Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/423

 belongs to J$b$ rather than J$h$ (Gu.).—$8-21$ is wholly Elohistic:, $12. 17. 19. 20.$; , $10. 12. 13$; , $13. 18$ (J , 12$2$; P , 17$20$); and rare expressions like, $14. 15. 19$; , $16$; , $20$. Further characteristics are the revelation of God by night ($12f.$), and in a voice from heaven ($17$).

1-7. The birth of Isaac.—2. a son to his old age] so v.$7$ 24$36$ 37$3$ 44$20$ (all J). All the sources emphasise the fact that Isaac was a late-born child; but this section contains nothing implying a miracle (ct. chs. 17, 18).—3-5. The naming and circumcision of Isaac, in accordance with 17$19. 12$ (P).—6a. God has made laughter for me] Both here and in $6b$ laughter is an expression of joy, whereas in 18$12ff.$ 17$17$ it expresses incredulity.—6b, 7 is the Yahwistic parallel. It has been pointed out by Bu. (Urg. 224: so Kit. KS. Ho.) that the transposition of $6b$ to the end of $7$ greatly improves the sense, and brings out the metrical form of the original (in Heb. 4 trimeters):

Who would have said to Abraham, "Sarah gives children suck"? For I have borne him a son in his old age! Every one that hears will laugh at me!

8-10. Sarah demands the ejection of Ishmael.—8. The occasion was the customary family feast of the weaning of Isaac (Benz. Arch.$2$ 131). The age of weaning in modern Palestine is said to be 2 or 3 years (ib. 116); in ancient Israel also it must often have been late (1 Sa. 1$22ff.$, 2 Mac.

1a. ] never used by P sensu bono (Str.).—2. ] G —3. ] pointed as pf. with art. (18$21$).—6a. ] The [root] never occurs outside of Pent., except Ju. 16$25$ (where should probably be read) and Ezk. 23$32$ (but see Corn. and Toy), the Qal being used only in connexion with Isaac (17$17$ 18$12. 13. 15$ 21$6$), while Pi. has a stronger sense (19$14$ 21$9$ 26$8$ 39$14. 17$, Ex. 32$6$). The other form (not in Pent.) is mostly later than Jer. (except Ju 16$27$, 1 Sa. 18$7$, 2 Sa. 2$14$ 6$5. 21$): in four cases (Am. 7$9. 16$, Jer. 33$26$, Ps. 105$9$) even the name appears as. It will be seen that in Gn. we have no fewer than 4 (17$17$ 18$12$ 21$6a. 6b.$) or 5 (21$9$?) different suggestions of a connexion of with [root]. Analogy would lead us to suppose that in reality it is a contraction of, in all probability the name of an extinct tribe (cf., , etc.).—6b. ] see G-K. § 10 g.—7. ] Aram.; in Heb. rare and poetic.—On the modal use of pf. ('would have said'), cf. G-K. § 106 p; Dri. T. § 19.—] pl. of species; cf. Ex. 21$22$, 1 Sa. 17$43$, Ca. 2$9$ (Di.). G has sing.— G.