Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/260

 sound theology, but it hardly expresses the idea of the passage.—21b is a monologue .— (see on 6$5$) may be understood either as epexegetical of (a reason why Yahwe might be moved to curse the ground, though he will not [Ho.]), or as the ground of the promise not to visit the earth with a flood any more. The latter is by far the more probable. The emphasis is on, from his youth; the innate sinfulness of man constitutes an appeal to the divine clemency, since it cannot be cured by an undiscriminating judgement like the Flood, which arrests all progress toward better things (cf. Is. 54$9$).—22. The pledge of Yahwe's patience with humanity is the regularity of the course of nature, in which good and bad men are treated alike (Mt. 5$45$). A division of the year into six seasons (Ra.), or even into two halves (De.), is not intended; the order of nature is simply indicated by a series of contrasts, whose alternation is never more to be interrupted by a catastrophe like the Flood. This assurance closes J's account of the Deluge. It rests on an interior resolve of Yahwe; whereas in P it assumes the form of a 'covenant' (9$11$),—a striking instance of the development of religious ideas in the direction of legalism: cf. Jer. 31$35f.$ 33$20f. 25f.$.  The Flood according to P.

'''VI. 9-12. Noah's piety; The corruption of the earth.—9.' This is the genealogy of Noah''] The formula is usually taken as the heading of the section of P dealing with the Flood; but see on 9$28f.$.—Noah is characterised as

of Pual (Ps. 37$22$, Jb. 24$18$, Is. 65$20$).—] G, as 3$17$.—] G. See on 6$5$.—22. ] G om.; Ball, ].—] 'come to an end': see on 2$2$.

9. ] (so Jb. 12$4$). The asyndeton is harsh; but it is hardly safe to remedy it on the authority of [E] and V, against G. To remove as a gloss from J (7$1$) (Ball) is too bold. Perhaps the sentence should be broken up into two clauses, one nominal and the other verbal: 'Noah was a righteous man; perfect was he,' etc.—The forensic sense of given above may not be the original: see S. A. Cook, JTS, ix. 632$1$, who adduces some evidence that it meant what was 'due' among a definite social group, and between it and its gods.*