Page:A critical and exegetical commentary on Genesis (1910).djvu/83

 and  are in Genesis singularly few. In E contexts, occurs 22$11. 14 bis$ 28$21$ 31$49$, where its presence seems due to the intentional action of a redactor. J has (a) in 3$1-5$ 4$25$ (a special case: see pp. 2, 53); (b) where the contrast between the divine and the human is to be emphasised, 32$29$; (c) in conversations with, or references to, heathen (real or supposed), 9$27$ 39$9$ 41$32b. 38$ 43$28. 29$ 44$16$; there are also (d) some doubtful examples which are very probably to be assigned to E, 33$5b. 10b. 11$ 42$28$. It is only in the last group (if even there), with the possible addition (see p. 155) of 8$1$, that redactional alteration or scribal error need be suspected.

For the inhabitants of Canaan, J uses, 10$18b. 19$ 12$6$ (? R), 24$3. 37$ 50$11$ + (with, 13$7$ (R?) 34$30$); E , 15$16$ 48$22$ +.

For the name Jacob, J substitutes Israel after 35$22$ (exc. 46$5b$); E consistently uses Jacob (exc. 46$2$ 48$8. 11. 21$ [50$25$?]).

The following are selected lists of expressions (in Genesis) highly characteristic of J and E respectively:

J: and  in genealogies: the former, 4$20. 21$ 10$21$ 11$29$ 22$2$; the latter, 4$21$ 10$25$ (cf. 22$21$ 25$26$ 38$29f.$).— (in connexion with a late-born child), 21$2a. 7$ 24$36$ 37$3$ 44$20$.—, 6$8$ 18$3$ 19$19$ 30$27$ 32$6$ 33$8. 10. 15$ 34$11$ 39$4$ 47$25. 29$ 50$4$ +.— (without ), 2$5$ 19$4$ 24$15. 45$ +.— (in sexual sense), 4$1. 17. 25$ 19$5. 8$ 24$16$ 38$26$ (also in P).— (= 'beget'), 4$18$ 10$8. 13. 15. 26$ 22$23$ 25$3$.—, 24$23. 42. 49$ 28$16$ 39$4. 5. 8$ 42$2$ 43$4. 7$ 44$19. 20. 26$ 47$6b$ + (42$1$ E?).—Derivatives of [root], 3$16. 16. 17$ 5$29$ 6$6$ 45$5a$.—, 2$23$ 18$32$ 29$34. 35$ 30$20b$ 46$30$ +.—, (for the younger of two brothers or sisters), 19$31. 34. 35. 38$ 25$23$ 29$26$ 43$33$ 48$14$.—, 4$26$ 12$8$ 13$4$ 21$33$ 26$25$ +.—, 18$2$ [19$1$] 24$17$ 29$13$ 33$4$.—, 12$16$ 16$1. 5. 6. 8$ 24$35$ 30$7. 10. 12. 43$ 32$6. 23$ 33$1. 2. 6.$ (20$14$ 30$18$ R: also common in P); see on below.—, 18$16$ 19$28$ 26$8$ +.— with following gen., 18$4$ 24$17. 43$ 43$2. 11$ 44$25$.—Particles:, 3$17$ 8$21$ 12$13. 16$ 18{26 29. 31. 32} 21$30$ 26$24$ 27$4. 10. 19. 31$ 46$34$.—, 18$5$ 19$8$ 33$10$ 38$26$ +.—, 3$11$ 4$15$ 19$21$ 38$9$ + (in E and P once each).—, in J about 40 times, in E about 6 times (in Gen.).

E:, 20$17$ 21$10. 12. 13$ 30$3$ 31$33$ + (see above).— and  ('elder' and 'younger'), 29$16. 18$ 42$13. 15. 20. 32. 34$ (cf. 41$51f.$).—, 45$11$ 47$12$ 50$21$.—, 29$15$ 31$7. 41$.—A very characteristic idiom of E is the vocative (sometimes doubled: 22$11$ 46$2$, Ex. 3$4$, [1 Sa. 3$4$ G] +) with the answer : 22$1. 7. 11$ 27$1b. 18$ 31$11$ 37$13$ 46$2$ +.—E is further distinguished by a number of rare or archaic words or phrases:, 20$12$ + Jos. 7$20$;, 48$16$ +; , 30$20$; , 21$14. 15. 19$ +; , 21$16$ +; ('honest'), 42$11. 19. 31. 33. 34$; , 31$7. 41$ +;, 21$23$ (cf. Is. 14$22$, Jb. 18$19$ +); , 22$9$ +; , 48$11$; , 40$8ff.$ 41$8ff.$ +;, 40$5ff.$ 41$11$ +; , 41$23$; , 33$19$ + Jos. 24$32$ [Jb. 42$11$] +; by a partiality for rare infinitive forms (31$28$ 46$3$ 50$20$ 48$11$ +), and the occasional use of long forms of the nominal suff. (21$29$ [31$6$] 41$21$ 42$36$).

The religious and theological conceptions of the two documents are in the main identical, though a certain difference of standpoint appears in one or two features. Both