Category Archives: Home

Rachel and Leah continued and sources

Posted on by
March  27, 2008 Class #5 
These are the notes I used for the class.   Because some may like to know the sources, I’ve left some of them in.  Bibliography at the end.   What is listed are the ideas I brought to the class, but in many cases people brought up other interpretations, and we did not necessarily discuss everything here.   However, this is useful for anyone who would like to review the texts or go over the class in their mind.
Introductory ideas
  • Bible as literature – stories are carefully crafted for a purpose – human beings are messy – they will never be God – this is monotheism, but God has to work through messy humans (Alter)
  • Stories show conflict between divine and human, between ordered plan and messy working out in history – like the two stories of Creation.  Look for the tension in our story
  • The Rachel/Leah story is revealing of personal feelings through the namings – what will the speeches show us – either about Rachel and Leah’s feelings, or about what the authors think.
  • Dialog in Bible is most important way to convey action and character.  Yet we almost never see direct dialog between women – only Lot’s daughters, Rachel/Leah, Naomi/Ruth. (Alter) 
  • What are the components of building the house of Israel (question to discuss at the end).  Human beings in all their faults working out divine destiny
Texts
  • Gen 29: 1-14   At the well- type-scene betrothal (Rachel means “ewe-lamb”)
  • 15-30   The marriages and deceptions and slave girls (Leah commonly taken to mean “cow”)
    • 14 – 15:  Laban may remember Rebekah’s jewelry;  Jacob serves for one month before discussing wages
    • 25: “look, there was Leah” – Jacob gets his comeuppance – but we don’t know of Rachel’s feelings
  • Discuss naming speeches  (Pardes pp 42 ff Countertraditions)
    • More often than not, mother does the naming speech
    • Reveals more about character of namer than the recipient
    • Direct speech predominates in providing characterization in bible
    • Name – puns are not necessarily real etymology
  • 31-36   Reuben, Simeon, Levi and Judah (Leah)
    • Reuben (Alter) The Lord has seen my suffering, for now my husband will love me.
    • Simeon (Alter) The Lord heard I was despised and He has given me this one, too.
    • Levi (Alter) This time my husband will join me because I have born him three sons.
    • Judah (Alter)  This time I shall sing praise to the Lord.  (she no longer expresses hope of winning husband’s affection – just gives thanks to God for her offspring)
    • She ceased bearing (did Jacob stop cohabiting?)
  • Gen 30: 1-3     Rachel is envious of sister.  Rachel wants children – Give me children or I die;  Bilhah given to Jacob – Jacob follows along
    • Until now we do not know Rachel’s feelings – bitter after all these years of barrenness, skipped over for Leah – jealous of “sister” – connecting sibling rivalry to Jacob/Esau –
    • The first speech of any character is especially revelatory – Rachel’s is “Give me children or I die.”  (literally, I am dead) – Rachel shows as impatient, impulsive, explosive (Alter)
    • Jacob’s answer is rhetorical, sarcastic, complex sentence (Alter)
    • Rachel does not even respond to Jacob, just orders him to procreate with her maid
    • What do we see in Rachel’s words – tangle of emotions – love, consideration, jealousy, frustration, resentment, rage – all the components of a conjugal relationship
    • Who does Rachel call upon, God or husband?  Unlike Sara, Rebekah or Hannah she neither prays to God nor is visited by God for her annunciation – perhaps this contributes to her early death
    • But Rachel and Leah do call on God in the naming speeches
  • 4-8       Dan, Naphthali (Bilhah)
    • Dan (Alter) God heard my voice and He gave me a son.  Etymology of verb dan suggests vindication of legal plea.  (PW note – check Job) (RTWB pg 231 “God has vindicated me and listened to my voice”)
    • Naphthali (Alter)  In awesome grapplings ( Pardes pg 65 naftuley elohim = a contest of God.  But God is really marginal.  Maybe Rachel envisions a different outcome – in any event, this is Bilhah’s and Rachel is still barren.  Is her naming speech delusional?) I have grappled with my sister and, yes, I won out.
  • 9-13     Gad, Asher (Zilpah) – Leah had stopped bearing
    • Gad (Alter)  Good luck has come
    • Asher (Alter)  What good fortune.  For the girls have claimed me fortunate.
  • 14-16   Mandrakes (love-apples) 
    • Rareness of direct speech between women
    • What does this say about their negotiating skills?
    • Is this win-win?  How does Leah fare in the bargain compared to Esau?  In his craving for lentils he is no match for Esau, but Leah benefits as much as Rachel and they both become pregnant
    • Jacob becomes a token of exchange between the women (Pardes pg 66), not unlike how Rachel and Leah were pawns between Jacob and Laban
  • 17-21   Issachar, Zebulun, Dinah (Leah)
    • Issachar (Alter) God has given me my wages because I gave my slave girl to my husband (see pg 161 for more)
    • Zebulun (Alter) God has granted me a goodly gift.  This time my husband will exalt me for I have borne him six sons.
    • Dinah – no naming speech – narrative – she called her name Dinah.
  • 22-24   Joseph (Rachel)
    • Joseph (Alter) God had taken away my shame; and May the Lord add me another son. (She will be granted the second son a the cost of her life)
  • 25-43   Jacob once again takes charge of ewes and goats- in charge of virility – 38: rechelekha
  • Gen 31            Laban’s sons say Jacob has taken all that was their father’s and built up his wealth so that the sons will loose their inheritance
  • 14-15     Daughters’ attitude to father is revealed (Pardes pg 68). Rachel and Leah answered “Have we a share in our the inheritance of our father’s house?  All the wealth that God has taken away from our father belongs to us and to our children. 
    • They ignore Jacob’s blustering and posturing about how God has guided the cattle and the come back with how their father has treated them. (Pardes pg 70)
    • Rachel and Leah are united here in support of husband – speak with one voice, although Rachel may take precedence, and she is the one who steals the teraphim
    • Both Rachel and Leah are abandoning the land of idol worshippers and the land of their father and mother – Ruth does the same 
  • 16        Do just as God tells you
  • 32        Anyone who has your gods shall not remain alive – Jacob did not know Rachel had stolen them – or did he guess?  Was he secretly thinking she had gotten out of hand with her independence?
  • Gen 33:1         Children divided amongst maids and wives
  • Gen 35 16-20  Rachel’s last birth, naming and death.
    • Benjamin (Alter)
      • Rachel calls him Ben-Oni can mean either son of my affliction or son of my vigor – the latter more likely –
      • sole instance of competing names.  Jacob calls him Bin-Yamin = son of right hand (dexterity) or dweller in the south or son of old age (yamim)
    • Leah will be left with 13 children.  The audience is accustomed to women in pioneer society being full partners in work event with childbearing (Eve)
    • (Pardes pg 72) Does Rachel die because Jacob has cursed her as the Rabbis say?  Shades of Jephthah’s daughter?  Was there any intention?  Could Jacob have guessed she stole the teraphim?
  • 21        Reuben lies with Bilhah 
    • consider this when we look at Tamar and Judah
  • 23-26   list of the sons
What are the components of building the house of Israel (question to discuss at the end).  Human beings in all their faults working out divine destiny.
  • How does this pair compare to Abraham/Lot, Esau/Jacob, Jacob/Laban?  Can they separate, are they tied together, how well do they negotiate with each other?
  • Does God intervene directly?  This leaves them both frailer.   Rachel and Leah have no oracles.
  • The issue is no longer which son will be heir – they are all children of Israel – emphasis on progeny – mold of heroic women who preserve people of Israel and ensure continuity

Some bibliography (abbreviated)
Alter, Robert, The Five Books of Moses, 2004
Alter, Robert, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 1980
Alter writes about the careful crafting of the bible and what can be learned from studying its literary conventions.  In his translation he tries to capture accurate Hebrew, both in the meaning and in the cadence of language.   He differs in this regard from Fox, whose translation tries to be word for word, but not to convey the power of the language.
Meyers, Carol, Discovering Eve, Ancient Israelite Women in Context, (1988)
Myers studies the archeology, anthropology, historical documents, the Bible, and cross cultural studies to uncover the life of the early, pre-monarchic Israelite settlement in the land, and to discover the role of women therein.  Scholarly but very readable.
Frymer-Kensky, Tikva, Reading the Women of the Bible 2002
Frymer-Kensky, Tikva, In the Wake of the Goddesses, Women, Culture and the Biblical Transformation of Pagan Myth  1992
Frymer-Kensky is a prominent scholar of ancient Near Eastern religion, and using many historical and cultural tools, seeks to convey the marginalization of goddesses that preceded biblical monotheism in Israel, and the new concepts of humanity, culture and society found in the bible.  Excellent source for understanding the Mesopotamian period.  A bit hard on the rabbis, whom she blames for introducing Greek misogyny to an otherwise egalitarian biblical culture.  I think she goes overboard there.
Pardes, Ilana Countertraditions in the Bible A Feminist Approach 1992
Pardes uses, feminist theory, biblical scholarship, literary criticism and psychoanalysis to explore the dialogue between patriarchal discourse and counter female voices in the Bible.   She looks at a few specific women and ideas.
Knohl, Israel The Divine Symphony: The Bible’s Many Voices  2003
Knohl divides the Priestly source (“P”) into Priestly and Holiness School (“H”) and discusses at length the different layers and the differing interpretations of biblical ideas in the J, E, D, P and finally redacted bible, which is symphony of voices.  His thesis is that the Bible was redacted by H.

Review and Rachel and Leah

Posted on by

March 6, 2008 Class #4 


Rather than try to recapitulate our discussion, I am posting my lesson plan, so as to give an idea of what we went over.  
We did an overview to date:
  • Looking at texts with our own eyes
    • Filters – how it is not possible to approach the texts objectively, but that we have filters, such as feeling that women in the bible are mistreated.  In fact, every author we read has filters. The key thing is to try and be aware of filters as we study.
    • Having a prejudice against Rivka the trickster – nasty female tricks, and Sarah – mean to her slave.
      • Do we readily accept these readings because we have been conditioned to these attitudes?
      • Ask everyone, what is your impression of Br’er Fox – and discuss
  • When individual male family heads are supreme, often the women can have considerable influence.   When society is tightly bound with legal hierarchies, women are not so able to be effectual.
    • What emerges is picture of women who are not different from men in essence, who have the same capabilities of leadership, trickery, partnership and conversations with God as men do.   Women emerge as – yes- certainly secondary socially, and subject to the rule of the male family head – but not as inherently inferior.  This is an important discovery.
  • Women effectuating continuance of blood line
    • Lots’ daughters –strong feminine/ odds with Moabites
    • Sarah
    • Rivka 
      • The only woman of the Bible whose birth is recorded – child of destiny and agent of God’s promise
      • lineage passing from Abraham AND Sarah, to Rivka, who will then, through her own efforts, ensure the fulfillment of God’s wish that Jacob inherit.  Isaac seems to fall out of the loop.
      • Like Abraham – ● inherit  ● trip ● hospitality  ● also trickster in a way
    • Note the change from Genesis to Exodus, where Moses talks about Abraham, Isaac and Jacob
      • Ilana Pardes pg 57:  While Yahwistic texts permit a certain dramatization of the struggle between the sexes, one intertwined with the human-divine conflict, Priestly traditions avoid conflict just as they avoid narrative.
      • There are very important women at beginning of Exodus but the issue of sons of Israel overrides family heritage – this is the Priestly way.
      • After they join Joseph in Egypt, there are 600,000 male heads of households and their entourage.  Moses leads the People, not a family.  
      • Still, all the stories of women are preserved, because they are important in the Abrahamic and Davidic lineages, to forward the lines.
      • Even they are highlighted at Holy Days – Shavuot, Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur etc.
  • Look at Sefat Emet on breshit and discuss importance of the patriarchal/matriarchal stories.
    • Why do we have laws and also stories?   Why do the stories come first?
Start on Rachel and Leah. 
  • Mention Ruth 4:11  “May the Lord make the woman who is coming into your house like Rachel and Leah, both of whom built up the House of Israel.  I said we would come back to this.  Talk about House of Israel in light of Rachel and Leah
  • Rachel and Leah are more complex, more personal, and yet less effective perhaps?  The next step in the destiny of the Israelites is to build the house.
    • Remember Rivka inherits from Sarah and Abraham, even looks a bit like Abraham – and is strong in her own right.   At the well she carries all that water, she carries the story to her mother (Bethuel seems to have disappeared), and she is asked if she would be willing to go right away.   She does not have the choice not to go at all, of course
      • Gen 24:28  The maiden ran and told all her mother’s household
      • Gen 24:51:  Here is Rebekah – take her
      • Gen 24:58:  I will go with them – this is not negotiated on her behalf by the men.
    • Rachel does not have so much strength it would seem
    • Note that it takes a pair of matriarchs to supply the huge number of progeny for bnei Israel.
  • Look at meeting of Jacob and Rachel
    • After the initial meeting, Jacob and Laban take over – this is very different from Rivka.
      • Gen 29:12:  Rachel runs and tells her father.
      • Gen 29; 14-21 Laban and Jacob negotiate the taking of the wife
  • Yet, they speak up in rebellion as they are leaving their father’s house – he has sold them –
    • Gen 31: 4-16 – the departure – Rachel speaks before Leah
    • makar = selling, otherwise used only in Bible for selling humans into slavery, selling of Joseph, selling one’s daughter into slavery
    • Sister’s complaint in remarkably critical  “stranger women” and “sold”
    • still, sisters set aside feud to reinforce the word of God to husband

Women as critical ancestors and tricksters

Posted on by

February 21, 2008, Class #3 
How did Rachel and Leah build up the House of Israel?  Why is it Rachel and Leah and not Rifka and Sarah.    This is a question to keep in the back of our minds.
Today we looked at women as critical ancestors and the trickster.  These are aspects of the role of women in building up the House of Israel.  We saw that women also do their thing and disappear
Thematically we first introduced Abraham the trickster – Gen 12:13-20 –  Abram asks Sarai to lie.  She is in Pharaoh’s harem – not a good position for Sarai to be in.
Then we looked at Sarah’s role in ensuring the line of succession and in ensuring God’s will be done.
·         We noted that initially God promises Abram a heritage through his issue, but does not mention through which woman.  Some texts we referred to
o   Gen 12:2 – I will make of you a great nation
o   Gen 15:3  Abram “I die childless” – 1st speech of Abram to God.
o   Gen 16:2   “The Lord has kept me from bearing.  Sarai sees God a author of her suffering.  Sarai shall be built up thru Hagar.  Not clear that she knows about God’s promise to Abram
o   Gen 16:15  Abram names his son Ishmael, (God heeds) according to God’s command (16:11) = God has seen the suffering of Hagar – this is not Sarai’s child – she must be the mother of the lineage.  Sarai is cut out here.
o   Gen 17:2 – God will establish covenant with Abram = he becomes Abraham – he gets land and offspring
·         Sarah enters the picture, but it’s not clear she knows that she will have a role to play in who will inherit the covenant from Abraham
o   Gen 17:16 – Sarah will give rise to nations – rulers shall issue from her.    God has to tell Abraham of Sarah’s importance
o   Gen 17:18 – Abraham asks God’s blessing for Ishmael.
o   Gen 17:19 – the covenant will come thru Sarah’s son “but my covenant will be with Isaac”
o   Gen 18:10 – your wife shall bear a child – first that Sarah hears of it.  Not clear she knows of its destiny
·         God starts to tell Abraham that he must listen to Sarah
o   Gen 21:10 – Sarah says to Abraham to cast out slave woman and son – not share with Isaac.  Sarah is not visible again until her death in 23.2
o   Gen 21:12 – God tells Abraham he must listen to Sarah
The torch passes from Sarah to Rebekah.   It seems as if lineage goes from Abraham and Sarah to Rebekah to Jacob, and skips Isaac.
o   Gen 22 – Binding of Isaac – Sarah not involved
o   Gen 22:23  Bethuel introduced as father of Rebekah.  Slipped in right before Sarah’s death.  The only woman of the Bible whose birth is recorded.  The placement of birth notice is important.  Isaac has been saved, promise repeated to Abraham.  Baby Rifka will be child of destiny and agent of God’s promise.
o   Gen 23 Sarah does not chose Isaac’s wife – After Sarah’s death, Abraham sends a servant to get a wife for Isaac from the homeland
o   Gen 24: 2-4 – Servant must get wife for Isaac from land of Abraham’s birth
o   Gen 24:67  Rebekah takes Isaac’s mother’s place and he loves her.  2nd mention of love in Bible.   First one was 22:2  Abraham loves Isaac
We looked at similarities between Rifka and Abraham
·         Inheriting land (enemies’ gates)
o   Gen 22:17 – Abraham will inherit the enemies gates (Fox)
o   Gen 24:60 – Rifka’s offspring will inherit the enemies gates (Fox)
o   Gen 26: 4 – seed many, but  “inherit” is missing.   God “assigns” and “makes”.  Isaac seems the least active of the group.
o   Gen 28:4 – Jacob will “inherit the land” (Fox)
·         They are both extreme examples of hospitality – note how Abraham treats the angels and note how Rebekah at the well attends to the servants needs, even doing the arduous work of running up and down hills to water the camels
·         They both make the voyage from Mesopotamia to Canaan, in fact Abraham insists upon Rebekah making the same voyage
We looked at the theme of Rebekah the trickster, manipulating behind the scenes on behalf of her favorite.
·         Gen 25: 22-23  Rifka told about two separate peoples in her womb and older will serve younger.  Isaac not told.
·         Gen 26:3-5  God will fulfill oath to Abraham through Isaac – because Abraham kept covenant
·         Gen 24:24 – God will bless Isaac and offspring – God does not reveal to Isaac that it will be Jacob
·         Gen 26:34 – Esau spurns birthright.  Jacob “tricks’ him
·         Gen 27:5 – Rebekah overhears and intervenes to fulfill that older will serve younger
·         We noted that it’s unclear if Isaac know he was being duped
o   Gen 27:19 “I am Esau”
o   Gen 27: 24 “Are you really my son Esau?”
·         Gen 27:28-29 – The blessing
·         Gen 27:35 – “Your brother came with guile” – no suspicion on Rifka
·         Gen 27:41-46 – Rebekah wants to send son away for his safety but tricks Isaac by saying it is because of the Hittite woman and tricks Jacob by saying it is for his safety
·         Gen 35:8 – Deborah, Rebekah’s nurse dies.  We never hear of Rebekah’s death.  She has done her work and disappeared from the scene.
Some things we noted in discussion
·         Abraham seems to play no active role in ensuring that Sarah bears a child.
·         Isaac plays a minor role in determining who will carry his inheritance – Rifka does the heavy lifting.
·         As important as Rifka is in the text, seeming to bear the succession from Abraham and Sarah thru her to Jacob, skipping Isaac, yet by the time we get to Moses, Moses refers only to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.  Why have the matriarchs disappeared already?  Miriam is there, but she plays a different role – for instance has no children.  Is it related to the time of Exodus being a time when the priestly function comes to the fore, in which women could not intervene.

Lots Daughters; Ezra and Nehemiah

Posted on by

Here are a few points from our class on February 7, 2008. 
I owe thanks to the works that I am currently studying, including Women’s Bible commentary by Carol Newsom and Sharon Ringe and Women of the Bible and In the Wake of the Goddesses, both by Tikva Frymer Kensky.  My teachers at Hebrew college are very helpful, in particular Professor Judith Kates and Rabbi Natan Margalit.
I would recommend that everyone read the Book of Ruth.   We will not get to it for a while, but you may wish to have some knowledge of it as we go along.   It’s quite short.
1          We talked first about filters – how it is not possible to approach the texts objectively, but that we have filters, such as feeling that women in the bible are mistreated, or that the bible is nonsense, or that it’s important to identify with our ancestors, or that it doesn’t matter.  In fact, everything author we read has filters  We identified some of our personal filters.  The key thing is to try and be aware as we study of filters. 
2.         Review of last week:  Note that Lot’s daughters did not use sexual wiles – we rally don’t see that until the book of Judith, definitely written under Greek influence.  The story can support different meanings and it’s good to be able to hold several points of view.   Maybe the story tries to provide a reason why Israelites are at odds with the Moabites, maybe the story supports  the idea of there being a strong feminine guidance of Israel’s destiny.  My hope is that people will not in general go away from class thinking that we have all found “the answer” together.
3.         We studied some of Ezra- Nehemiah in order to see an extreme case of not intermarrying with foreign women.    Ezra takes place around the time when the was Temple rebuilt following the return from the Babylonian Exile (516/515 BCE),  and Nehemiah a bit later when the walls of Jerusalem were restored and rededicated (445/444 BCE).
We looked at most of these texts listed below.  We talked to understand the reasoning behind the prohibition against intermarriage, about whether the prohibition was cultural, religious, economic, racial; whether the resettlement in the land after the exile was perhaps driven by the Persian king wanting to control the land; we considered the prohibition on intermarriage as a possible tactic of a minority trying to establish itself.  It’s not clear if the returned exiles were tying to isolate themselves from Canaanites and Moabites and the like, or from Judahites who had not gone into exile.   We mostly agreed that this was not a polemic against women per se.   For further reading, David Weiss Halivni (Revelation Restored) makes a compelling argument for Ezra as being on a level almost with Moses in restoring the Torah to the Jewish people.
  • Ezra 9-10  Intermarriage prohibition “expel the women and children”  no intermarriage with people of the land– whatever the reason, women were important.  It’s not the women themselves who are bad, but it’s marrying into the foreign culture.  Not much said about taking foreign husbands. 
  • Neh 10:30-40 – pledge includes women 10:29
  • Neh 10:31 we will not give our daughter or take their daughters or buy etc
  • Nehemiah 13:  separate the alien mixture from Israel – no ammonite can enter
  • Nehemiah 13:26  foreign wives caused even King Solomon to sin
4.         We began on background for understanding Ruth 4:11  “May the Lord make the woman who is coming into your house like Rachel and Leah, both of whom built up the House of Israel.”  (spoken to Boaz)
Some things to look for as we begin studying the women – are women portrayed as essentially different from men (like Sumerian/Mesopotamian background), or are texts misogynist (like some Greek and rabbinic texts), or is there a human equality, albeit within an androcentric society?  What is the role of women in building up the House of Israel?   Here is a quote  by Adele Berlin in Reading Ruth  (pg 258) that you may find interesting to wrestle with (accurate, not accurate?).  I did not read it in class.  It’s the perfect type of quote for an essay assignment like “Do you think this is true or not true?  Support your arguments with references to the text.”   “The amazing thing about these stories is that , although lineage is defined through the males, it is the women who take responsibility for the continuity of the family and the guardianship of its lineage.  It is the women, often despite their husbands, who ensure the birth of the next generation and direct the proper line of inheritance.”  
We only looked at a couple of texts about Sarah and will continue next week.  Many people are interested/worried/concerned about Sarah’s treatment of Hagar and why this is part of our Rosh Hashanah service.  For now, we will focus on a only a couple of aspects of Sarah in regards to the part of women in “building up the house of Israel,” and we will study Sarah and Hagar extensively in Elul. 
·         Gen 16:2  Sarai shall be built up thru Hagar – there is a pun on son and build.  Sarai asks to be built up through having a son.  We noted that the text indicates that the heir to the covenant between God and Abram will have to come from Sarai, and that for some reason it will have to be a son of Sarai, not of her handmaid.  This is a topic to be explored more fully next week.
·         Gen 16:10 – Hagar’s offspring are too numerous to count, although they are not granted land as Abraham is.  It is unusual to see so much attention paid to a lineage which is outside the group covenanted with God.

Introduction to Biblical Women Series

Posted on by
Here are a few salient points from our class on Jan 24 2008.   If anyone has questions or comments, whether you  attended or missed please let me know.
Note that after talking to a few folks after class, I have moved the start time to 7:30.
Next class will be Feb 7.  Class schedule is on the second page.

Our focus of study will be the women of Ruth, so that in the month of May we can study the book of Ruth in preparation for Shavuot.   A hoped for outcome of the class will be that those students who wish to will present a teaching at our community Shavuot celebration.   Rabbi Liza is looking forward to presentations on the women of Ruth.   We’ll talk more about this later.  Beth will help with that preparation..

We will try and cleanse our palettes of rabbinic and modern commentary so that we can come at the biblical text with fresh eyes.

Penina distributed a biblical family tree and we discussed it.  This family tree will remain a useful tool as we continue our studies.  Later, in Deuteronomy, the men heed a council – here the patriarch reigns supreme.  Abraham kicks out all his kids but Isaac.  In Deut, a man is not allowed to favor any son over the first born.  When individual patriarchs are supreme, often the women can have considerable influence.   When society is tightly bound with legal hierarchies, women are not so able to be effectual.

Our first class focused on the branch from Lot, leading through the Moabites to Ruth.   When we study Ruth we will want to have some understanding of the meaning of Ruth as a Moabitess. 

We looked at the following texts or briefly went over the content
  • Gen 13: 1-13:  Abraham and Lot separate.  Lot chooses Sodom, which appears to him to be the best land.  In this section it is already mentioned that Sodom is wicked.   Is there a hint that Lot is making bad choices?
  • 14:12:  War on Sodom and Lot is captured
  • 14:16  Abram rescues Lot
  • 18:16  Lord will destroy Sodom
  • 19:8:  Lot tells his townspeople “You may do what you please with my daughters.”  Lot is perhaps not such a good guy?
  • 19:23 and ff  Sulfurous fire on Sodom and Gomorrah.  Sodom is destroyed, but Lot escapes to a cave the hills with his two daughters.  They must be very young.  It’s possible that Lot and his daughters dwell in the cave for some time before the daughters lie with their father.
  • Gen 19:30-38:  the story of Lot’s daughters.  If you did not attend class, read this verse in particular.
    • What causes the daughters to lie with their father?   Are they wicked, are they trapped in societal demands that they be mothers, are they trying to preserve society?   Do they have agency or are they helpless?   It does not seem that their mind is on their own pleasure.
    • Is it possible Lot would not have recognized his own daughters?   How could he have produced seed if he was really drunk?   This is in fact known type of phenomena in mythology and other religions.
    • Do we see men in the bible being tricky?  Maybe not – they generally have the power and don’t need to be tricky.
    • Is this a story a woman would have told, or a man?   
    • Is the story actually an attempt to fill in history, i.e. to explain why the Israelites disparage the Moabites and Ammonites?
  • Deut 2:9-11, 18-23: God gave children of Lot their own land, never calling for extermination., but they must be separate, both Moabites and Ammonites.
  • Deut 2:29 – it appears the Moabites did aid the Israelites
  • Deut 23:4-7  No Moabite or Ammonite will be admitted to congregation of the Lord because they  did not offer water to Israel during desert wanderings and hired Balaam to curse.   We noted that this passage is preceded by rules about members and men not lying with their fathers’ wives.   Does this tie the injunction against Moabites to the incest of Lot and his daughters?  Not clear.
  • Num 25  The people profaned themselves by whoring with Moabite women who caused the Israelites to worship Baal-peor.  (Phineas spears a Midianite woman).   Is this a man’s or a woman’s story?  Note that there is some conflation of Midianite and Moabite, which we did not try to sort out.  We noted that is it the Israelites who die, not the Moabite or Midianite women, except for one.