew lives, and Abraham tries to haggle with YHVH, whittling down His requirements. In the end, YHVH stood firm on what He was going to do, and left (presumably he flew back upward to the heavens). And Abraham went back home.

End of story.

The Angels

It is only at the beginning of the next chapter (19:1) that we read of "And the two angels came to Sodom...". 

This is a completely different story. 

The most generic Apologetics on this verse is that the three men who ate with Abraham were really angels who didn't need to eat, but that they were just being nice guests. And that the each of the three of them had a separate mission, and one of them, Raphael (the angel of healing), had fixed up Abraham and so he went back to the heavens, leaving only two. Christianity has a different take, since they saw the three men as the Holy Trinity becoming the Holy Duality.

Of course, the text says none of this. In fact, because it starts with "and the two angels came...", it should indicate that we would have been told about these two angels before. But like the beginning of the "binding of Isaac" story, there is a lost part of the story that was never included. To recover from this, the apologist will say that these are two of the three, and therefore the three were actually always angels (or the Holy Trinity).

Conclusion

When trying to turn a collection of short stories into a long serial dialogue, one needs to be inventive and insert narrative where is did not exist, and to change existing narrative to fit with the unconnected one.

That is not learning the text.

That is called apologetics.

Vayera (Part 2) - Genesis 18:1-22:24

The parasha begins with a story of the three men (the text doesn't say angels, who appear later in a later story about Sodom). And because of all of the additional legends added to it later on, people automatically think of these three men as being supernatural instead of simply three travelers who were well known and who also knew Abraham and Sarah.

This "extension by legend" process occurs a lot within religious circles. So it's not suprising that Christians see Jesus in this story.

Jesus?

Yes. And I want to touch on how that happens in order to extend that further to include all legends (aggadic midrashim) that follow the same type of logic.

Preface

In Christianity there is this belief in a pre-incarnate Jesus, meaning, that he existed before humanity.

Since the Torah (the so-called "5 books of Moses") has not a single mention of a messiah, which Christians equate to being a Christ, which becomes a problem. And so, the teachers of Christianity searched for places where Jesus could be inserted into the overall narrative.

After all, without any mention of a messiah, how can you claim that he existed before humanity?

There are a handful of these gems, and in this blog entry, I am going to focus on Genesis, chapter 18.

For brevity, I am going to omit the Hebrew text. (The English text is my translation). At points where comments are needed, I will insert them, otherwise I will continue on. 

Genesis 18:

1. And YHVH appeared to [Abraham] by some sapling at Mamre as [Abraham] sat at the tent opening in the heat of the day.

2. And [Abraham] lifted his eyes and he saw. And lo, three men were standing not too far from him, And [Abraham] saw, and he ran to greet them from the opening of the tent and bowed down to the land.

The Hebrew word for men here is "enoshim", which is often used for people of some importance. The Hebrew term for "standing" is actually "to have been positioned", being in one's place. The next term is difficult, because "ahl" means upon. Instead of "upon", I used "not too far". They were close enough for him to respond, but far enough away to run to them. 

This is important: bowing was a form of Honor, as well as calling someone "adoni" ("sir"), as we read in Genesis 23:11, when wanting to buy a grave for his wife, he calls the head of the town "adoni", and twice he bows down before the people of the community as he makes his request (Genesis 23:7 and 23:12). It has other meanings as well, which I will explain below.

So at this point, you have YHVH by a cluster of some sort of trees by the tent, Abraham outside of the tent, bowing, and these three men. And it is to the apparent leader of the 3, since the offer is to them, and he is speaking in the single tense. To Christians, this person, part of the "trinity" of men is Jesus

3. And [Abraham] said, "Sir, if I have found grace in your eyes, please do not pass by from your servant."

"found grace in your eyes" is an expression of seeking a favor, as in "if you find me worthy" with "servant" an expression of humility and not his status.

4. [Abraham]: "Now a bit of water will be fetched, you-all will wash your feet, and you-all will recline beneath the tree."

Here the trio is told, in the plural form, to go was and rest by the nearby tree where YHVH is stationed. YHVH is silent during this and in a few verses will excuse himself to leave, and the speaking form will switch.

5. [Abraham]: "And I will fetch a bit of bread, and you-all will stay your heart. After that, you-all will pass on, forasmuch as you are come to your servant." And they said, "Do thusly as you have spoken."

It is interesting that supernatural beings need to eat. Most apologetics state that they weren't really eating, but were appearing to do s, in that way they wouldn't hurt Abraham's feelings. However, it is important to note that the Gods in Canaanite literature were often served food and ate it and, at times, got drunk. But it is not clear that the three men are anything but men.

6.And Abraham hurried into the tent, unto Sarah, and said, "Make ready, quickly, three measures of fine meal, knead, and make cakes."

It is apparent that with the three men, and the three cakes, neither Abraham, nor YHVH will be joining them. These quick cakes are pancakes of dough pressed upon a hot surface and only take a few minutes.

7. And into the herd ran Abraham, and fetched a calf, tender and good, [killed it] and he gave [the remains] to the lad and [the lad] hastened to prepare it.

8. And [Abraham] took curd, and milk, and the calf that [the lad] had prepared, and [Abraham] set it before [the men], under the tree, and [the three men] ate.

9. And they said to [Abraham] "Where is Sarah, your wife"? And [Abraham] said, "Behold, in the tent."

Up to this point, the guests have been in the plural form. It now switches into the single form, which is YHVH, who is ready to go back to the top of His mountain (which he descends in verse 21, which is the start of a different story).

10. And He said, "I will certainly return to you [Abraham] according to [this] time of life, and lo, Sarah, your wife, will have a son." And Sarah heard in the door of the tent, and it was behind [Abraham].

The Gods of the Bible are not all that omniscient. As we will see later, YHVH will descend again to see what is going on in Sodom. The double-language of "return" I have rendered as "certainly return".

11. And Abraham and Saran [were] old-ones, advanced in years, it had ceased to be for Sarah after the manner of women.

I translated a pair of words that would mean many days of days had come to simply be "advanced in years". And Sarah was post-menopausal, in the tent, behind Abraham who was in front of the opening.

12. And Sarah laughed within herself, saying, "After I have become worn-out, shall I have pleasure, my husband, being old [also]?"

Here, Sarah calls her husband "Adoni", which means "sir", but also "my husband" or "my lord", "my master".

13. And YHVH said to Abraham, "Why did Sarah laugh, saying, "Shall I surely bear a child [now that] I am old?"

14. [YHVH]: "I anything too hard of YHVH? At a set time, I will return to you [Abraham] according to [this] time of life and Sarah will have a son.

YHVH only says half of what Sarah said. Some wonder why He lied. Some say that it was to spare Abraham's feelings, that his wife felt that he was too old.

15. The Sarah denied, saying, "I didn't laugh" For she was afraid. And He said, "No, you did laugh."

At this point, YHVH is no longer there, and will descend to earth 6 verses later. Let's finish the story with the 3 men leaving and Abraham escorting them:

16. And the men rose up from there, and looked out towards Sodom, and Abraham went with them to bring them on the way.

END OF STORY

A few points to know about how these stories are arranged:

1) The stories were broken into separate chapters during a later period. Due to ideological issues, the Christians and the Jews have chapter and verse matching issues because one side says that break should be "x" and the other side says that it should be "y". Keeping this in mind, there were never indicators as to when a story ended and a new one began. Somewhere between verse 15 and verse 17, YHVH goes from being with Abraham to being up high. Which is why I indicated that He left. But, in truth, one story is often unrelated to another and may have a different author. So the story of Sodom is a new story. The fact that you have 2 angels in that story and 3 men in the "Dining with Abraham" story doesn't mean anything.

They are unrelated.

In this story, are the men ever called angels? No.
In the next story, are there 3? No.

This is the problem with trying to force an anthology of unrelated stories into a linear history.

SUMMARY

YHVH appears to Abraham and three guys show up. YHVH remains silent until after the three men are done eating. During that time, all grammar is plural. Then YHVH gives the message, chastises Sarah, (all of the grammar is in the singular) and is not heard from again in the story. We assume He went home. The men get up and leave.

Now, where is Jesus?

If you want to say that the three men are the "holy trinity", then you have the problem with YHVH being there and showing up. By tradition, many call the three men angels, and paintings have them with wings and hovering over Abraham. But that problem is because people see the 2 angels in the next story and assume that they are part of the group in the previous story.

We don't know who these three men were. The narrative never gives that information. They were greeted as honored guests, going to a city that Abraham helped defend in a ward against the Gods (Chapter 14 of Genesis), and may have been men whom he had fought with.

We don't know.

And just because we don't know doesn't mean that you get to call one of them Jesus.

Vayera - Genesis 18:1-22:24

Preface

There are those who see the writings of the Torah as a text of one author, written in a linear fashion, which is a mistake. Even the apologetic, "there is no early or later [order] in Torah" to get around some of the repetitions and jumping around in the timeline doesn't smooth out this view entirely.

Many of the chapters in the Torah begin with earlier references that don't exist, suggesting that these stories are anthologies, fragments of other stories that have long been lost. Excluding the "J" and "E" hypothesis, there are many instances where the stories are haphazard, where it forces the reader to create a non-existing narrative to resolve this problem. 

I am going to present a single example to keep this blog short, and I have some certainty that if you maintain an awareness of this problem, that you will be able to see this issue throughout what is erroneously called "the five books of Moses".

The Akeida

At the end of chapter 21, we have Abraham making a covenant with King Avimelech, and then Abraham planting a tree to commemorate the event and going off to travel among the Philistines for many days. The Akeida, which is the story of the 'Binding of Isaac', begins after all of that with verse 22:1. 

ויהי אחר הדברים האלה והאלהים נסה את אברהם ויאמר אליו אברהם ויאמר הנני

"And it was after those words, and THE Elohim had tested Abraham, and He said unto him, "Abraham" and he said, "Here I am."

You have several problems here. The first is that "after these words". 

What words?

The next problem is that nisah, which means to test, experiment, or trial, is in the past tense piel (active) form of the Hebrew verb.

What test?

There was no test, and there were no words exchanged. "Those words" should be words that would have demanded that this Akeida take place. And it is from this that the Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir, the grandson of Rashi), a 12th century Jewish commentator and apologist, connected "those words" to Abraham's vow to King Avimelech (verse 21:22-24) and his planting an eshel to commemorate that by swearing the name of YHVH, that he saw the Akeida as a punishment, since "test" had to already have happened (although he doesn't address that):

YHVH: "You were so bold as to take the son I gave you and to forge a covenant that will apply between him and Avimelech's children?! Take Isaac and bring him as an offering. We shall see what comes of your covenant!" Peirush HaTorah Genesis 22:1

So according to the Rashbam, the Akeida was not a test, but a punishment to put Abraham in his place. Like so many ways of trying to make a fragment part of a flowing narrative, one needs to invent the missing fragment, as though the current story has any connection with the previous one, and that it was written by the same author.

Here is another example:

According to the sages of the Talmud, "those words" were from the Satan (a mischievous servant of YHVH who would often trick him into doing some pretty horrible things, such as killing Job's family just to prove a point). After Abraham plants an eshel and declares that YHVH is great, the Satan tell him:

The Satan: Out of the entire banquet that Abraham made [honoring the birth of his son], he did not offer before you a bull or a ram! 

YHVH: Did he make it other than for his son? If I were to say to [Abraham] "Sacrifice [Isaac] before me", he would not refrain from doing so." Sanhedrin 89b, Midrash Rabbah Genesis 55:4

Things

The word "devarim" can mean "words" or "things", depending on the context. So, what about reading it as: 

"And it was after these things, and THE Elohim had tested Abraham, and He said unto him, "Abraham" and he said, "Here I am."

What were these "things"? 

Many would translate this to be the same as "events", and in doing so, turn this verse into referring to events that had transpired where YHVH had tested Abraham. 

But there was no testing of Abraham in the previous chapter. 

"But, ah!", the apologist would tell you, "this is not referring to the test at the end chapter 21 (21:33), but the test at the beginning of that chapter (21:10), where Abraham was told to send away his son, Ishmael.the previous chapter.

Does the text call that event a test? 

No. 

But based on using "events" in this verse, and that there had to be multiple ones, since "devarim" ("things") is in the plural, the Rambam came up with a list of 10 tests, where the Akeida is the 10th and the final test. There are other lists (such as one by Rabbi Ovadiah of Bertinoro) that change some of the first 8 of the 10 "tests", but they all have their list of 10 (just as you have multiple lists of 613 mitzvot).

But the earlier texts never state that there were any tests! 

In fact, the term nisah (test) only appears one time in the Book of Genesis, and this verse  (22:1) is it.

The apologetic of having "those events" be events that occurred in other chapters does not help in binding this chapter to the previous one, but only strengthens that gap.

But, remember, for the devout: "there is no order to the Torah" is the answer to that dilemma as well.

Traditional Learning

There is a tradition that one should not learn Torah one time without learning the Aramaic Targum two times. (Talmud, Berachot 8a-8b. Shulchan Aruch Orach Chiam 285). 

The Aramaic Targum Onkelos (circa 2nd century CE) is the approved Rabbinical Aramaic interpretation of the text. It doesn't tell you what the text says as much as how you should read the text and has more than 10,000 changes to the actual text. 

Here is how the Targum rewrites this verse:

These are the things by which YHVH put Abraham to the test.

In other words, the Akeida was the only test, and what follows are the things. Also note that "Ha-Elohim" ("That/the Elohim" or "The entire Elohim")  is replaced by YHVH to eliminate some ideological problems.

The result of all of this is that if you ask most Yeshiva students what this first verse means, chances are that they will see it exactly as the Targum explains it, because that is how they are taught: loyalty to the words of the sages take precedence over personal interpretation.

Summary

The story of the Akeida begins with "And it was after those words", but there were no words. There are those who would have this read "And it was after those things", treating is the previous events for which there is no indication of any test. To get around this, some move the events to things much further in the past, and the Targum tells us that there were no previous events, but that the text only speaks of the future test of the Akeida.

It's a tangled web of apologetics to attach meaning to where there is none rather than simple say, "some of the text of this story is lost".

Reading the story simply shows us that this is not the whole story. To the ideologue, the Torah is perfect, and so nothing can be missing.

And for the religious, loyalty to a group interpretation often trumps personal understanding.

Lech Lecha (Part 2) - Genesis 12:1-17:27

(Note: I am posting this a week early because I will be on vacation)

Abraham and the War of the Gods

Preface

There is a short chapter in the Book of Genesis that speaks of a war between two groups of nine different kingdoms, a war that Abraham gets eventually involved in to save his nephew from captivity. The story of this war is usually glossed over, and is oddly placed.

One of the biggest problems with the story, which is typically ignored (and may be the cause for it being glossed over), is its reference to unnatural beings and Gods. This might explain why many interpretations of the text avoid naming them and fall back to transliterations rather than translation or interpretations of the names.

Before we proceed, it is important that you understand that the Pentateuch was not written by one person, and that even the individual books have more than one contributor and editor. Because of that, it is a mistake to take something in a narrative in Genesis, and then modify what it was saying by applying a different explanation in Deuteronomy. But it need not just be between different books, but even different portions of the same book, portions contributed by different narrators, can cause such a problem. We see this when trying to homogenize the two Creation narratives of Genesis 1 and 2, where there are incompatibilities that require adding other stories in order to make them work better.

I will explain further below when we get to the Rephaim: servants of the Gods in the Book of Genesis, long before the Deuteronomists changed the Rephaim into giants who have no connection to the Gods. 

Before the War

Once upon a time, in the land of Ur Kasim, lived Abram (who would later be known as Abraham[1]), with his father, brother, and wife Sarai[2] (who would later be known as Sarah[3]), who was also his half-sister (they shared the same father, but different mothers)[4]. Abram and Sarai were childless,[5] which is a statement that will be repeated over and over within the Genesis text.

One day, Abram’s father, Terach, took his three sons and their families with him, to leave their land and go to the land of the Canaan, where they would settle in a place called Haran. At a later time, Abram’s father died there[6] at the ripe old age of 205, making Abram 75 years old at the time.

At some point after this, YHVH tells Abram to leave the place where he was living, just as he left the place of his father (inferring Ur Kasim), to arrive at a place to be revealed later on. In short, Abram was to go deeper into the land of Canaan where YHVH would show him all of the land that was to be his[7]. He takes his half-sister wife and, for reasons unexplained, his nephew with him. He also takes “souls that they made” (Gen 12:5) with them, which is an expression, causing many translations to express this in other ways that are ideologically sound. 

Abraham would encounter a Pharaoh, deceive him, and get sent away later with his entourage and a lot of material gains: slaves, servants, and animals[8].

(Note: It is odd that this story of Abram tricking the king because he was afraid is nearly the same in chapter 20, with some changes. It makes one wonder if this story was simply being retold in two places by two different narrators. There are other examples or such repetition in the text).

Eventually, Abram would find a place to settle. His workers and those of Lot would not get along, and so Lot moved towards Sodom, and Abram is told by God that all of the real estate that he sees will be given to his offspring[9].

And Abraham dwelled peacefully.

Here is a map of Abraham’s travels:

The war itself would be farther south, close to the Dead Sea. But let’s pause for a moment before we go there.

The Gods of Canaan

About a century ago, the writings of the ancient city of Ugarit were uncovered. A vast number of tablets have given us insight as to how they lived, as well as to what they believed. It is fascinating that a number of the Gods mentioned in their text are also mentioned in the Old Testament. YHVH is not mentioned, and appears to either have been unknown to them, or is a new name applied to an existing God.

EL, Asherah, Ashteroth, Anat, Baal, Elohim, Mot, Shamayim, and others appear, not only in the Ugarit text, but in the Old Testament as well. At no point does the Torah call these Gods “false Gods”, but simply “other Gods”. Later texts, such as Jeremiah will include propaganda that all of their Gods are worthless and the same as the idols, of wood and metal. And the book of Isaiah would have YHVH banish the other Gods to other lands, and there would be no more Elohim, not even the Elohim of the Hebrews. But it would not be until after the exile that the Jews would embrace monotheism (there has only ever been one God) in place of henotheism (they have been loyal to only one God out of many Gods).

This war story appears to be quite old, is taking place in the land of Canaan, in a place where the Gods walked the earth or, when needed, their unnatural servants acted on their behalf.

Now, before we look at the battle, let’s look at the unnatural and supernatural players who are often missed.

The Not-so-Human Participants

Ashteroth

The first of these mentioned, after the names of the human kings[11] is the Goddess Ashteroth who is referred to as “Ashteroth of the horns”, for She is often depicted as a horned Goddess in the objects created in Her name:

The verse reads “…and they struck the Rephaim who were with Ashteroth of the horns”. Yet most translations will read “and they struck the Rephaim who were in Ashteroth-karnaim”, to hide the Goddess. Some translations are more honest about it.

We are now going to look at the various categories of giants, of servants of the Gods (Rephaim), who were also participating in the battle.

It should be noted that many apologists have a problem with the Goddess Ashteroth actually being in the text, and will fight tooth and nail to hold that "Ashteroth-karnaim" was a place, and not a Goddess. And yet, they don't have a problem with there being supernatural Rephaim dwelling there, picturing them as giant monsters and fighting the puny humans.

It's an odd position to hold.

Rephaim

The Rephaim, mentioned with Ashteroth[12], were those who once lived among the people of the land, but were taken by one or more Gods, to serve them. According to the text, these Rephaim were not invincible and could be killed. And like the Ugarit version, some were kings, and would continue to rule their subjects. The later  Deuteronomy text expands on the story, changing the Rephaim, saying that they were “tall like giants.” and that one of them had a large iron bed. The Genesis texts, however, don't indicate anything unnatural about them. External texts, such as the Book of Job, tell us that they dwell in Sheol, beneath the ground, and will rise up as needed. If one tries to apply every reference to the Rephaim and try to make them all into a single explanation, you will have a stew composed of incompatible ingredients.

Different books and different authors had different ideas about the Rephaim. But their us in Genesis is certainly one of serving the Gods, and as such, their being mentioned in the Torah is a problem for those who want to hold a monotheistic view of that book.

IMPORTANT

The term "Rephaim" only appears 7 times in the Torah, with 2 of them being in Genesis 14:5 and 15:20. In Deuteronomy we see it in 2:11, twice in 2:20, 3:11, and 3:13.

In the Genesis version, all we know is that the Rephaim are those who were with the Goddess. This is consistent with what we know from the older Ugarit text from Canaan, that the Rephaim, which is a transliteration of the Canaanite word, served the Gods. And where you saw a rapau (singular for Rephaim), you knew that his God was being served.

The Deuteronomist(s) took the Gods away, and made the Rephaim into giants. Not only were they giants, but their food was giant, so big that it took two humans to carry a single cluster of grapes. And these giants were so big, that the humans looked like grasshoppers when compared to them. And there were no Gods by them or mentioned in relationship to them.

I am not calling the Rephaim "giants" because the Rephaim in Genesis does not work with the Deuteronomy narrative. It should also be noted that the Deuteronomy narrative tells us that "Og was the last of the Rephaim[13]", but in their war against him in the earlier book of Numbers, he is never called that. As is common in Scripture, stories change with the telling, and as the ages pass by.

The Genesis text tells us of two other unnatural players in the war. One of these, the Emim, was “called Rephaim by the Moabites[14]” by the Deurteronomist.

Emim

There is a tradition that the Emim[15] were called that because they were “dreaded ones”, which is based on the root letters of the name. Of course, that same book also tells us that this particular group of rephaim were tall like the "giants" (anakim), and were known among the Moabites[16].

Zuzim/Zamzuzim

The Zuzim[17] may have been called this because they caused those who saw them to flee (from “zuz”, meaning “move”). But the Deuteronomist [18] gives them a slightly different name, calling them Zamzuzim. Because the Deuteronomist also includes the Emim, like the Genesis text, it is generally assumed that the Zamzuzim and the Zuzim are the same, without considering that the narrative has made a change. An additional idea provided is that it was the Ammonites who called the Zamzuzim ,"Rephaim". Like the Emim, the Zamzuzim were said to have been many and were tall like the "giants"[19].

It would make sense for each nation to have their own rephaim, and give them alternate names that were unique to their region. And even if we discard all of the Deuteronomy descriptions of the Rephaim, and say that the Emim and the Zuzim in chapter 14 of Genesis were not Rephaim, it does not detract that there were Rephaim in the story fighting with a Goddess. Because of that, I am willing to tentatively hold that there were three kingdoms with rephaim living among them.

Because of that, let's say that we have the Moabite Rephaim, the Ammonite Rephaim, and the local Rephaim battling on one side. Keep in mind that, according to the Genesis use and that of the Canaanite texts, the Rephaim serve the Gods, and one can certainly imply that if the Rephaim are fighting, then the Gods, as in The Iliad, are also directly involved.

Human Non-Participants

Even though they are listed with the Rephaim, there were other kingdoms mentioned, not to make them giants as well, but to simply indicate the extent and locations of the battles.

These include the Horim (who would end up intermarrying with Esau’s descendants), the Amalekites (who would attack the Hebrews during the Exodus story) and the Amorites. The Amalekites is a bit problematic, given that Amalek wasn’t even born until after the Esau story.   

Human Participants

According to the story, you once had a unified group of 9 kingdoms. For some reason that is never made clear, 4 of the kingdoms broke away, and the 5 kingdoms were fighting them for years. These groups were:

1. Four kingdoms represented by: King Amraphel of Shinar, King Arioch of Ellasar, King Chedorlaomer of Elam, and King Tidal of Goyyim[20].
2. Five kingdoms represented by: King Bera of Sodom, King Birsha of Gomorrah, King Shinab of Admah, King Shemeber of Zeboyim, and King Zoar of Bela.

Two of the kingdoms of group 2 should be familiar to everyone who has heard of the book of Genesis: Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot (Abraham’s nephew), who moved to Sodom because is family issues with Abraham and his workers, was captured. Abraham, upon hearing this, decides to join in the battle which was taking place in Siddim.

When Abraham does join the battle, he brings YHVH, and even though the other side had vast armies of Rephaim, YHVH wiped most of them out.[21]

The Battle

There is no narrative that tells us about the weapons, strategy, or even the casualties. Because the Torah later says that only Og remained of all of the Rephaim, we can imagine a vast plain of the bodies of these Rephaim were everywhere.

But that was after YHVH showed up.

Prior to that, in the 14^th year, the group of the 5 kings could no longer cope. Some fled to the mountains, and others hid within their protective battlements, waiting for help[22].

Abraham himself stays clear of this battle until a messenger comes to tell him that his nephew was taken captive as a slave by the marauding army. Abraham sides with the 5 kings, which include the king of Sodom whose kingdom had fallen to the enemy, and his own “army” (only the ones “born in his house”), which totaled 318[23]. There is a Jewish tradition that 318 represents the numeric value of the name “Eliezer”, which was Abraham’s servant, implying that it was just the two of them, since YHVH really did the fighting for them[24].

After Abraham, his small army, and YHVH single-handedly defeated the army of the 4 kings, Abraham returned with Lot and all of the stolen booty. The army of the 5 kings came out of hiding and praised Abraham, and the High priest of the God El comes to bless them. Abraham then redistributes the booty to the group.

The Blessing

As noted, Abraham was dwelling in the land of Canaan. After the war, the High Priest comes to bless him:

Many apologists have a problem with the High Priest of El blessing Abraham, who has absolutely no problem with it. To get around this, a number of apologetics have been born. One claims that Malchizedek was really Shem, the son of Noah who had a personal relationship with YHVH[25].

But to believe that a High Priest of Canaan would be invoking the name of any chief God (“Elyon”) than El, is a force, at best. It also appears that El did not take a personal interest in the war, and so praising Him for Abraham’s success is akin to those who praised their God for the end of World War II.

Some Final Points

The story of the war of the 5 kings who fought against the 4 kings is certainly not a natural war. You have rephaim, and at least one God and Goddess involved in it. You, perhaps, have not just one, but three different armies of Rephaim on the side of the 4 kings, forcing the 5 kings to flee with their lives. And it is only when Abraham shows up with his God that the tide changes, the Rephaim, (according to Deuteronomy, not the Genesis text) were nearly wiped out, and the war was over.

The story of the war seems to be an odd interlude between Abraham pitching his tent and bemoaning the fact that Sarah is childless, and the story where YHVH promises to fix that problem[26].

But be that as it may, the short story about an epic battle between humans and non-humans is an amazing one. It is rarely cited by those who are embarrassed by the inclusion of giants in the text, and is often skimmed over because of its placement right in the middle of Abraham wanting to have a child with Sarah.

Oh, one more thing.

Giants.

Sites, such as “Answers in Genesis” claim that because we have giant snakes and bugs today, it means that there could have been giant human societies in the past, which is a logical leap. Not only are there biological reasons why that cannot work, but it does not explain the lack of giant populations or of a single skeleton ever being found. Their final response is quite telling:

"However, the biblical data about these people can be trusted because it is in the Word of God. Furthermore, other ancient sources describe giants, and the Anakim are even mentioned as dwelling in the land of Canaan."[27]

---

[1] Genesis 17:5

[2] Genesis 11:27-29

[3] Genesis 17:15

[4] Genesis 20:12

[5] Genesis 11:20

[6] Genesis 11:31-32

[7] Genesis 15:18

[8] Genesis 12:16

[9] Genesis 13:17-18
[10] Removed
[11] Removed

[12] Genesis 14:5

[13] Deuteronomy 3:11

[14] Deuteronomy 2:12

[15] Genesis 14:5

[16] Deuteronomy 2:10-11

[17] Genesis 14:5

[18] Deuteronomy 2:20

[19] Ibid. 2:21

[20] I won’t be interpreting anything based on the names, but will stick to the plain narrative.

[21] Deuteronomy 3:11 says that Og was the last living one.

[22] Genesis 14:10

[23] Genesis 14:14. 

[24] Talmud, Nedarim, 32a

[25] Talmud, Nederim 32b and Targum Yonaton

[27] https://answersingenesis.org/bible-characters/giants-in-the-old-testament/

Lech Lecha - Genesis 12:1-17:27

(Note: I am posting “Lech Lecha” a week early because I will be on vacation).

In the Book of Genesis we are introduced to Abram (who will later be known as Abraham) and his isha Sarai (who will later be known as Sarah). With them is a sheficha known as Hagar.

It is important that you know the distinctions between the two.

An isha is often translated as "wife". A person with this status is the head of the house, after her husband, and sees to the upkeep of his property. This is the favored position. While there are times in Scripture when one has more than one isha, this is a shared position of authority.

A sheficha (sometimes translated as "maid" or "servant") is a secondary breeder who is subservient to the isha. When the sheficha has a child, that child is now considered as the offspring of the isha, although the sheficha will often raise the child. An example of this is Jacob who had two wives and their maids. Even though the maid gave birth, the infant was passed to the isha who named him.

There is a verse in Genesis 31:3 where Laban gives a stern warning to Jacob, saying that if he causes his daughters to cry-out-in-anguish (from the pi'el form of the verb, le'anot, which also translates to "torture") that Jacob will have something to fear. It is the warning of a father to his son in-law who is about to move away. He also warns Jacob not to add another isha to his group.

The torture verb (inah) is also used in Deuteronomy 22:29, when it speaks of a woman who was raped and cried out in anguish. Some apologists have a problem with God demanding that the raped girl becomes the wife of her rapist and will either mangle inah to mean “she was humbled”, or say that the father could opt-out of selling his raped daughter to the rapist if he so desired (which contradicts the majority view of the Jewish sages). But in that case, the girl still has no say in her situation.

Scripture also tells us that a father may sell his daughter to a master, who will treat her as a servant, but may choose to give her to his son. This was to become a sheficha to the son (or the master), as a breeder servant for the household. Many commentators explain that this was a method for the poor to find a well-off family for which the daughter, having no possibility of betrothal, could be inserted into.

And in various sections of Scripture, we read of the indifference that the master often had to the shificha, passing on those decisions to his isha.

And this brings us to Abraham and Sarah.

There are some who argue that Hagar was an isha, because Sarah was unable to conceive, saw her status as an isha compromised, and so gave Hagar to Abraham as an isha (verse 16:3). Yet, Abraham never saw Hagar in that way, and 3 verses later he refers to Hagar as a sheficha - simply a fill-in for Sarah as the breeding person.

The Sages try very hard to portray Hagar as the perpetrator of evil, with Sarah being the innocent one. And so, the very strong word that was used by Laban, that refers to cry-out-in-anguish, as in torture, is often toned down, saying that she was treated harshly "through hard labor" (Rashi). They do something similar with Laban's threat, saying that Jacob should not make the daughters cry-out-in-anguish as being "he will not lie with them" (Rashi).

That type of tweaking diminishes the strength of the threat, or what the women would be experiencing.

So here is the story with Sarah and Abraham and Hagar:

16:3 - And Sarai , the isha of Abram, took Hagar the Egyptian, her sheficha at the end of 10 years of Abram's in the land of Cana'an, and gave her to Abram, her man/husband as his isha. 

16:4 - [Abram] came to Hagar and she conceived, and [Hagar] saw that she had conceived, and her mistress became lighter in her eyes (less important). 

16:5 - And Sarai said to Abram, "My injustice is upon you! I game my sheficha in your bosom, and she saw that she had conceived, I became lighter in her eyes. Yahweh will judge between me and you!" 

16:6 - Abram said to Sarai, "Behold, your sheficha is in your hand. Do to her what is good in your eyes. And Sarai harmed Hagar (caused-her-to-cry-out-in-anguish), and [Hagar] fled from [Sarai].

The KJV translated "caused-her-to-cry-out-in-anguish" as "dealt harshly.

The idea of an isha and a sheficha were perfectly normal and were seen as the Biblical models for marriage. The word for "husband" is ba'al which also means "lord", "master", "owner". Whether ist is an isha or a sheficha, but are acquired and owned by the ba'al, who may acquire as many as he is capable of affording, and so long as they serve their purpose of breeding and serving, the women serve a purpose as well.

For Hagar, it was to give Abram an heir, which was to be replaces with Isaac (In the Septuagint, the second-born will almost always take over for the first born: Isaac, Jacob, Judah, Moses, etc.

For Sarah, it was to give birth to a son that Abraham will be commanded to offer as a human sacrifice. (True, God changed His mind, but Abraham demonstrated that he was willing).

A final note: After Sarah dies, Abraham marries and has a lot of other children with a woman named Keturah (25:1) There is a Midrash that Keturah was also Hagar (keturah as a form of "katair", meaning "incense" as in the sweet smell of those days. Maybe she was, and maybe she wasn't. But as with Hagar, Abraham will send those children away as well.

Finally, here is a list of common translations. Notice how the torture of Hagar is glossed over.

Noach (Part 4) - Genesis 6:9-11:32

The Tower of Babel story is quite famous, and yet, a lot of people only know it by the tales that they have been told and not by learning the meager 9 sentences that compose the entire myth.

It should be noted that the individual myths that make of the collective anthology that we call the “Torah”, are not always in chronological order. For example, when Abraham (chapter 14) goes to rescue Lot, it says that his army was composed of those who was born upon his land, and yet, if you look at the story chronologically, that tale should have been inserted much later. In fact, it seems to interrupt a narrative that was taking place that continues after Lot is rescued.

The Tower of Babel story in Genesis does not name any people, or give any dates. In fact, it could have happened at any time. Perhaps even before the flood. We don’t know, and there are no literary indicators to tell us otherwise. This is one of the problems with multiple stories being stitched together to make an imperfect whole cloth.

Now, if you want to hold that this took place right after the Flood story was all over, then Noah and his sons were there and a young Abraham was helping as well, for is says, “all of the people of the land” participated. And as I have noted, it may be unrelated to the Noah story at all, and from a different storyteller.

Since it is only 9 sentences long, let’s look at the story in a way that it is normally never presented.

1. And the entire land was of one language and of unified words (meanings).

I use “land” instead of “earth” (lower-case “e”) because it is sometimes confused with “Earth” as a planet, which was an unknown concept in Genesis. This story could be titled, “Why are there so many languages across the land?”

2. And it happened in their migrating from the east, that they found a valley in the land of Shinar and settled there.

It doesn’t mention who “they” are, but we can assume all of humankind, as small as it was. East of Eden was where Cain was exiled, but that story may not be related to this one.

3. Each man said to his fellow, “Come, let us make bricks and burn them in fire.” And the brick served them as stone and the building-substance (bitumen) served them as stuff-to-build (plaster, spackle).

“Bitumen” and “plaster” are the common translations for “chomer”, which I don’t have a problem with. Of course, such materials have their limits.

4. And they said, “Come, let us build a city for us and a tower with its top in shamayim (“heavens”), and let us make for ourselves a name, lest we become dispersed across the face of the entire land.”

The word “shamayim” was understood as being the underside of the rakia, the solid dome that was overhead. And above that was where Elohim and His myriad of Hosts dwelled. There is this legend that they were trying to get to God and defeat Him. Of course, that is nowhere to be found in the text. One could equally hold that they wanted to play it safe, just in case God wanted to flood them again, which is also not in the text.

5. And YHVH descended to see the city and tower that the sons of man (humans) had built.

This is but one of the many times that God needs to descend to the land to see what was going on, which undermines the modern view of His omniscience. And as for those people who claim that God doesn’t intervene in the affairs of man because He honors free will, well…

6. And YHVH said, “Behold one people and there is one language for all of them, and this they began to do?! And now, should it not be withheld from them all that they plan to do?”

For some reason, YHVH was upset. And rather than tell them, or publically ruin their work, he first whines to His supernatural brethren.

7. “Come, let use descend and there confuse their language there, that a man will not hear (understand) the language of his fellow.”

So apparently, YHVH went on a reconnaissance mission in verse 5, came back upset, and complained in verses 6 and 7, and the next sentence he casts a spell on humanity so that people cannot understand one another, which is a bit overboard, and doesn’t guarantee that building will stop.

8. And YHVH dispersed them from there over the face of the entire land, and they stopped building the city.

It is assumed that it was the language change that caused them to give up and disperse. And the Hebrew word, “yfetz” could also mean “opened a mouth”, so it’s a great play on words.

9. And that is why it is called “Babel” (Bavel), because it was there that YHVH confused (balal) the language of the whole land, and from there, YHVH scattered them over the entire face of the land.

End of story.

Rational people want to assign this story to a specific ruins or remains of a tower. But they ignore that this is a supernatural story with a purpose of explaining why there are many languages, not to describe a historical event without naming a single person or place to which it could be ascribed.

It’s a story that stands alone, a story 9 lines long, and a story that gets expounded upon at the pulpit.

Noach (Part 3) - Genesis 6:9-11:32

Near the end of the Noach Torah portion we read (Genesis 11:31) and are told this interesting tidbit:

“Terach took his son Abram (who will become “Abraham”), and Lot, the son of Haran, his grandson, and his daughter in-law Sarai (who will become “Sarah”), the wife of Abram, his son, and they departed…”

Later one, we will read three versions of the same tale. We could group them into a title called:  “Don’t tell the king that you are my wife. Tell him that you are my sister!” Two times “Abraham” supposedly pulls this trick, and one time (Genesis 26:7), the storyteller chooses to put Isaac into the narrative.

Which is more likely? - Two people lying to a king three different times as part of a family tradition, or that it is the same story told by different authors.

It is something to consider.

But in one version, the king demands an explanation for the lie. In an earlier and shorter version, (12:18), Abraham doesn’t tell the king why he lied. But in a later and lengthier version, Abraham tells the King that he was afraid that he would be killed (Genesis 20:10), followed by a “Well, I didn’t technically lie” explanation (Genesis 20:12):

“And also, [she is] indeed my sister, she is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother, and she became my wife.”

So she is Abraham’s half-sister by his father. And yet, the author of Genesis 11 never calls her “the daughter of Terach”, but simply “the daughter in-law of Terach”.

This is yet another example of authors of one story having no concern with continuity of another author.

It’s an issue certainly worth noting.

Noach (Part 2) - Genesis 6:9-11:32

There is a story about Noah, and that he built an ark.

He built a really big ark to house 2 of every animal across the land.

So how long did it take him to build this ark (which, most likely, had very little resemblance to the design that Ken Ham used, which was based on artistic renderings)?

Many apologists want Noah to have taken a very, very, long time. The reason for this is that Genesis 6:3 has YHVH saying that he was going to limit man’s days to 120 years. And we know that the stories that came later have people who lived a lot longer than that. This is an example of how a group of authors don’t really care what another author said. But since the Bible needs to be perfect, the apologist will say, “Well, God meant that he was going to flood the world in 120 years!”

It doesn’t say that. Not only that, but 3 verses earlier it says that Noah was 500 years old, and later, it will tell us that Noah was 600 years old when he entered the ark.

And that brings us to a different type of a “God of the gaps”.

Genesis doesn’t really say how old Noah was when God spoke to him and gave him the command in 6:13. All we have is verse 5:32 (the last verse of chapter 5) saying that Noah was 500 years old when he had 3 sons. It doesn’t say if they were triplets (unlikely) or not, but most commentators treat them as if they were.

The next time we have a date/age indicated is in verse 7:11, where is says that Noah was 600 years old when he entered the ark. So the sons were 100 years old (using the idea that they were triplets) when they entered the ark with their spouses.

And that’s it.

But we do have language where God is telling Noah what He is going to do. And there is immediacy in it. Once there is this exchange between God and Noah, the name YHVH is dropped, and Elohim is used.

Verse 6:13 – “I am going to wipe out mankind”

Verses 6:14-6:16 are the few instructions about the dimensions and a light “Oh, and make a door!”

Verse 6:17 “And I, BEHOLD!, am bringing (present tense) flood waters upon the land…”

Verses 6:18-21 is where God says He’s going to kill everyone else, so bring in the family, animals, and food for everyone, including the animals. (He never tells Noah that he needs a year’s worth!)

Verse 6:22 – “And Noah did all that Elohim commanded him”

And the very next verse, YHVH tells Noah, “Get into the ark”.

And that’s all there is to it.

There is no length of time indicated. In fact, there is an immediacy “Look, I am bringing flood waters to the land!”

Look, Genesis is a book of supernaturalism. So why do apologists have a problem with an ark being built in a few days or weeks. Just because Ken Ham couldn’t do it doesn’t mean anything. Noah had YHVH (or Elohim) by his side!

Noah didn’t associate with anyone but family. There is no town indicated, no neighbors. And as far as we can tell, he didn’t really care what happened to anyone else.

So there was no really, really, long time to build the boat to let people know that a flood was coming.

God was on a short schedule.

One final note about the use of Elohim and YHVH, which is a classic use of Illeism, is that verse 7:16 uses both names, but doing different things. It’s an oddity worth noting.