Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/400

 more; i.e., a means whereby God is reminded of the covenant. According to Kraetzschmar, it is both a sign and a constituent of the covenant, forming the condition on which the covenant is entered into. The truth seems to lie somewhere between two extremes. The Bĕrîth is neither a simple divine promise to which no obligation on man's part is attached (as in 15$18$), nor is it a mutual contract in the sense that the failure of one party dissolves the relation. It is an immutable determination of God's purpose, which no unfaithfulness of man can invalidate; but it carries conditions, the neglect of which will exclude the individual from its benefits. It is perhaps an over-refinement when Kraetzschmar (l.c. 201) infers from the expressions and  that for P there is only one eternal divine Bĕrîth, immutably established by God and progressively revealed to man.

The Theophany at Hebron: Abraham's Intercession for Sodom (J).

Under the terebinths of Mamre, Abraham hospitably entertains three mysterious visitors ($1-8$), and is rewarded by the promise of a son to be born to Sarah in her old age ($9-15$). The three 'men,' whose true nature had been disclosed by their supernatural knowledge of Sarah's thoughts, then turn towards Sodom, accompanied by Abraham ($16$), who, on learning Yahwe's purpose to destroy that city ($17-21$), intercedes eloquently on its behalf ($22-33$).

The first half of the chapter ($1-16$) shows at its best the picturesque, lucid, and flexible narrative style of J, and contains many expressions characteristic of that document:, $1. 13. 14$; , $2$ (only in J 24$17$ 29$13$ 33$4$); , $3$; , $3. 4$; (for 1st per.), $3. 5$; , $5$; , $13$; , $16$. The latter part ($17-33$) is also Yahwistic (, $20. 22. 26. 33$;, $27. 30ff.$; , $25$; , $32$), but contains two expansions of later date than the primary narrative. We. (Comp.$2$ 27 f.) appears to have proved that the original connexion between 18$15$ and 19$1$ consists of $16. 20-22a. 33b$; and that $17-19. 22b-33a$ are editorial insertions reflecting theological ideas proper to a more advanced stage of thought (see below). A more comprehensive analysis is attempted by Kraetzschmar in ZATW, xvii. 81 ff., prompted by the perplexing alternation of the sing. ([] $1. 3. 10. 13. 14. 15. 17-21. 22b-33$) and pl. ($2. 4. 5. 8. 9. 16. 22a$) in the dialogue between Abraham and his guests. The theory will repay a closer examination than can be given to it here; but I agree with Gu. in thinking that the texture of $1a$ is too homogeneous to admit of decomposition, and that some other explana-