Kejadian 2:1-25
Konteks2:1 The heavens and the earth 1 were completed with everything that was in them. 2 2:2 By 3 the seventh day God finished the work that he had been doing, 4 and he ceased 5 on the seventh day all the work that he had been doing. 2:3 God blessed the seventh day and made it holy 6 because on it he ceased all the work that he 7 had been doing in creation. 8
2:4 This is the account 9 of the heavens and
the earth 10 when they were created – when the Lord God 11 made the earth and heavens. 12
2:5 Now 13 no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of the field 14 had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. 15 2:6 Springs 16 would well up 17 from the earth and water 18 the whole surface of the ground. 19 2:7 The Lord God formed 20 the man from the soil of the ground 21 and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, 22 and the man became a living being. 23
2:8 The Lord God planted an orchard 24 in the east, 25 in Eden; 26 and there he placed the man he had formed. 27 2:9 The Lord God made all kinds of trees grow from the soil, 28 every tree that was pleasing to look at 29 and good for food. (Now 30 the tree of life 31 and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil 32 were in the middle of the orchard.)
2:10 Now 33 a river flows 34 from Eden 35 to
water the orchard, and from there it divides 36 into four headstreams. 37 2:11 The name of the first is Pishon; it runs through 38 the entire land of Havilah, where there is gold. 2:12 (The gold of that land is pure; 39 pearls 40 and lapis lazuli 41 are also there). 2:13 The name of the second river is Gihon; it runs through 42 the entire land of Cush. 43 2:14 The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. 44 The fourth river is the Euphrates.
2:15 The Lord God took the man and placed 45 him in the orchard in 46 Eden to care for it and to maintain it. 47 2:16 Then the Lord God commanded 48 the man, “You may freely eat 49 fruit 50 from every tree of the orchard, 2:17 but 51 you must not eat 52 from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when 53 you eat from it you will surely die.” 54
2:18 The Lord God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. 55 I will make a companion 56 for him who corresponds to him.” 57 2:19 The Lord God formed 58 out of the ground every living animal of the field and every bird of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would 59 name them, and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. 2:20 So the man named all the animals, the birds of the air, and the living creatures of the field, but for Adam 60 no companion who corresponded to him was found. 61 2:21 So the Lord God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep, 62 and while he was asleep, 63 he took part of the man’s side 64 and closed up the place with flesh. 65 2:22 Then the Lord God made 66 a woman from the part he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. 2:23 Then the man said,
“This one at last 67 is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
this one will be called 68 ‘woman,’
for she was taken out of 69 man.” 70
2:24 That is why 71 a man leaves 72 his father and mother and unites with 73 his wife, and they become a new family. 74 2:25 The man and his wife were both naked, 75 but they were not ashamed. 76
Kejadian 14:1--16:16
Konteks14:1 At that time 77 Amraphel king of Shinar, 78 Arioch king of Ellasar, Kedorlaomer king of Elam, and Tidal king of nations 79 14:2 went to war 80 against Bera king of Sodom, Birsha king of Gomorrah, Shinab king of Admah, Shemeber king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar). 81 14:3 These last five kings 82 joined forces 83 in the Valley of Siddim (that is, the Salt Sea). 84 14:4 For twelve years 85 they had served Kedorlaomer, but in the thirteenth year 86 they rebelled. 87 14:5 In the fourteenth year, Kedorlaomer and the kings who were his allies came and defeated 88 the Rephaites in Ashteroth Karnaim, the Zuzites in Ham, the Emites in Shaveh Kiriathaim, 14:6 and the Horites in their hill country of Seir, as far as El Paran, which is near the desert. 89 14:7 Then they attacked En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh) again, 90 and they conquered all the territory of the Amalekites, as well as the Amorites who were living in Hazazon Tamar.
14:8 Then the king of Sodom, the king of Gomorrah, the king of Admah, the king of Zeboiim, and the king of Bela (that is, Zoar) went out and prepared for battle. In the Valley of Siddim they met 91 14:9 Kedorlaomer king of Elam, Tidal king of nations, 92 Amraphel king of Shinar, and Arioch king of Ellasar. Four kings fought against 93 five. 14:10 Now the Valley of Siddim was full of tar pits. 94 When the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah fled, they fell into them, 95 but some survivors 96 fled to the hills. 97 14:11 The four victorious kings 98 took all the possessions and food of Sodom and Gomorrah and left. 14:12 They also took Abram’s nephew 99 Lot and his possessions when 100 they left, for Lot 101 was living in Sodom. 102
14:13 A fugitive 103 came and told Abram the Hebrew. 104 Now Abram was living by the oaks 105 of Mamre the Amorite, the brother 106 of Eshcol and Aner. (All these were allied by treaty 107 with Abram.) 108 14:14 When Abram heard that his nephew 109 had been taken captive, he mobilized 110 his 318 trained men who had been born in his household, and he pursued the invaders 111 as far as Dan. 112 14:15 Then, during the night, 113 Abram 114 divided his forces 115 against them and defeated them. He chased them as far as Hobah, which is north 116 of Damascus. 14:16 He retrieved all the stolen property. 117 He also brought back his nephew Lot and his possessions, as well as the women and the rest of 118 the people.
14:17 After Abram 119 returned from defeating Kedorlaomer and the kings who were with him, the king of Sodom went out to meet Abram 120 in the Valley of Shaveh (known as the King’s Valley). 121 14:18 Melchizedek king of Salem 122 brought out bread and wine. (Now he was the priest of the Most High God.) 123 14:19 He blessed Abram, saying,
“Blessed be Abram by 124 the Most High God,
Creator 125 of heaven and earth. 126
14:20 Worthy of praise is 127 the Most High God,
who delivered 128 your enemies into your hand.”
Abram gave Melchizedek 129 a tenth of everything.
14:21 Then the king of Sodom said to Abram, “Give me the people and take the possessions for yourself.” 14:22 But Abram replied to the king of Sodom, “I raise my hand 130 to the Lord, the Most High God, Creator of heaven and earth, and vow 131 14:23 that I will take nothing 132 belonging to you, not even a thread or the strap of a sandal. That way you can never say, ‘It is I 133 who made Abram rich.’ 14:24 I will take nothing 134 except compensation for what the young men have eaten. 135 As for the share of the men who went with me – Aner, Eshcol, and Mamre – let them take their share.”
15:1 After these things the word of the Lord came to Abram in a vision: “Fear not, Abram! I am your shield 136 and the one who will reward you in great abundance.” 137
15:2 But Abram said, “O sovereign Lord, 138 what will you give me since 139 I continue to be 140 childless, and my heir 141 is 142 Eliezer of Damascus?” 143 15:3 Abram added, 144 “Since 145 you have not given me a descendant, then look, one born in my house will be my heir!” 146
15:4 But look, 147 the word of the Lord came to him: “This man 148 will not be your heir, 149 but instead 150 a son 151 who comes from your own body will be 152 your heir.” 153 15:5 The Lord 154 took him outside and said, “Gaze into the sky and count the stars – if you are able to count them!” Then he said to him, “So will your descendants be.”
15:6 Abram believed 155 the Lord, and the Lord 156 considered his response of faith 157 as proof of genuine loyalty. 158
15:7 The Lord said 159 to him, “I am the Lord 160 who brought you out from Ur of the Chaldeans 161 to give you this land to possess.” 15:8 But 162 Abram 163 said, “O sovereign Lord, 164 by what 165 can I know that I am to possess it?”
15:9 The Lord 166 said to him, “Take for me a heifer, a goat, and a ram, each three years old, along with a dove and a young pigeon.” 15:10 So Abram 167 took all these for him and then cut them in two 168 and placed each half opposite the other, 169 but he did not cut the birds in half. 15:11 When birds of prey came down on the carcasses, Abram drove them away.
15:12 When the sun went down, Abram fell sound asleep, 170 and great terror overwhelmed him. 171 15:13 Then the Lord said to Abram, “Know for certain 172 that your descendants will be strangers 173 in a foreign country. 174 They will be enslaved and oppressed 175 for four hundred years. 15:14 But I will execute judgment on the nation that they will serve. 176 Afterward they will come out with many possessions. 15:15 But as for you, 177 you will go to your ancestors 178 in peace and be buried at a good old age. 179 15:16 In the fourth generation 180 your descendants 181 will return here, for the sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its limit.” 182
15:17 When the sun had gone down and it was dark, a smoking firepot with a flaming torch 183 passed between the animal parts. 184 15:18 That day the Lord made a covenant 185 with Abram: “To your descendants I give 186 this land, from the river of Egypt 187 to the great river, the Euphrates River – 15:19 the land 188 of the Kenites, Kenizzites, Kadmonites, 15:20 Hittites, Perizzites, Rephaites, 15:21 Amorites, Canaanites, Girgashites, and Jebusites.” 189
16:1 Now Sarai, 190 Abram’s wife, had not given birth to any children, 191 but she had an Egyptian servant 192 named Hagar. 193 16:2 So Sarai said to Abram, “Since 194 the Lord has prevented me from having children, have sexual relations with 195 my servant. Perhaps I can have a family by her.” 196 Abram did what 197 Sarai told him.
16:3 So after Abram had lived 198 in Canaan for ten years, Sarai, Abram’s wife, gave Hagar, her Egyptian servant, 199 to her husband to be his wife. 200 16:4 He had sexual relations with 201 Hagar, and she became pregnant. 202 Once Hagar realized she was pregnant, she despised Sarai. 203 16:5 Then Sarai said to Abram, “You have brought this wrong on me! 204 I allowed my servant to have sexual relations with you, 205 but when she realized 206 that she was pregnant, she despised me. 207 May the Lord judge between you and me!” 208
16:6 Abram said to Sarai, “Since your 209 servant is under your authority, 210 do to her whatever you think best.” 211 Then Sarai treated Hagar 212 harshly, 213 so she ran away from Sarai. 214
16:7 The Lord’s angel 215 found Hagar near a spring of water in the desert – the spring that is along the road to Shur. 216 16:8 He said, “Hagar, servant of Sarai, where have you come from, and where are you going?” She replied, “I’m running away from 217 my mistress, Sarai.”
16:9 Then the Lord’s angel said to her, “Return to your mistress and submit 218 to her authority. 16:10 I will greatly multiply your descendants,” the Lord’s angel added, 219 “so that they will be too numerous to count.” 220 16:11 Then the Lord’s angel said to her,
“You are now 221 pregnant
and are about to give birth 222 to a son.
You are to name him Ishmael, 223
for the Lord has heard your painful groans. 224
16:12 He will be a wild donkey 225 of a man.
He will be hostile to everyone, 226
and everyone will be hostile to him. 227
He will live away from 228 his brothers.”
16:13 So Hagar named the Lord who spoke to her, “You are the God who sees me,” 229 for she said, “Here I have seen one who sees me!” 230 16:14 That is why the well was called 231 Beer Lahai Roi. 232 (It is located 233 between Kadesh and Bered.)
16:15 So Hagar gave birth to Abram’s son, whom Abram named Ishmael. 234 16:16 (Now 235 Abram was 86 years old 236 when Hagar gave birth to Ishmael.) 237
[2:1] 1 tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1.
[2:1] 2 tn Heb “and all the host of them.” Here the “host” refers to all the entities and creatures that God created to populate the world.
[2:2] 3 tn Heb “on/in the seventh day.”
[2:2] 4 tn Heb “his work which he did [or “made”].”
[2:2] 5 tn The Hebrew term שָׁבַּת (shabbat) can be translated “to rest” (“and he rested”) but it basically means “to cease.” This is not a rest from exhaustion; it is the cessation of the work of creation.
[2:3] 6 tn The verb is usually translated “and sanctified it.” The Piel verb קִדֵּשׁ (qiddesh) means “to make something holy; to set something apart; to distinguish it.” On the literal level the phrase means essentially that God made this day different. But within the context of the Law, it means that the day belonged to God; it was for rest from ordinary labor, worship, and spiritual service. The day belonged to God.
[2:3] 7 tn Heb “God.” The pronoun (“he”) has been employed in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[2:3] 8 tn Heb “for on it he ceased from all his work which God created to make.” The last infinitive construct and the verb before it form a verbal hendiadys, the infinitive becoming the modifier – “which God creatively made,” or “which God made in his creating.”
[2:4] 9 tn The Hebrew phrase אֵלֶּה תּוֹלְדֹת (’elle tolÿdot) is traditionally translated as “these are the generations of” because the noun was derived from the verb “beget.” Its usage, however, shows that it introduces more than genealogies; it begins a narrative that traces what became of the entity or individual mentioned in the heading. In fact, a good paraphrase of this heading would be: “This is what became of the heavens and the earth,” for what follows is not another account of creation but a tracing of events from creation through the fall and judgment (the section extends from 2:4 through 4:26). See M. H. Woudstra, “The Toledot of the Book of Genesis and Their Redemptive-Historical Significance,” CTJ 5 (1970): 184-89.
[2:4] sn The expression this is the account of is an important title used throughout the Book of Genesis, serving as the organizing principle of the work. It is always a heading, introducing the subject matter that is to come. From the starting point of the title, the narrative traces the genealogy or the records or the particulars involved. Although some would make the heading in 2:4 a summary of creation (1:1–2:3), that goes against the usage in the book. As a heading it introduces the theme of the next section, the particulars about this creation that God made. Genesis 2 is not a simple parallel account of creation; rather, beginning with the account of the creation of man and women, the narrative tells what became of that creation. As a beginning, the construction of 2:4-7 forms a fine parallel to the construction of 1:1-3. The subject matter of each תּוֹלְדֹת (tolÿdot, “this is the account of”) section of the book traces a decline or a deterioration through to the next beginning point, and each is thereby a microcosm of the book which begins with divine blessing in the garden, and ends with a coffin in Egypt. So, what became of the creation? Gen 2:4–4:26 will explain that sin entered the world and all but destroyed God’s perfect creation.
[2:4] 10 tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1.
[2:4] sn This is the only use of the Hebrew noun תּוֹלְדֹת (tolÿdot) in the book that is not followed by a personal name (e.g., “this is the account of Isaac”). The poetic parallelism reveals that even though the account may be about the creation, it is the creation the
[2:4] 11 sn Advocates of the so-called documentary hypothesis of pentateuchal authorship argue that the introduction of the name Yahweh (
[2:4] 12 tn See the note on the phrase “the heavens and the earth” in 1:1; the order here is reversed, but the meaning is the same.
[2:5] 13 tn Heb “Now every sprig of the field before it was.” The verb forms, although appearing to be imperfects, are technically preterites coming after the adverb טֶּרֶם (terem). The word order (conjunction + subject + predicate) indicates a disjunctive clause, which provides background information for the following narrative (as in 1:2). Two negative clauses are given (“before any sprig…”, and “before any cultivated grain” existed), followed by two causal clauses explaining them, and then a positive circumstantial clause is given – again dealing with water as in 1:2 (water would well up).
[2:5] 14 tn The first term, שִׂיחַ (siakh), probably refers to the wild, uncultivated plants (see Gen 21:15; Job 30:4,7); whereas the second, עֵשֶׂב (’esev), refers to cultivated grains. It is a way of saying: “back before anything was growing.”
[2:5] 15 tn The two causal clauses explain the first two disjunctive clauses: There was no uncultivated, general growth because there was no rain, and there were no grains because there was no man to cultivate the soil.
[2:5] sn The last clause in v. 5, “and there was no man to cultivate the ground,” anticipates the curse and the expulsion from the garden (Gen 3:23).
[2:6] 16 tn The conjunction vav (ו) introduces a third disjunctive clause. The Hebrew word אֵד (’ed) was traditionally translated “mist” because of its use in Job 36:27. However, an Akkadian cognate edu in Babylonian texts refers to subterranean springs or waterways. Such a spring would fit the description in this context, since this water “goes up” and waters the ground.
[2:6] 17 tn Heb “was going up.” The verb is an imperfect form, which in this narrative context carries a customary nuance, indicating continual action in past time.
[2:6] 18 tn The perfect with vav (ו) consecutive carries the same nuance as the preceding verb. Whenever it would well up, it would water the ground.
[2:6] 19 tn The Hebrew word אֲדָמָה (’adamah) actually means “ground; fertile soil.”
[2:6] sn Here is an indication of fertility. The water would well up from the earth (אֶרֶץ, ’erets) and water all the surface of the fertile soil (אֲדָמָה). It is from that soil that the man (אָדָם, ’adam) was made (Gen 2:7).
[2:7] 20 tn Or “fashioned.” The prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive initiates narrative sequence. The Hebrew word יָצַר (yatsar) means “to form” or “to fashion,” usually by plan or design (see the related noun יֵצֶר [yetser] in Gen 6:5). It is the term for an artist’s work (the Hebrew term יוֹצֵר [yotser] refers to a potter; see Jer 18:2-4.)
[2:7] sn Various traditions in the ancient Near East reflect this idea of creation. Egyptian drawings show a deity turning little people off of the potter’s wheel with another deity giving them life. In the Bible humans are related to the soil and return to it (see 3:19; see also Job 4:19, 20:9; and Isa 29:16).
[2:7] 21 tn The line literally reads “And Yahweh God formed the man, soil, from the ground.” “Soil” is an adverbial accusative, identifying the material from which the man was made.
[2:7] 22 tn The Hebrew word נְשָׁמָה (nÿshamah, “breath”) is used for God and for the life imparted to humans, not animals (see T. C. Mitchell, “The Old Testament Usage of Nÿshama,” VT 11 [1961]: 177-87). Its usage in the Bible conveys more than a breathing living organism (נֶפֶשׁ חַיַּה, nefesh khayyah). Whatever is given this breath of life becomes animated with the life from God, has spiritual understanding (Job 32:8), and has a functioning conscience (Prov 20:27).
[2:7] sn Human life is described here as consisting of a body (made from soil from the ground) and breath (given by God). Both animals and humans are called “a living being” (נֶפֶשׁ חַיַּה) but humankind became that in a different and more significant way.
[2:7] 23 tn The Hebrew term נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh, “being”) is often translated “soul,” but the word usually refers to the whole person. The phrase נֶפֶשׁ חַיַּה (nefesh khayyah, “living being”) is used of both animals and human beings (see 1:20, 24, 30; 2:19).
[2:8] 24 tn Traditionally “garden,” but the subsequent description of this “garden” makes it clear that it is an orchard of fruit trees.
[2:8] sn The
[2:8] 25 tn Heb “from the east” or “off east.”
[2:8] sn One would assume this is east from the perspective of the land of Israel, particularly since the rivers in the area are identified as the rivers in those eastern regions.
[2:8] 26 sn The name Eden (עֵדֶן, ’eden) means “pleasure” in Hebrew.
[2:8] 27 tn The perfect verbal form here requires the past perfect translation since it describes an event that preceded the event described in the main clause.
[2:9] 28 tn Heb “ground,” referring to the fertile soil.
[2:9] 29 tn Heb “desirable of sight [or “appearance”].” The phrase describes the kinds of trees that are visually pleasing and yield fruit that is desirable to the appetite.
[2:9] 30 tn The verse ends with a disjunctive clause providing a parenthetical bit of information about the existence of two special trees in the garden.
[2:9] 31 tn In light of Gen 3:22, the construction “tree of life” should be interpreted to mean a tree that produces life-giving fruit (objective genitive) rather than a living tree (attributive genitive). See E. O. James, The Tree of Life (SHR); and R. Marcus, “The Tree of Life in Proverbs,” JBL 62 (1943): 117-20.
[2:9] 32 tn The expression “tree of the knowledge of good and evil” must be interpreted to mean that the tree would produce fruit which, when eaten, gives special knowledge of “good and evil.” Scholars debate what this phrase means here. For a survey of opinions, see G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:62-64. One view is that “good” refers to that which enhances, promotes, and produces life, while “evil” refers to anything that hinders, interrupts or destroys life. So eating from this tree would change human nature – people would be able to alter life for better (in their thinking) or for worse. See D. J. A. Clines, “The Tree of Knowledge and the Law of Yahweh,” VT 24 (1974): 8-14; and I. Engnell, “‘Knowledge’ and ‘Life’ in the Creation Story,” Wisdom in Israel and in the Ancient Near East [VTSup], 103-19. Another view understands the “knowledge of good and evil” as the capacity to discern between moral good and evil. The following context suggests the tree’s fruit gives one wisdom (see the phrase “capable of making one wise” in 3:6, as well as the note there on the word “wise”), which certainly includes the capacity to discern between good and evil. Such wisdom is characteristic of divine beings, as the serpent’s promise implies (3:5) and as 3:22 makes clear. (Note, however, that this capacity does not include the ability to do what is right.) God prohibits man from eating of the tree. The prohibition becomes a test to see if man will be satisfied with his role and place, or if he will try to ascend to the divine level. There will be a time for man to possess moral discernment/wisdom, as God reveals and imparts it to him, but it is not something to be grasped at in an effort to become “a god.” In fact, the command to be obedient was the first lesson in moral discernment/wisdom. God was essentially saying: “Here is lesson one – respect my authority and commands. Disobey me and you will die.” When man disobeys, he decides he does not want to acquire moral wisdom God’s way, but instead tries to rise immediately to the divine level. Once man has acquired such divine wisdom by eating the tree’s fruit (3:22), he must be banned from the garden so that he will not be able to achieve his goal of being godlike and thus live forever, a divine characteristic (3:24). Ironically, man now has the capacity to discern good from evil (3:22), but he is morally corrupted and rebellious and will not consistently choose what is right.
[2:10] 33 tn The disjunctive clause (note the construction conjunction + subject + predicate) introduces an entire paragraph about the richness of the region in the east.
[2:10] 34 tn The Hebrew active participle may be translated here as indicating past durative action, “was flowing,” or as a present durative, “flows.” Since this river was the source of the rivers mentioned in vv. 11-14, which appear to describe a situation contemporary with the narrator, it is preferable to translate the participle in v. 10 with the present tense. This suggests that Eden and its orchard still existed in the narrator’s time. According to ancient Jewish tradition, Enoch was taken to the Garden of Eden, where his presence insulated the garden from the destructive waters of Noah’s flood. See Jub. 4:23-24.
[2:10] 35 sn Eden is portrayed here as a source of life-giving rivers (that is, perennial streams). This is no surprise because its orchard is where the tree of life is located. Eden is a source of life, but tragically its orchard is no longer accessible to humankind. The river flowing out of Eden is a tantalizing reminder of this. God continues to provide life-giving water to sustain physical existence on the earth, but immortality has been lost.
[2:10] 36 tn The imperfect verb form has the same nuance as the preceding participle. (If the participle is taken as past durative, then the imperfect would be translated “was dividing.”)
[2:10] 37 tn Or “branches”; Heb “heads.” Cf. NEB “streams”; NASB “rivers.”
[2:11] 38 tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”
[2:12] 40 tn The Hebrew term translated “pearls” may be a reference to resin (cf. NIV “aromatic resin”) or another precious stone (cf. NEB, NASB, NRSV “bdellium”).
[2:13] 42 tn Heb “it is that which goes around.”
[2:13] 43 sn Cush. In the Bible the Hebrew word כּוּשׁ (kush, “Kush”) often refers to Ethiopia (so KJV, CEV), but here it must refer to a region in Mesopotamia, the area of the later Cassite dynasty of Babylon. See Gen 10:8 as well as E. A. Speiser, Genesis (AB), 20.
[2:14] 44 tn Heb “Asshur” (so NEB, NIV).
[2:15] 45 tn The Hebrew verb נוּחַ (nuakh, translated here as “placed”) is a different verb than the one used in 2:8.
[2:15] 46 tn Traditionally translated “the Garden of Eden,” the context makes it clear that the garden (or orchard) was in Eden (making “Eden” a genitive of location).
[2:15] 47 tn Heb “to work it and to keep it.”
[2:15] sn Note that man’s task is to care for and maintain the trees of the orchard. Not until after the fall, when he is condemned to cultivate the soil, does this task change.
[2:16] 48 sn This is the first time in the Bible that the verb tsavah (צָוָה, “to command”) appears. Whatever the man had to do in the garden, the main focus of the narrative is on keeping God’s commandments. God created humans with the capacity to obey him and then tested them with commands.
[2:16] 49 tn The imperfect verb form probably carries the nuance of permission (“you may eat”) since the man is not being commanded to eat from every tree. The accompanying infinitive absolute adds emphasis: “you may freely eat,” or “you may eat to your heart’s content.”
[2:16] 50 tn The word “fruit” is not in the Hebrew text, but is implied as the direct object of the verb “eat.” Presumably the only part of the tree the man would eat would be its fruit (cf. 3:2).
[2:17] 51 tn The disjunctive clause here indicates contrast: “but from the tree of the knowledge….”
[2:17] 52 tn The negated imperfect verb form indicates prohibition, “you must not eat.”
[2:17] 53 tn Or “in the very day, as soon as.” If one understands the expression to have this more precise meaning, then the following narrative presents a problem, for the man does not die physically as soon as he eats from the tree. In this case one may argue that spiritual death is in view. If physical death is in view here, there are two options to explain the following narrative: (1) The following phrase “You will surely die” concerns mortality which ultimately results in death (a natural paraphrase would be, “You will become mortal”), or (2) God mercifully gave man a reprieve, allowing him to live longer than he deserved.
[2:17] 54 tn Heb “dying you will die.” The imperfect verb form here has the nuance of the specific future because it is introduced with the temporal clause, “when you eat…you will die.” That certainty is underscored with the infinitive absolute, “you will surely die.”
[2:17] sn The Hebrew text (“dying you will die”) does not refer to two aspects of death (“dying spiritually, you will then die physically”). The construction simply emphasizes the certainty of death, however it is defined. Death is essentially separation. To die physically means separation from the land of the living, but not extinction. To die spiritually means to be separated from God. Both occur with sin, although the physical alienation is more gradual than instant, and the spiritual is immediate, although the effects of it continue the separation.
[2:18] 55 tn Heb “The being of man by himself is not good.” The meaning of “good” must be defined contextually. Within the context of creation, in which God instructs humankind to be fruitful and multiply, the man alone cannot comply. Being alone prevents the man from fulfilling the design of creation and therefore is not good.
[2:18] 56 tn Traditionally “helper.” The English word “helper,” because it can connote so many different ideas, does not accurately convey the connotation of the Hebrew word עֵזֶר (’ezer). Usage of the Hebrew term does not suggest a subordinate role, a connotation which English “helper” can have. In the Bible God is frequently described as the “helper,” the one who does for us what we cannot do for ourselves, the one who meets our needs. In this context the word seems to express the idea of an “indispensable companion.” The woman would supply what the man was lacking in the design of creation and logically it would follow that the man would supply what she was lacking, although that is not stated here. See further M. L. Rosenzweig, “A Helper Equal to Him,” Jud 139 (1986): 277-80.
[2:18] 57 tn The Hebrew expression כְּנֶגְדּוֹ (kÿnegdo) literally means “according to the opposite of him.” Translations such as “suitable [for]” (NASB, NIV), “matching,” “corresponding to” all capture the idea. (Translations that render the phrase simply “partner” [cf. NEB, NRSV], while not totally inaccurate, do not reflect the nuance of correspondence and/or suitability.) The man’s form and nature are matched by the woman’s as she reflects him and complements him. Together they correspond. In short, this prepositional phrase indicates that she has everything that God had invested in him.
[2:19] 58 tn Or “fashioned.” To harmonize the order of events with the chronology of chapter one, some translate the prefixed verb form with vav (ו) consecutive as a past perfect (“had formed,” cf. NIV) here. (In chapter one the creation of the animals preceded the creation of man; here the animals are created after the man.) However, it is unlikely that the Hebrew construction can be translated in this way in the middle of this pericope, for the criteria for unmarked temporal overlay are not present here. See S. R. Driver, A Treatise on the Use of the Tenses in Hebrew, 84-88, and especially R. Buth, “Methodological Collision between Source Criticism and Discourse Analysis,” Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, 138-54. For a contrary viewpoint see IBHS 552-53 §33.2.3 and C. J. Collins, “The Wayyiqtol as ‘Pluperfect’: When and Why,” TynBul 46 (1995): 117-40.
[2:19] 59 tn The imperfect verb form is future from the perspective of the past time narrative.
[2:20] 60 tn Here for the first time the Hebrew word אָדָם (’adam) appears without the article, suggesting that it might now be the name “Adam” rather than “[the] man.” Translations of the Bible differ as to where they make the change from “man” to “Adam” (e.g., NASB and NIV translate “Adam” here, while NEB and NRSV continue to use “the man”; the KJV uses “Adam” twice in v. 19).
[2:20] 61 tn Heb “there was not found a companion who corresponded to him.” The subject of the third masculine singular verb form is indefinite. Without a formally expressed subject the verb may be translated as passive: “one did not find = there was not found.”
[2:21] 62 tn Heb “And the
[2:21] 63 tn Heb “and he slept.” In the sequence the verb may be subordinated to the following verb to indicate a temporal clause (“while…”).
[2:21] 64 tn Traditionally translated “rib,” the Hebrew word actually means “side.” The Hebrew text reads, “and he took one from his sides,” which could be rendered “part of his sides.” That idea may fit better the explanation by the man that the woman is his flesh and bone.
[2:21] 65 tn Heb “closed up the flesh under it.”
[2:22] 66 tn The Hebrew verb is בָּנָה (banah, “to make, to build, to construct”). The text states that the
[2:23] 67 tn The Hebrew term הַפַּעַם (happa’am) means “the [this] time, this place,” or “now, finally, at last.” The expression conveys the futility of the man while naming the animals and finding no one who corresponded to him.
[2:23] 68 tn The Hebrew text is very precise, stating: “of this one it will be said, ‘woman’.” The text is not necessarily saying that the man named his wife – that comes after the fall (Gen 3:20).
[2:23] sn Some argue that naming implies the man’s authority or ownership over the woman here. Naming can indicate ownership or authority if one is calling someone or something by one’s name and/or calling a name over someone or something (see 2 Sam 12:28; 2 Chr 7:14; Isa 4:1; Jer 7:14; 15:16), especially if one is conquering and renaming a site. But the idiomatic construction used here (the Niphal of קָרָא, qara’, with preposition lamed [לְ, lÿ]) does not suggest such an idea. In each case where it is used, the one naming discerns something about the object being named and gives it an appropriate name (See 1 Sam 9:9; 2 Sam 18:18; Prov 16:21; Isa 1:26; 32:5; 35:8; 62:4, 12; Jer 19:6). Adam is not so much naming the woman as he is discerning her close relationship to him and referring to her accordingly. He may simply be anticipating that she will be given an appropriate name based on the discernible similarity.
[2:23] 69 tn Or “from” (but see v. 22).
[2:23] 70 sn This poetic section expresses the correspondence between the man and the woman. She is bone of his bones, flesh of his flesh. Note the wordplay (paronomasia) between “woman” (אִשָּׁה, ’ishah) and “man” (אִישׁ, ’ish). On the surface it appears that the word for woman is the feminine form of the word for man. But the two words are not etymologically related. The sound and the sense give that impression, however, and make for a more effective wordplay.
[2:24] 71 tn This statement, introduced by the Hebrew phrase עַל־כֵּן (’al-ken, “therefore” or “that is why”), is an editorial comment, not an extension of the quotation. The statement is describing what typically happens, not what will or should happen. It is saying, “This is why we do things the way we do.” It links a contemporary (with the narrator) practice with the historical event being narrated. The historical event narrated in v. 23 provides the basis for the contemporary practice described in v. 24. That is why the imperfect verb forms are translated with the present tense rather than future.
[2:24] 72 tn The imperfect verb form has a habitual or characteristic nuance. For other examples of עַל־כֵּן (’al-ken, “therefore, that is why”) with the imperfect in a narrative framework, see Gen 10:9; 32:32 (the phrase “to this day” indicates characteristic behavior is in view); Num 21:14, 27; 1 Sam 5:5 (note “to this day”); 19:24 (perhaps the imperfect is customary here, “were saying”); 2 Sam 5:8. The verb translated “leave” (עָזָב, ’azab) normally means “to abandon, to forsake, to leave behind, to discard,” when used with human subject and object (see Josh 22:3; 1 Sam 30:13; Ps 27:10; Prov 2:17; Isa 54:6; 60:15; 62:4; Jer 49:11). Within the context of the ancient Israelite extended family structure, this cannot refer to emotional or geographical separation. The narrator is using hyperbole to emphasize the change in perspective that typically overtakes a young man when his thoughts turn to love and marriage.
[2:24] 73 tn The perfect with vav (ו) consecutive carries the same habitual or characteristic nuance as the preceding imperfect. The verb is traditionally translated “cleaves [to]”; it has the basic idea of “stick with/to” (e.g., it is used of Ruth resolutely staying with her mother-in-law in Ruth 1:14). In this passage it describes the inseparable relationship between the man and the woman in marriage as God intended it.
[2:24] 74 tn Heb “and they become one flesh.” The perfect with vav consecutive carries the same habitual or characteristic nuance as the preceding verbs in the verse. The retention of the word “flesh” (בָּשָׂר, basar) in the translation often leads to improper or incomplete interpretations. The Hebrew word refers to more than just a sexual union. When they unite in marriage, the man and woman bring into being a new family unit (הָיָה + לְ, hayah + lamed preposition means “become”). The phrase “one flesh” occurs only here and must be interpreted in light of v. 23. There the man declares that the woman is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. To be one’s “bone and flesh” is to be related by blood to someone. For example, the phrase describes the relationship between Laban and Jacob (Gen 29:14); Abimelech and the Shechemites (Judg 9:2; his mother was a Shechemite); David and the Israelites (2 Sam 5:1); David and the elders of Judah (2 Sam 19:12); and David and his nephew Amasa (2 Sam 19:13, see 2 Sam 17:2; 1 Chr 2:16-17). The expression “one flesh” seems to indicate that they become, as it were, “kin,” at least legally (a new family unit is created) or metaphorically. In this first marriage in human history, the woman was literally formed from the man’s bone and flesh. Even though later marriages do not involve such a divine surgical operation, the first marriage sets the pattern for how later marriages are understood and explains why marriage supersedes the parent-child relationship.
[2:25] 75 tn Heb “And the two of them were naked, the man and his wife.”
[2:25] sn Naked. The motif of nakedness is introduced here and plays an important role in the next chapter. In the Bible nakedness conveys different things. In this context it signifies either innocence or integrity, depending on how those terms are defined. There is no fear of exploitation, no sense of vulnerability. But after the entrance of sin into the race, nakedness takes on a negative sense. It is then usually connected with the sense of vulnerability, shame, exploitation, and exposure (such as the idea of “uncovering nakedness” either in sexual exploitation or in captivity in war).
[2:25] 76 tn The imperfect verb form here has a customary nuance, indicating a continuing condition in past time. The meaning of the Hebrew term בּוֹשׁ (bosh) is “to be ashamed, to put to shame,” but its meaning is stronger than “to be embarrassed.” The word conveys the fear of exploitation or evil – enemies are put to shame through military victory. It indicates the feeling of shame that approximates a fear of evil.
[14:1] 77 tn The sentence begins with the temporal indicator וַיְהִי (vayÿhi) followed by “in the days of.”
[14:1] 78 sn Shinar (also in v. 9) is the region of Babylonia.
[14:1] 79 tn Or “king of Goyim.” The Hebrew term גּוֹיִם (goyim) means “nations,” but a number of modern translations merely transliterate the Hebrew (cf. NEB “Goyim”; NIV, NRSV “Goiim”).
[14:2] sn Went to war. The conflict here reflects international warfare in the Early and Middle Bronze periods. The countries operated with overlords and vassals. Kings ruled over city states, or sometimes a number of city states (i.e., nations). Due to their treaties, when one went to war, those confederate with him joined him in battle. It appears here that it is Kedorlaomer’s war, because the western city states have rebelled against him (meaning they did not send products as tribute to keep him from invading them).
[14:2] 81 sn On the geographical background of vv. 1-2 see J. P. Harland, “Sodom and Gomorrah,” The Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 1:41-75; and D. N. Freedman, “The Real Story of the Ebla Tablets, Ebla and the Cities of the Plain,” BA 41 (1978): 143-64.
[14:3] 82 tn Heb “all these,” referring only to the last five kings named. The referent has been specified as “these last five kings” in the translation for clarity.
[14:3] 83 tn The Hebrew verb used here means “to join together; to unite; to be allied.” It stresses close associations, especially of friendships, marriages, or treaties.
[14:3] 84 sn The Salt Sea is the older name for the Dead Sea.
[14:4] 85 tn The sentence simply begins with “twelve years”; it serves as an adverbial accusative giving the duration of their bondage.
[14:4] 86 tn This is another adverbial accusative of time.
[14:4] 87 sn The story serves as a foreshadowing of the plight of the kingdom of Israel later. Eastern powers came and forced the western kingdoms into submission. Each year, then, they would send tribute east – to keep them away. Here, in the thirteenth year, they refused to send the tribute (just as later Hezekiah rebelled against Assyria). And so in the fourteenth year the eastern powers came to put them down again. This account from Abram’s life taught future generations that God can give victory over such threats – that people did not have to live in servitude to tyrants from the east.
[14:5] 88 tn The Hebrew verb נָכָה (nakhah) means “to attack, to strike, to smite.” In this context it appears that the strike was successful, and so a translation of “defeated” is preferable.
[14:6] 89 sn The line of attack ran down the eastern side of the Jordan Valley into the desert, and then turned and came up the valley to the cities of the plain.
[14:7] 90 tn Heb “they returned and came to En Mishpat (that is, Kadesh).” The two verbs together form a verbal hendiadys, the first serving as the adverb: “they returned and came” means “they came again.” Most English translations do not treat this as a hendiadys, but translate “they turned back” or something similar. Since in the context, however, “came again to” does not simply refer to travel but an assault against the place, the present translation expresses this as “attacked…again.”
[14:9] 92 tn Or “Goyim.” See the note on the word “nations” in 14:1.
[14:9] 93 tn The Hebrew text has simply “against.” The word “fought” is supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[14:10] 94 tn Heb “Now the Valley of Siddim [was] pits, pits of tar.” This parenthetical disjunctive clause emphasizes the abundance of tar pits in the area through repetition of the noun “pits.”
[14:10] sn The word for “tar” (or “bitumen”) occurs earlier in the story of the building of the tower in Babylon (see Gen 11:3).
[14:10] 95 tn Or “they were defeated there.” After a verb of motion the Hebrew particle שָׁם (sham) with the directional heh (שָׁמָּה, shammah) can mean “into it, therein” (BDB 1027 s.v. שָׁם).
[14:10] 97 sn The reference to the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah must mean the kings along with their armies. Most of them were defeated in the valley, but some of them escaped to the hills.
[14:11] 98 tn Heb “they”; the referent (the four victorious kings, see v. 9) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
[14:12] 99 tn Heb “Lot the son of his brother.”
[14:12] 101 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Lot) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:12] 102 tn This disjunctive clause is circumstantial/causal, explaining that Lot was captured because he was living in Sodom at the time.
[14:13] 103 tn Heb “the fugitive.” The article carries a generic force or indicates that this fugitive is definite in the mind of the speaker.
[14:13] 104 sn E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103) suggests that part of this chapter came from an outside source since it refers to Abram the Hebrew. That is not impossible, given that the narrator likely utilized traditions and genealogies that had been collected and transmitted over the years. The meaning of the word “Hebrew” has proved elusive. It may be related to the verb “to cross over,” perhaps meaning “immigrant.” Or it might be derived from the name of Abram’s ancestor Eber (see Gen 11:14-16).
[14:13] 105 tn Or “terebinths.”
[14:13] 106 tn Or “a brother”; or “a relative”; or perhaps “an ally.”
[14:13] 107 tn Heb “possessors of a treaty with.” Since it is likely that the qualifying statement refers to all three (Mamre, Eshcol, and Aner) the words “all these” have been supplied in the translation to make this clear.
[14:13] 108 tn This parenthetical disjunctive clause explains how Abram came to be living in their territory, but it also explains why they must go to war with Abram.
[14:14] 109 tn Heb “his brother,” by extension, “relative.” Here and in v. 16 the more specific term “nephew” has been used in the translation for clarity. Lot was the son of Haran, Abram’s brother (Gen 11:27).
[14:14] 110 tn The verb וַיָּרֶק (vayyareq) is a rare form, probably related to the word רֵיק (req, “to be empty”). If so, it would be a very figurative use: “he emptied out” (or perhaps “unsheathed”) his men. The LXX has “mustered” (cf. NEB). E. A. Speiser (Genesis [AB], 103-4) suggests reading with the Samaritan Pentateuch a verb diq, cognate with Akkadian deku, “to mobilize” troops. If this view is accepted, one must assume that a confusion of the Hebrew letters ד (dalet) and ר (resh) led to the error in the traditional Hebrew text. These two letters are easily confused in all phases of ancient Hebrew script development. The present translation is based on this view.
[14:14] 111 tn The words “the invaders” have been supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:14] 112 sn The use of the name Dan reflects a later perspective. The Danites did not migrate to this northern territory until centuries later (see Judg 18:29). Furthermore Dan was not even born until much later. By inserting this name a scribe has clarified the location of the region.
[14:15] 113 tn The Hebrew text simply has “night” as an adverbial accusative.
[14:15] 114 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:15] 115 tn Heb “he divided himself…he and his servants.”
[14:15] 116 tn Heb “left.” Directions in ancient Israel were given in relation to the east rather than the north.
[14:16] 117 tn The word “stolen” is supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:16] 118 tn The phrase “the rest of “ has been supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:17] 119 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:17] 120 tn Heb “him”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:17] 121 sn The King’s Valley is possibly a reference to what came to be known later as the Kidron Valley.
[14:18] 122 sn Salem is traditionally identified as the Jebusite stronghold of old Jerusalem. Accordingly, there has been much speculation about its king. Though some have identified him with the preincarnate Christ or with Noah’s son Shem, it is far more likely that Melchizedek was a Canaanite royal priest whom God used to renew the promise of the blessing to Abram, perhaps because Abram considered Melchizedek his spiritual superior. But Melchizedek remains an enigma. In a book filled with genealogical records he appears on the scene without a genealogy and then disappears from the narrative. In Psalm 110 the
[14:18] 123 tn The parenthetical disjunctive clause significantly identifies Melchizedek as a priest as well as a king.
[14:18] sn It is his royal priestly status that makes Melchizedek a type of Christ: He was identified with Jerusalem, superior to the ancestor of Israel, and both a king and a priest. Unlike the normal Canaanites, this man served “God Most High” (אֵל עֶלְיוֹן, ’el ’elyon) – one sovereign God, who was the creator of all the universe. Abram had in him a spiritual brother.
[14:19] 124 tn The preposition לְ (lamed) introduces the agent after the passive participle.
[14:19] 125 tn Some translate “possessor of heaven and earth” (cf. NASB). But cognate evidence from Ugaritic indicates that there were two homonymic roots ָקנָה (qanah), one meaning “to create” (as in Gen 4:1) and the other “to obtain, to acquire, to possess.” While “possessor” would fit here, “creator” is the more likely due to the collocation with “heaven and earth.”
[14:19] 126 tn The terms translated “heaven” and “earth” are both objective genitives after the participle in construct.
[14:20] 127 tn Heb “blessed be.” For God to be “blessed” means that is praised. His reputation is enriched in the world as his name is praised.
[14:20] 128 sn Who delivered. The Hebrew verb מִגֵּן (miggen, “delivered”) foreshadows the statement by God to Abram in Gen 15:1, “I am your shield” (מָגֵן, magen). Melchizedek provided a theological interpretation of Abram’s military victory.
[14:20] 129 tn Heb “him”; the referent (Melchizedek) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:22] 130 tn Abram takes an oath, raising his hand as a solemn gesture. The translation understands the perfect tense as having an instantaneous nuance: “Here and now I raise my hand.”
[14:22] 131 tn The words “and vow” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for clarification.
[14:23] 132 tn The oath formula is elliptical, reading simply: “…if I take.” It is as if Abram says, “[May the
[14:23] 133 tn The Hebrew text adds the independent pronoun (“I”) to the verb form for emphasis.
[14:24] 134 tn The words “I will take nothing” have been supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[14:24] 135 tn Heb “except only what the young men have eaten.”
[15:1] 136 sn The noun “shield” recalls the words of Melchizedek in 14:20. If God is the shield, then God will deliver. Abram need not fear reprisals from those he has fought.
[15:1] 137 tn Heb “your reward [in] great abundance.” When the phrase הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ (harbeh mÿod) follows a noun it invariably modifies the noun and carries the nuance “very great” or “in great abundance.” (See its use in Gen 41:49; Deut 3:5; Josh 22:8; 2 Sam 8:8; 12:2; 1 Kgs 4:29; 10:10-11; 2 Chr 14:13; 32:27; Jer 40:12.) Here the noun “reward” is in apposition to “shield” and refers by metonymy to God as the source of the reward. Some translate here “your reward will be very great” (cf. NASB, NRSV), taking the statement as an independent clause and understanding the Hiphil infinitive absolute as a substitute for a finite verb. However, the construction הַרְבּה מְאֹדֵ is never used this way elsewhere, where it either modifies a noun (see the texts listed above) or serves as an adverb in relation to a finite verb (see Josh 13:1; 1 Sam 26:21; 2 Sam 12:30; 2 Kgs 21:16; 1 Chr 20:2; Neh 2:2).
[15:1] sn Abram has just rejected all the spoils of war, and the
[15:2] 138 tn The Hebrew text has אֲדֹנָי יֱהוִה (’adonay yehvih, “Master,
[15:2] 139 tn The vav (ו) disjunctive at the beginning of the clause is circumstantial, expressing the cause or reason.
[15:2] 140 tn Heb “I am going.”
[15:2] 141 tn Heb “the son of the acquisition of my house.”
[15:2] sn For the custom of designating a member of the household as heir, see C. H. Gordon, “Biblical Customs and the Nuzu Tablets,” Biblical Archaeologist Reader, 2:21-33.
[15:2] 142 tn The pronoun is anaphoric here, equivalent to the verb “to be” (R. J. Williams, Hebrew Syntax, 23, §115).
[15:2] 143 sn The sentence in the Hebrew text employs a very effective wordplay on the name Damascus: “The son of the acquisition (בֶּן־מֶשֶׁק, ben-mesheq) of my house is Eliezer of Damascus (דַּמֶּשֶׁק, dammesheq).” The words are not the same; they have different sibilants. But the sound play gives the impression that “in the nomen is the omen.” Eliezer the Damascene will be Abram’s heir if Abram dies childless because “Damascus” seems to mean that. See M. F. Unger, “Some Comments on the Text of Genesis 15:2-3,” JBL 72 (1953): 49-50; H. L. Ginsberg, “Abram’s ‘Damascene’ Steward,” BASOR 200 (1970): 31-32.
[15:3] 144 tn Heb “And Abram said.”
[15:3] 145 tn The construction uses הֵן (hen) to introduce the foundational clause (“since…”), and וְהִנֵּה (vÿhinneh) to introduce the main clause (“then look…”).
[15:3] 146 tn Heb “is inheriting me.”
[15:4] 147 tn The disjunctive draws attention to God’s response and the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh, translated “look”) mirrors Abram’s statement in v. 3 and highlights the fact that God responded to Abram.
[15:4] 148 tn The subject of the verb is the demonstrative pronoun, which can be translated “this one” or “this man.” That the
[15:4] 149 tn Heb “inherit you.”
[15:4] 150 tn The Hebrew כִּי־אִם (ki-’im) forms a very strong adversative.
[15:4] 151 tn Heb “he who”; the implied referent (Abram’s unborn son who will be his heir) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[15:4] 152 tn The pronoun could also be an emphatic subject: “whoever comes out of your body, he will inherit you.”
[15:4] 153 tn Heb “will inherit you.”
[15:5] 154 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the
[15:6] 155 tn The nonconsecutive vav (ו) is on a perfect verbal form. If the composer of the narrative had wanted to show simple sequence, he would have used the vav consecutive with the preterite. The perfect with vav conjunctive (where one expects the preterite with vav consecutive) in narrative contexts can have a variety of discourse functions, but here it probably serves to highlight Abram’s response to God’s promise. For a detailed discussion of the vav + perfect construction in Hebrew narrative, see R. Longacre, “Weqatal Forms in Biblical Hebrew Prose: A Discourse-modular Approach,” Biblical Hebrew and Discourse Linguistics, 50-98. The Hebrew verb אָמַן (’aman) means “to confirm, to support” in the Qal verbal stem. Its derivative nouns refer to something or someone that/who provides support, such as a “pillar,” “nurse,” or “guardian, trustee.” In the Niphal stem it comes to mean “to be faithful, to be reliable, to be dependable,” or “to be firm, to be sure.” In the Hiphil, the form used here, it takes on a declarative sense: “to consider something reliable [or “dependable”].” Abram regarded the God who made this promise as reliable and fully capable of making it a reality.
[15:6] 156 tn Heb “and he”; the referent (the
[15:6] 157 tn Heb “and he reckoned it to him.” The third feminine singular pronominal suffix refers back to Abram’s act of faith, mentioned in the preceding clause. On third feminine singular pronouns referring back to verbal ideas see GKC 440-41 §135.p. Some propose taking the suffix as proleptic, anticipating the following feminine noun (“righteousness”). In this case one might translate: “and he reckoned it to him – [namely] righteousness.” See O. P. Robertson, “Genesis 15:6: A New Covenant Exposition of an Old Covenant Text,” WTJ 42 (1980): 259-89.
[15:6] 158 tn Or “righteousness”; or “evidence of steadfast commitment.” The noun is an adverbial accusative. The verb translated “considered” (Heb “reckoned”) also appears with צְדָקָה (tsÿdaqah, “righteousness”) in Ps 106:31. Alluding to the events recorded in Numbers 25, the psalmist notes that Phinehas’ actions were “credited to him as righteousness for endless generations to come.” Reference is made to the unconditional, eternal covenant with which God rewarded Phinehas’ loyalty (Num 25:12-13). So צְדָקָה seems to carry by metonymy the meaning “loyal, rewardable behavior” here, a nuance that fits nicely in Genesis 15, where God responds to Abram’s faith by formally ratifying his promise to give Abram and his descendants the land. (See R. B. Chisholm, “Evidence from Genesis,” A Case for Premillennialism, 40.) In Phoenician and Old Aramaic inscriptions cognate nouns glossed as “correct, justifiable conduct” sometimes carry this same semantic nuance (DNWSI 2:962).
[15:6] sn This episode is basic to the NT teaching of Paul on justification (Romans 4). Paul weaves this passage and Psalm 32 together, for both use this word. Paul explains that for the one who believes in the
[15:7] 159 tn Heb “And he said.”
[15:7] 160 sn I am the
[15:7] 161 sn The phrase of the Chaldeans is a later editorial clarification for the readers, designating the location of Ur. From all evidence there would have been no Chaldeans in existence at this early date; they are known in the time of the neo-Babylonian empire in the first millennium
[15:8] 162 tn Here the vav carries adversative force and is translated “but.”
[15:8] 163 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[15:8] 164 tn See note on the phrase “sovereign
[15:9] 166 tn Heb “He”; the referent (the
[15:10] 167 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Abram) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[15:10] 168 tn Heb “in the middle.”
[15:10] 169 tn Heb “to meet its neighbor.”
[15:10] sn For discussion of this ritual see G. F. Hasel, “The Meaning of the Animal Rite in Genesis 15,” JSOT 19 (1981): 61-78.
[15:12] 170 tn Heb “a deep sleep fell on Abram.”
[15:12] 171 tn Heb “and look, terror, a great darkness was falling on him.”
[15:13] 172 tn The Hebrew construction is emphatic, with the Qal infinitive absolute followed by the imperfect from יָדַע (yada’, “know”). The imperfect here has an obligatory or imperatival force.
[15:13] 173 tn The Hebrew word גֵּר (ger, “sojourner, stranger”) is related to the verb גּוּר (gur, “to sojourn, to stay for awhile”). Abram’s descendants will stay in a land as resident aliens without rights of citizenship.
[15:13] 174 tn Heb “in a land not theirs.”
[15:13] 175 tn Heb “and they will serve them and they will oppress them.” The verb עִנּוּ, (’innu, a Piel form from עָנָה, ’anah, “to afflict, to oppress, to treat harshly”), is used in Exod 1:11 to describe the oppression of the Israelites in Egypt.
[15:14] 176 tn The participle דָּן (dan, from דִּין, din) is used here for the future: “I am judging” = “I will surely judge.” The judgment in this case will be condemnation and punishment. The translation “execute judgment on” implies that the judgment will certainly be carried out.
[15:15] 177 tn The vav with the pronoun before the verb calls special attention to the subject in contrast to the preceding subject.
[15:15] 178 sn You will go to your ancestors. This is a euphemistic expression for death.
[15:15] 179 tn Heb “in a good old age.”
[15:16] 180 sn The term generation is being used here in its widest sense to refer to a full life span. When the chronological factors are considered and the genealogies tabulated, there are four hundred years of bondage. This suggests that in this context a generation is equivalent to one hundred years.
[15:16] 181 tn Heb “they”; the referent (“your descendants”) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.
[15:16] 182 tn Heb “is not yet complete.”
[15:16] sn The sin of the Amorites has not yet reached its limit. The justice of God is apparent. He will wait until the Amorites are fully deserving of judgment before he annihilates them and gives the land to Israel.
[15:17] 183 sn A smoking pot with a flaming torch. These same implements were used in Mesopotamian rituals designed to ward off evil (see E. A. Speiser, Genesis [AB], 113-14).
[15:17] 184 tn Heb “these pieces.”
[15:18] 185 tn Heb “cut a covenant.”
[15:18] 186 tn The perfect verbal form is understood as instantaneous (“I here and now give”). Another option is to understand it as rhetorical, indicating certitude (“I have given” meaning it is as good as done, i.e., “I will surely give”).
[15:18] sn To your descendants I give this land. The
[15:18] 187 sn The river of Egypt is a wadi (a seasonal stream) on the northeastern border of Egypt, not to the River Nile.
[15:19] 188 tn The words “the land” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[15:21] 189 tn Each of the names in the list has the Hebrew definite article, which is used here generically for the class of people identified.
[16:1] 190 tn The disjunctive clause signals the beginning of a new episode in the story.
[16:1] 191 sn On the cultural background of the story of Sarai’s childlessness see J. Van Seters, “The Problem of Childlessness in Near Eastern Law and the Patriarchs of Israel,” JBL 87 (1968): 401-8.
[16:1] 192 tn The Hebrew term שִׁפְחָה (shifkhah, translated “servant” here and in vv. 2, 3, 5, 6, and 8) refers to a menial female servant.
[16:1] 193 sn The passage records the birth of Ishmael to Abram through an Egyptian woman. The story illustrates the limits of Abram’s faith as he tries to obtain a son through social custom. The barrenness of Sarai poses a challenge to Abram’s faith, just as the famine did in chap. 12. As in chap. 12, an Egyptian figures prominently. (Perhaps Hagar was obtained as a slave during Abram’s stay in Egypt.)
[16:2] 194 tn Heb “look.” The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) introduces the foundational clause for the imperative to follow.
[16:2] 195 tn Heb “enter to.” The expression is a euphemism for sexual relations (also in v. 4).
[16:2] sn The Hebrew expression translated have sexual relations with does not convey the intimacy of other expressions, such as “so and so knew his wife.” Sarai simply sees this as the social custom of having a child through a surrogate. For further discussion see C. F. Fensham, “The Son of a Handmaid in Northwest Semitic,” VT 19 (1969): 312-21.
[16:2] 196 tn Heb “perhaps I will be built from her.” Sarai hopes to have a family established through this surrogate mother.
[16:2] 197 tn Heb “listened to the voice of,” which is an idiom meaning “obeyed.”
[16:2] sn Abram did what Sarai told him. This expression was first used in Gen 3:17 of Adam’s obeying his wife. In both cases the text highlights weak faith and how it jeopardized the plan of God.
[16:3] 198 tn Heb “at the end of ten years, to live, Abram.” The prepositional phrase introduces the temporal clause, the infinitive construct serves as the verb, and the name “Abram” is the subject.
[16:3] 199 tn Heb “the Egyptian, her female servant.”
[16:3] 200 sn To be his wife. Hagar became a slave wife, not on equal standing with Sarai. However, if Hagar produced the heir, she would be the primary wife in the eyes of society. When this eventually happened, Hagar become insolent, prompting Sarai’s anger.
[16:4] 201 tn Heb “entered to.” See the note on the same expression in v. 2.
[16:4] 202 tn Or “she conceived” (also in v. 5)
[16:4] 203 tn Heb “and she saw that she was pregnant and her mistress was despised in her eyes.” The Hebrew verb קָלַל (qalal) means “to despise, to treat lightly, to treat with contempt.” In Hagar’s opinion Sarai had been demoted.
[16:5] 204 tn Heb “my wrong is because of you.”
[16:5] 205 tn Heb “I placed my female servant in your bosom.”
[16:5] 207 tn Heb “I was despised in her eyes.” The passive verb has been translated as active for stylistic reasons. Sarai was made to feel supplanted and worthless by Hagar the servant girl.
[16:5] 208 tn Heb “me and you.”
[16:5] sn May the
[16:6] 209 tn The clause is introduced with the particle הִנֵּה (hinneh), introducing a foundational clause for the coming imperative: “since…do.”
[16:6] 210 tn Heb “in your hand.”
[16:6] 211 tn Heb “what is good in your eyes.”
[16:6] 212 tn Heb “her”; the referent (Hagar) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[16:6] 213 tn In the Piel stem the verb עָנָה (’anah) means “to afflict, to oppress, to treat harshly, to mistreat.”
[16:6] 214 tn Heb “and she fled from her presence.” The referent of “her” (Sarai) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[16:7] 215 tn Heb “the messenger of the
[16:7] 216 tn Heb “And the angel of the
[16:8] 217 tn Heb “from the presence of.”
[16:9] 218 tn The imperative וְהִתְעַנִּי (vÿhit’anni) is the Hitpael of עָנָה (’anah, here translated “submit”), the same word used for Sarai’s harsh treatment of her. Hagar is instructed not only to submit to Sarai’s authority, but to whatever mistreatment that involves. God calls for Hagar to humble herself.
[16:10] 219 tn Heb “The
[16:10] 220 tn Heb “cannot be numbered because of abundance.”
[16:11] 221 tn The particle הִנֵּה (hinneh) focuses on her immediate situation: “Here you are pregnant.”
[16:11] 222 tn The active participle refers here to something that is about to happen.
[16:11] 223 sn The name Ishmael consists of the imperfect or jussive form of the Hebrew verb with the theophoric element added as the subject. It means “God hears” or “may God hear.”
[16:11] 224 tn Heb “affliction,” which must refer here to Hagar’s painful groans of anguish.
[16:11] sn This clause gives the explanation of the name Ishmael, using a wordplay. Ishmael’s name will be a reminder that “God hears” Hagar’s painful cries.
[16:12] 225 sn A wild donkey of a man. The prophecy is not an insult. The wild donkey lived a solitary existence in the desert away from society. Ishmael would be free-roaming, strong, and like a bedouin; he would enjoy the freedom his mother sought.
[16:12] 226 tn Heb “His hand will be against everyone.” The “hand” by metonymy represents strength. His free-roaming life style would put him in conflict with those who follow social conventions. There would not be open warfare, only friction because of his antagonism to their way of life.
[16:12] 227 tn Heb “And the hand of everyone will be against him.”
[16:12] 228 tn Heb “opposite, across from.” Ishmael would live on the edge of society (cf. NASB “to the east of”). Some take this as an idiom meaning “be at odds with” (cf. NRSV, NLT) or “live in hostility toward” (cf. NIV).
[16:13] 229 tn Heb “God of my seeing.” The pronominal suffix may be understood either as objective (“who sees me,” as in the translation) or subjective (“whom I see”).
[16:13] 230 tn Heb “after one who sees me.”
[16:13] sn For a discussion of Hagar’s exclamation, see T. Booij, “Hagar’s Words in Genesis 16:13b,” VT 30 (1980): 1-7.
[16:14] 231 tn The verb does not have an expressed subject and so is rendered as passive in the translation.
[16:14] 232 sn The Hebrew name Beer Lahai Roi (בְּאֵר לַחַי רֹאִי, bÿ’er lakhay ro’i) means “The well of the Living One who sees me.” The text suggests that God takes up the cause of those who are oppressed.
[16:14] 233 tn Heb “look.” The words “it is located” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.
[16:15] 234 tn Heb “and Abram called the name of his son whom Hagar bore, Ishmael.”
[16:15] sn Whom Abram named Ishmael. Hagar must have informed Abram of what the angel had told her. See the note on the name “Ishmael” in 16:11.
[16:16] 235 tn The disjunctive clause gives information that is parenthetical to the narrative.
[16:16] 236 tn Heb “the son of eighty-six years.”
[16:16] 237 tn The Hebrew text adds, “for Abram.” This has not been included in the translation for stylistic reasons; it is somewhat redundant given the three occurrences of Abram’s name in this and the previous verse.
