cE EE eee ‘THE OLD TESTAMENT LIBRARY (6. Eaver Wa, The Divs Seeal Haar Uneniy a GENESIS } A Commentary GERHARD VON RAD Tramated by | JOHN H. MARKS SCM PRESS LTD 11 hrsé“Trandate by Jobo H. Math from the German i me CONTENTS e ‘Gstngen Abbreciations Translates Prefce Foreword tothe First Eaton 1. Introduction 1. Genesis a part ofthe Hexateuch 2. The three narrative sources 5. The theological problem ofthe Yahwist {f Hesmeneutcal problems ofthe Genes narratives 7 1, The Biblical Primeval History {The creation ofthe world. Ch. 1.1 0 248 UP 2/ Genealogical tabeo the patelarchs trim Ada Noah. Oh. 5 ' The Yahwstie story of Parade, Ch. 24gb-25, The wor ofthe Fall Ch ‘The story of Cain and Abel. Ch 41-16 he genalogy ofthe Kents, Che 417-26 The angel mariage. Ch. 6.14 The prologue to the Flood. Ch 65-8 The Flood ()) The epilogue tothe load. Ch 821-22 The Flood (P) Gea’ covenant with Noah. Ch. 91-17 enh’ euse and blesing. Ch 9-10-29 The table of mations (P) Fragments ofthe Yate table of nations I The sory of the Tower of Babel and the confasin of The father from Sher to Abraham. (P) Ch 11-10-27, 91 [Abraham's origin and ell) Cha. 1128-903 12.1-3 ‘Abraham's departure. (J) Ch 134-9, Finir vost a exouien 1961 Ow. sennans 196 Be deeseteatises, vastule er Abraham and Sarah in Egypt. Cha 12.40 0 9-1 ae The separation from Lot. Ch. 132-18 5 IIT, The Biblical Patriarchal History|THE MIMLICAL PRIMEVAL misTORY before Gods coming (Ch 15.12), and Moses could not te Gols es bu aly "God's back fb. 9318-9). The noon ‘that God “bul” woman fom man's ib gives an ancient answer (0 a cred rt pe ich hanes ay ‘thing ee, anda against i ‘ton of the human body becomes nonesential (sce atv. 24!). Nose ‘God himself ikea father ofthe bride leads the woman to the man. (en ee ieee seeped ning completely to him, and he express his understanding in the proper name that he gives the new creature sorption. The linguic coon. s(n wich och Sept ee {20 Be fly repented in Engin Mats oy in thet wily “tho” (cave te tre enrapored “hn one") is quite le ‘nal nd ins ong yr he Storemtcrs a 9) hh ratte ta ei” raleta] ch det pe the ht tentang 9 that they actually were come together again and ts HE stoRY oF Tutt PALL (Ch. 3) 8 bby destiny they belong to cach other. The recognition ofthis narrative is theologically important. Is point of departure, the thing to be explained, is for the narrator something in existence, present, not something “paradisiacal” and thus lst! ‘Curiously, the satement about forsaking father and mother does tot quite correspond to the patriarchal family customs of ancient for after the marriage the wife breaks lose from her faily ‘much more than the man does from his. Does this tendentious state- ‘ment perhaps preserve something from a Gime of matriarchal culture? One must emphasize, however, that our narrative is concerned not witha legal custom but with a natural drive (Pr). It isclearly evident that v. 2¢ is a conclusion, and that with it the end of a formerly ‘independent and compact cluster of material has been reached. Ghapter g begins something new, not only thematically but also ‘materially, Presumably it was the Vahwist who fist welded these differing traditions together by means of unifying idea. An important [pat inthis coupling was astigned tov. 25 which points both back ‘ward and forward (ef. ch. 3.7) and in which the Yahwist obviously foes beyond the existing traditions to present something of his own ‘They “were . . . naked, and were not ashamed.” That inexplicable split in human nature did not yet exist. "Shame isthe overpowering feeling thatinwardharmony and satisfction withoneselfare disturbed. ‘They were not ashamed of their nakednes. Why not? Shame is the ‘correlative of sin and guilt. They had no reason to fear thatthe body ‘would show sin in them” (Del). See further at ch. 3.7, 4. THE STORY OF THE FALL. Ch. 5 32Now the serpent wat more subtle than anyother wild creature that {he Lono God had made. He sat the wontan, “Did God say, You hall not at of any tree ofthe gure’? And the worn said tthe Serpent, “We may ca ofthe fat ofthe tree of the garden but God at Nal ot at fhe ra fhe ee wh ie mst the garden, neither sal you touch lest you de” But the serpent ‘aide the woman, "You wil not de For God Knows that wien you ‘at oft your eyes wll be opened, and you wil be ike God, knowing sped avd evi wen te woman stat the wee wa god fot fod, and tha twas delight tothe eyes and that the tee wa to be Adored to make one wise he took of frat and ate; ad se tome to her husband, and he ates "Then te eyes o beth wr Sind hey knew tat they were naked and they sewed fg tether nd made themselves aprons a> )Tote fini ee a4 WE STORY oF THE ALL (Ch. 3) oa Toxo God sent hie fort fom the garden of Eden, to til the ground {om which he was taken. "He drove out the man and atthe st of the fpr of en he placed the cherub ands fang swoed "ured every way, o guard the ray to the tee oie [2] The serpent which now enters the narrative is marked as one of ‘God's created animals (ch. 2.19) Inthe narrators mind itis vareely fan embodiment of a “demonic” power and certainly not of Satan ‘What distinguishes ita litle from the ret ofthe animals is exclusively lis greater cleverness. On the basis of this characteristic alone the narrator initiates the following addeess. 1¢ would be well to withhold ‘fom this beginning of the narrative the great theological weight that the exposition of the church, almost without exception, has fiven it, The mention of the sake here is almost secondary; at any ate, in the “temptation” by i the concern i with a completely wn Iythical proces, presented in such a way because the narrator is ‘obviously anxious to shift the problem as litle as posible from man. Teisa question only of man and ks guilt; therefore the narrator has arefilly guarded against veiling evil in any way, and therfore as Tittle as possible has he objected it or even personified it as a power ‘coming from without. That he transferred the impulte to temptation futside of man vas almost more a necesity for the sory than an Attempt at making vil something existing ouside man. Throughout the entre story this antagonist of man remain in acarcely definable incognito, which is not cleated up. In the history of religions the snake indeed isthe sinister, strange animal lath exoc (v. d. Leeuw land one ean also assume that long before, a myth was once at the buss of our narrative. But as it now lies before us, transparent and Ici, i is anything but = myth ‘We are not to be concerned with what the snake i but rather with ‘what it says, Te begins very cautiously with an interested and quite general question (not mentioning the subtly introduced subject of the convertion, the ree of knowledge, which it leaves tthe un suspecting woman!). The serpents question contains, iti tue, complete distortion, far God never said man should ea fon n tee Jn the garden; bue in jast this way the serpent drew the woman into conversation. It gives her the opportunity frst ofall to be right and to defend herself for God's sake (Z,). In the form of this question, however, the serpent has already made a deadly attack on the at lesanest of obedience. [a~3] The woman iequite ingenious wth regard to this malice. She corerts the distortion but in so doing goes 4 bitGod did withhold only oe tree from man (this does not seem to know the tree of life), but God that tsoul not even be touched Tis adlonal word re te ‘oe ate foie rey an th eer tert ty ae ws SSe = Wat Os dat ot re tala it gies aon oes ser eae eee teenrersacs ccc. Se etetntccacctsccs © intentions to God, Tt wes the ancient and wide ‘Cotati poh ‘mans: can And man's ance flyin thinking he can understand God beter cain he comet al (seating, a dine ing Kn pod apd co )3 ioe logical to understand yd tb war asa second predicate design < Beacee = SeSace eine ee Seta cian etary eee ae Simaeeern arent Sees ie tno oped ad evil is concerned, one must ‘remem it (“to know") never signifies pure! eee ern eae fences = gghpedpereh peta ea arlaain trolls ley aS gat gO ines) ria ean rd te sux stony oF Tite ratt (Ch. 3) 8 “too one must take tin its meaning as far as posible. The fascination ‘ofthis statement isin its lack of restriction, is intangiblenes; iti iiysterious, and after it hae brought the thoughts of ‘man into a definite direction, iis again open on all sides and gives oom tall whispering seret fantasies. What the verpent'sinsnuation ‘means isthe pensibility ofan extension of human existence beyond the limits set for it by God at creation, an increase of life not only in the sense of pure intellectual enrichment but also of familiarity with, and power over, mysteries that lie beyond man, That the narrative Sees man’s fl, his actual separation from God, occuring again and again in this area (and not, for example, as a plunge into moral ei, into the subbuman!), i. in what we cal Titanism, man's hubri ‘this is truly one of ies most significant alfirmations. “The serpent neither lied nor told the truth. One has always sen in the halfaruth the cunning of its statement. One should also observe ‘hat it speaks no summons; it simply gives men the great stimulus fom which decision can be made quite frely. Here too we see the ‘narrator's effort to transfer the matter and thus the question of guilt alittle at possible outside of man [6] The speech is ended; the serpent for the time being departs completely from the reader's view; the woman is now alone, “Man is llet before the assertion that to transgres the prohibition wil not bring him into death but rather into God's likeness. He es him- tel be persuaded ofthis thes.” Ie begins to dawn on him that he is better off as an autocrat than in obedience to God. (E. Osterloh, Thal 1987, 439.) The narrator draws a wonderful picture in v6 a scene without words in which the woman stands before the tee reflecting and then decides, With ie we rush through an entire scale ‘emotions “Goo for food,” that i the coarsely sensual aspect Aelight to the eyes,” that isthe finer, more aesthetic stimulus "desired to make one wise,” that isthe highest and decisive entice- ment (I John. 2.10, “the lst of the flesh and the lust of the eye and the pride of life”). And then follows the plucking and eating. The harrator express no shock; he docs not expect hs reader to become indignant ether. On the contrary, the unthinkable and terrible is described as simply and unsensationally as posible, completely with- ‘out the hubbub ofthe extraordinary or oft dramati break, 20 that itis represented from man’s wandpoint almost as something self evident, inwardly consistent! ‘The one who has been led astray now becomes a temptret, Thata ‘THE BIBLICAL PRIMEVAL misTORY ‘is meant to indicate thatthe woman confronts the obscure allure- ‘ments and mysteries that beet ou limited life more diretly than the ‘man docs In the history of Yahwel-rligon it has always been the ‘women who have shown an inclination for obscure astrological cults. ‘What kindof fut it was cannot be determined from the text; t was ‘hardly the fig which is amed ltr, but rather a unique, miraculous ‘tee of Paradise. The tradition about the apple tree derives from adn Cri sed may Be ceatoned by the anion mer {71 "“Then the eyes both were openc.” The words ofthe serpent aretepeste song eal nce en ut they noo Yet become dive Ma hat nt ben abet al nt hie wat od wield fom him bebe. Sarey wast praed bere caved order in his whole ner eee, a “hoorng” fh ‘ig (De). = : and eave aprons for themes They rent other end, owes tt with spta eing of gly, but wih ody shine Si ae te : feng a the deepest ot of human entenc the ig of Aiataches the lms eel ef our phys bag We men lade therfore, hat ec be sped for wht was atidaey ‘man has expences longing, “longing which annot be sll E Branne, Aan ix Rel), which agin snd again makes elt Independent sod teas apart the unity of bry and opt ad man frac to this imemestdsurbance with feng of ams {8-13} The deed becomes sin trough the encounter with God hich sgnicamly flow at once. Qf here doesnot means vee Dat (asin I Sam. 5.24) cherie of God's wep: that saved ESE Eee a Bro mores SS ee le Sey ice agar aese die awe sony oF TH yaLt (Ch. 3) 89 ‘man, Thi isthe fst thing of which the man speaks, of emotions, hich exit objectively and not yet consciously, ompictely beyond nd bere any raonal rection. Inthe second answer of the al Something new appears. Now begins the intellectual wrestle with gril oceaioned by Gods question, and with is aistance man tes {o clear himself of guilt and to place it, significantly, on God: “the ‘woman whom thou gavest tobe with me." This answer i frst ofall A reproaf of God by which man, cxgneating himself wants to dace {he imate cause of what has happens bt its ao the sign ofthe community of men with one another which has now been destroyed ‘This ulimat oidarty, the voldarity of, in which they are ao ited in Gods sight, it not recognized by them. The man betrays the woman. The ain they commited in common didnot unite men ‘etre God but iolated them. The woman too was unable to be the responiility before God: the erpent was the tempter! Significantly, 2 al ofthe serpent, God's personal addres to the serpent, missing [14-15] The penal go in ever order tthe tal proceedings als are all o be understood aetiological; in them the farratar gives a reason for dling enigmar and neces, he answer clementary quesiond about Hfe-Thtse ae the Fear Boland limas toward which the narrative was rected from the beginning The sent. Whence its marvelous physical costittion? In dstine- ion from the other larger beasts i tortures ive! by crawling slong the round on is belly. Whence this conduct? Te appears olive om {he dustin which i ses (In. 63253 Mich 7.17). Whence, above all, that biter hostty between it and san, & honlty that is oi ferent fom and deeper than that which otherwise may ext between tan and beast, which i inherited, species agian specie, from fencraton o generation? That & noe according to cretion, but in {his the serpent ears the cure of God, and Us suugale wih ans dezrec by God because of evil dee One must, unr all ream tance, proceed from the fat thatthe pasage reflects quite reais ically man's strap with the real make; but one most not sop there, Sr the things with which this passage deal are bas, and in itsraing ther, tenarratoriaeant only the commonplacelanguage everyday, bua language tha also figuratively depicts the mor ie tect mater Tub serpent he dando othe logial pees which in a Palestinian’ ie plays a quite diferent ole ffom in oun), but at the vane ine, na kind of pital clearheaded ‘em escrnitancibeingthat has anmed for, that isinesplicaly{THE BIBLICAL PRIVEVAL mIsToRY created world, and that hat singled out man, es in him and everywherefightsabattle with him forlife andl death, ‘The serpent is an animal which, more than any other, embodies ‘uncanny ‘that make it superior to man. The same thing tothe forbidden fruit; one must guard against understanding as symbolical, and yet no reader thinks of stopping with the “understanding. So to the serpent; area serpent i meant; ‘but atthe same time, in it and its enigmatic relation fo man, mats ‘eaton to the evil wit which he has become involved becomes vivid "The woman once opened the doors tothe dark power, and now as 1 penalty the doors are always to remain open and man is daily (0 ‘be exposed to attack by that power which he now knows makes hin terribly wretched.” (Fr. So far asthe struggle itl is concerned, it is Wherever man and serpent meet, the meeting a PEST peal ES ee Senate ger fa ss shite generally with the meaning “poner.” nn oY ee acca, spatatisrencacsete fae mesg! (ee hing ‘o unresolved tension ocean i ith, and (2) yet a profound dese for the nad woe she (5) sill doesnot find faint andre (Ruth) tara ai Jog deminaon! "in he bonage of compu drive att we nal involved inthe wonder of enon, peas ‘Super intra, husiatd, overburdened, cae worn anes, sida - * W, Vasher, Chrumsempeis 0), Wie fees Yom the contadedona, hs depadaon ite ees BT tue stony oF He raLt (Ch. 3) 9 {not a small matter that our narrative absolves God's creation of this, Here a primeval offense receives it consequences, which faith recognizes as a punishment inflicted by God [e719] As for the man, his punishment consists inthe hardship and skimpiness of his livelihood, which he nove mur seck for himilf ‘The woman's punishment struck atthe deepest root of her being as wife and mother, the man’s strikes at the innermost nerve of his life his work, his activity, and provision for sustenance. Here again the ‘cracls tobe read as in the ease ofthe serpent. Tt does not, however, strike the man himself, but goes, 0 to speak, through him. It goes ‘more deeply to the lowest foundation of all human existence; it trikes the most clementary realm of male eleciveness, the earth ‘And here too iy cleft, a mutual recaleitrance that now breaks into treation asa profound disorder: Man was taken from the earth and 40-wat directed to it; she wat the material bass of his existence; ‘solidarity of ereation existed between man and the ground. But a break occurred in this affectionate relationship, an alienation that express itsein a lent, dogged struggle between man and soi, Now feisas though a spell lay ifthe earth which makes her deny man the ceaty produce of tubsstence, ‘Upon closer inspection, one finds tha the curt speaks clearly of two diferent forms of life ouside of Paradise A B v.76, 196 9b 81 une gn ecnsne Thorn and hte shall ost ting th toe alles aatestor atthe” ante cll rs plane Snot yori le a Interment ctyourfice’ Youre ds, oct ced nd tou hl rr. Hor out of i you wee takes ‘The one version (A) has in mind the lie ofthe peasant (Fella) and his unending trouble to exact a harvest from the clods; the other (B) the life of the Bedouin in the steppe. His existence fs characterized less by the effort of preparing the ground than by the poverty and skimpines of the livelihood accorded him. The miscry, therefor, of both primary forms of life in Palestine is atiologically eatablished in this passage, (J. Begrich, ZAW, 1932, 10.) The fasion of the two ppasages, which at one'time at an eaier stage were certainly‘THE BIBLICAL PRIVEVAL HISTORY independent, makes the cre ofthe ian thervih the misery of ‘sli hentia, bet ren or sn become mer comprehcnve sens nt only of et ee a eee catoce. . fphaed gun thatthe panage dotnet consider otk intel puniment sd cane? Werk ws ordined formas tren in Paradis (che ut hema itw weed, thse iso treseed by fre and wastes of ie and en en eee ce: SSE eee ‘The eure do not speak ef ears primary iu, butratier oie, and they ais the bare, $hpand wcchedns wll contin ima a death rears any itech One ana ny tha nan at gr of mora ‘mor than one can thats mateial modifeason decors ro him st a conequee: of which he must now fal pry toca reer Sosa temeet oe eaten a rs feck acres * thet ef eth precede ded *sion® ‘tux rrony oF Tax ravt (Ch. 3) 93 atits end isa terrible statement about actual death. This statement {nits entre tone is overwhelming to man’s ear. Whatever the case of ‘man's mortality or immortality may otherwise have been, thi state- ‘ment would never have been addressed to man in such a way bore his sinning, and therefore thematically with special em- tothe penalty. We must in any case content our Pete rem nde tong stschly wir te reat of ‘ch. 217, for men did not die after their deed, and the penalty tell Airected 90 intensively toward life that it must be'considered as intained and not basically forfeited (se Epilogue) th the penalties in ch. 5.14-19 which explain aetiological fn faith the severe dssonances and enigmas of human life, a high ‘point, a Kind of conclusion, has been reached. By continuing the narrative beyond this critical point, the author, who works altogether With preformed older traditions, could not avoid certain iregulaities And breals. The transition from v. 19 t0 v.20 has long been con ‘dered one such noticeable fracture, and the naming ofthe woman (asecond time, moreover, after eh. 2.23!) was not thought acceptable as the frst echo, 0 to speak, to the penalty. “Mother of al living” ‘@ name of honor; does it not presuppose, moreover, that she has already born children? The Aramaie word too, serpent"), thas led tothe supposition that atthe bass ofthe narrative thee i 8 ‘very different oder form, in which only three acting partner God, man,and a (chthonian?) serpent-dety. But nothingof| is palpable. Even though this verse may derive originally from at ‘other context and a seam be here recognizable, one must nevertheless Seek to understand i in its present place. One mut sce the mi ‘naming of the woman as an act of faith, certainly not faith in promises that lie hidden, veiled in the penalties, but rather an embracing of life, which a great miracle and mystery is maintained and caried by the motherhood of woman over hardship and death, We ssid above, atv. 19 that man could regard life in spite ofall punishment ft maintained and not basically forfeited This lif, which over and beyond the death ofthe individual is pased on by mothers, he now takes and blames even though its threatened by death. Who can expres the pain, love, and defiance contained in these words? {2t] The statement that God made men "garments of skins” isin some tension with v. 7, and probably stems ultimately from another ree of tradition, One must have become familiar with our narrator's Simple manner of presentation in order to understand the meaning‘THE BIBLICAL PRIMEVAL mtsTORY ofthis statement. To be sure, God gives them only charity to take ‘with them an “outit for misery” (Gu), and yet it is an act of marked signfcance. For the fist time we sce the Creator as the preserver! ‘That means he accepts men as those who are fallen, He does not ‘ia antithon: Con Fathi iny ra) Gadd tat he tsa Seo sary son fle pt of con. td gots (he par males coppon is ‘Tux story oF TH YALL (Ch. 3) 95 beast, which accompanied the deity (Ps, 18.10) and had the duty, ‘above all, of protecting sacred regions (I Kings 6.2 8.6). Along, ‘with them (not, therefore, in ther power! mentioned the flame of the quivering sword, in which one muxt doubles see « mythical ‘objectification of lighting (cf Jer. 47.) ‘To decide about the literary form ofthe story of Paradise andthe Falls very dificult. is in this rexpoct something unique, Ever since the victorious campaign of the science ofthe history of religions it thas been clear that Gen.,chs.2£, even though a direct Babylonian ¢ other corresponding parallel has not yet been found, must be fonsidered in connection with common Oriental myths of man ‘reation, the mountain ofthe gods, the tree of if, the water of lif, ‘cherubim, ete. Tit myth i also alluded to in another passage ofthe ‘Old Testament (Ezek. 28.11-19). There the prophet appliesit, “mak {ng it historical,” in a lamentation for the king of Tyre. But the implied meaning in the context of sinless original man whose wise dom was exemplary and whose beauty was perfect i lear enough. He lived in the Garden of Eden on the mountain of the gods; but he ‘was cast out because of his arrogance, The relation of the material to Gen, ch. 3, is apparent; likewise is origin from common Oriental material. Nevertheles, it presents the matter tous in quite differen tiated form. The Yahvris, who wrote in the period of the Solomonic ‘enlightenment or shorly thereafter, ata time when so much ancient, sacred tradition had reached a ers (seep. 16), was the ltt one 0 pass on a myth with archaic piety. Actually che didactic, clearly transparent manser which goet along so discreetly and far fran all bstruse wonderfalnes, has very litle in common with a real mth, How much richer are the mythological colors even in Ezek, 28.1 f., land how much “more modern” does the so much older Yahwit seem by contrat, iffor no other reason than that he paychologically pene= trates the events so incomparably! Genesis, chs 2 £, 8 sublime representation of the orginal sate, which uses some’ mythological {ideas frely. Its simplicity, however, is not archaic, but rather the highest command of every artistic means, ‘Scientific research has shown that behind the present frm ofthis narrative ae traditions of various kinds, traditions that ony in small part were united with one another by te final hand of the Yahwist, but had already merged much earlier. This combination of older6 {HE BIBLICAL PRIMEVAL HISTORY terials now very love and organic. Along withthe chief thought, ‘Which rus Grough the narave from Deinnig to end and of {Which we hallapesk ltr, therefor example, al he 6d (ran) sw edand (earth) moti, which now dominates and units the whole {em 27,19; 347, 29). Notetanding, one mast admit many seams, and iregularitia. ‘The fate of the woman is not auite uniform: ch, 2.18, a3 sees her as help and wife, and through 1724 Siliantly express the physical belonging of the sexes, ch 137320 and ch 1) doo too. The context ofthe narrative ch. 3.7 ee Earner eaten Cetra ace ee fears eee ee retesereec Siiecwemomennede ot ee eee eee Snieoeteran eee ee oe a eee eee. eee eee eee eee Sore pe eee ame at a er ee a cht etmenncserel — SSS ae een css frm ofthe india ratons which have merged cs eee SLL atone ame este eo pees eens aeeae aon an carenacs ‘rmx stony oF THE PALL (Ch. 3) 7 oriented aetiological have become more complete imply by thee combination with each other. The narrator's only fancern sno longer the aetiologies of cht. 2.24 and 314 fy and one enerlly must guard againt thinking that' story of such inner Eomplexy can have only oe meaning. It has occasionally perhaps low tone logical precon because ofthe heterogeneous character of ipa, but thas gained breadth of sion from the fact that evey~ thing is tied together quite so compacty. And precisely because here and there things do no fit and are not drawn together atthe end, the narrave guint unfathomable and inexhaustible character. Jos bees i doesnot sharply define allt statements, because it casonally suggest instead of making tangbly clear what iis talk- ing about- jon this consists the mystery of its universality. OF coune, thae characteriics make special demands on the under- Standing and exegetical consideration ofthe reader. The things of ‘which the narrative speaks are widely separated, and between them theres room fr many quesGons and problems aboot which i dos ot speak and about which, therfore, it doesnot want tobe asked, citer “The narrator doesnot reply to many impertinent questions bes his own standpoint, of cour, is ot within Paradise but outide and he reltaine fom all fantry and speculation about what existed before the Fall In this respect the reticence indeed soberness snd alm ofthe Biblical sory m especially noticeable in conta tothe Arrogant and harsh color inthe myth of other people. The sory throughout contain statement affaith that are made rom the stand lm of allen man. Ato point i ths ondary trangrencd tvenin ch. afr what aid shout the river ofParaiv, the cretion ‘fiman out of earth, the cretion ofthe base, ofthe woman and fate—all hoe things are creative act and decrees that have the sae ality for pos-Paradse man. The narrator docs not give a diet, Dative description of paradisac conditions of e He bit irc to priming out the great dvorders of cur presen ifeshame, fer, the ionances in te eof the woman andthe maB—and ascribing them to human sin. And this, of course, tthe chit concern entire narrative: One can welace int" theodicy of universal propor ions” (Hempel for itis concerned to acquit God and his creation of alte aflering and misery that is come into the worl. Phe Priel story of creation showed how God separated the word fom chaos, then the Vahwitie tory of Parade and the Fall intends to show how‘THE BIBLICAL PRIMEVAL HISTORY the chaos of troubled life which surrounds us today developed out of sport fi bcomet ier bene olla au; he hap Set ot mtetboot the highes flint fs womans is fro by pain and sro Only with braten being docs san cei it; that he enmat ct which the Yah cone and tad to expla bythe matinee che (esr, Dae The 193717) The mail, profound outs SBhamolichneher oth bow lena etn 10 God: Expresedmoreconiy, Cech, aera taal sorrow tone fons. Bat with sch smi che rons the danger of imine vat cotet ote marae: If we tak only chow itthors mun ate one who wants o be Hke Gd in trove tnd caperence we hae bebe ue 8 Kad of Promeheuy mot With tis inoyldge, obtained in Sesane, begs ndced “higher srr ata po gry ro ce ‘helene; “tisaknowlge aginst Col wich, tec, des fo Tring ts to Parad, but onthe contrary as to en” Gressmana, Glial. Wel, 1026, 846). ‘Thus this narrative contains ‘ome serious crtciam of culture to, All inal it loses in profound ‘ade. Man was surrounded isl THE STORY OF CAIN AND ABEL (41-16) 99 for his story of Paradise. Ifthe subjects which Israel’ faith was ‘ually careful to mention seem to be rather far fom those ofthis primeval history, sill manifold and important connecting lines run back and forth between here and there. That, of course, doet not ‘mean that as a matter of fact in Gen., chs. 2 and 3, only man’s sate within the covenant relation is discussed, Tt means, rather, tha the theological consequences ofthe statements have echatological mean ing, even though not according to their obvious meaning to the Yahwist It s not accidental that the primeval history 0 earnestly considers the themes of eschatology and apocalyptic. (Paradise, primeval man, peace among the animals, abundance of water, et) In any ease, behind both Od Testament protology and eschetology is Yahweh's revelation, Yabvreh the God of Israel. 5. THE STORY OF GAIN AND ABEL. Ch. 4.1-16 Now Adam knew Eve his wife and she conceived and bore Cai, sala, ave pote aan with ce belp ofthe Low Ard agin ‘he bote his brother Abel, Now Abel was a heeper ef sheep, and Cain tle of the ground In the course of time Cain brought the Lon 2 oflering of the rit ofthe ground, fand Abel brought of the stage this tlock aod of thet “And the Lonp had regard for Abel Sand his offering, bat for Cain and hit ofeing he had regard So Gin was very ange, and his countenance ll The Lonnsaid fo Cain, "Why ar you angry, and why bas your countenance allen? "you do ell will you not be accepted? And if you do not do well sa Couch Inga the door es desire is for you, bat you ust master it "8 Cain sid to Abel his brother “Letom go out tothe fel.” And nen they ere in he fel, Cain rose up agains his brother Abel, and Eile hry "Tien the Lomo ai to Cain, Whereis Ae your bth Hesaid I do not know am Tmy brother's keeper?” And the Lono said, "What have you dane? ‘The tuceof your bother’ blood crying to me from the ground. "And now you are cursed Tem the gee Which has opened is mouth to receive your brother's blood from your Rand hon tithe oun, al po lng yl oY strength; you shall be a faptve and a wanderer on th earth” Cake Said tothe Lono, My punksient greater tan I cam ben Behold thou has driven me ths day away from the ground and rom thy fae Thal be hidden and T salle fogtve a wanderer onthe tart fd whoever finds me wil aay mes"\Then the Lous sd thn "Nek ‘0! anyone ays Gan, vengeance shal be taken on hiss evenfol ‘And the Lono puta mark on Cain, lst ay who came upon histo Ail him. Then Can weat away from the presence of the Lono, and Adve inthe land of Nod, eat of Ee, [1-2] This new narrative is very closely ted in v. 1 to what has