Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/406

 formerly Kefr Barîk, from which the Sea is seen through gaps in the mountains (see Robinson, BR, i. 490 f.; Buhl, GP, 158 f.).—17. But Yahwe had said] sc. 'to Himself'; the construction marking the introduction of a circumstance.—18. Seeing Abraham, etc.] Yahwe reflects, as it were, on the religious importance of the individual beside Him.—and all nations, etc.] See the notes on 12$3$. possibly refers not to Abraham but to ; cf. 22$18$ (We.).—19. Comp. Dt. 6$1-3$.—For I have known (i.e. 'entered into personal relations with': as Am. 3$2$, Hos. 13$5$) him in order that, etc.] There is a certain incongruity between the two parts of the v.: here the establishment of the true religion is the purpose of Abraham's election; in $19b$ the end of the religion is the fulfilment of the promises made to Abraham.—20. Resuming v.$16$. An earlier form of the story no doubt read instead of ].—On the peculiar construction, v.i.—21. Restoring the pl. as before, the v. reads as a disjunctive question: We will go down that we may see whether or not: we would know.

'''22b-33. Abraham's intercession.'''

The secondary character of $22b-33a$ (see p. 298) appears from the following considerations: (a) In $22a$ 'the men' (i.e. all three) have moved away to Sodom; in $22b$ Yahwe remains behind with Abraham. That

17. After GS read .—19. ] [E]GV omit the suffix, while GVS treat what follows as an obj. cl. (quod, etc.), through a misunderstanding of the sense of. 20—] [E] as v.$21$.— (bis)] T$O$. The particle is ignored by G V; also by S, which supplies and omits. If the text be retained the is either corroborative (G-K. §§ 148 d, 159 ee), or causal (BDB, 473 b); but neither construction is natural. Moreover, the parallelism of clauses is itself objectionable; for whether the 'sin' actually corresponds to the 'cry' is the very point to be investigated (v.$21$). This material difficulty is not removed by the addition of (Ols.) or  (Kit.). Its removal is the sole recommendation of We.'s proposal to omit [H] before and render, 'There is a rumour about S. and G. that their sin is great, that it is very grievous.'—21. Read with GT$O$ .—On for, see G-K. § 138 k.— is difficult: cf. Ex. 11$1$, another doubtful pass. We. here suggests, Ols. .

22b contains one of the 18 (corrections of the scribes). The original reading is said to have been changed