Genesis 1

Gen 1.1-2.4a come from P (the Priestly source).

1.1 — Traditionally translated ‘In the beginning God created’. Some more recent translations have ‘In the beginning when God created’. Now critically argued to be ‘When God began to create’. These alternative translations impose different meanings on the when and what of creation. The third, probably the most accurate, indicates that the initial state of ‘the earth’ was ‘desolate and waste’ before God ‘began to create’, rather than indicating it was created from nothing as a blank slate. There is no distinction in Hebrew between ‘heaven’ (as an exclusively immaterial dimension invisible to mortals) and ‘sky’ (as the volume of air all above the surface of the land), so the latter is to be preferred to properly convey the cosmology of the authors.

1.2 — It was a ‘wind from God’ blowing over the primordial waters of chaos.

1.3 —

1.6 —

1.11 — The emphasis on ‘kinds’ is a small feature primarily found in P (Gen 6.20; 7.14; Lev 11.14-29), as well as a prophet closely associated with Priestly tradition (Ezek 47.10).

1.14 — The term ‘signs’ commonly refers to an act or symbol which communicates a message.

1.16 — greater light and lesser light

1.21 — The Hebrew (התנינם הגדלים, htnynm hgdlym) traditionally interpreted as ‘whales’ or ‘great sea creatures’ (as opposed to fish and other comparatively smaller animals). In other texts, translated as ‘snake’, ‘serpent’, or ‘dragon’. The third meaning is used of Leviathan, ‘the dragon that is in the sea’ (Isa 27.1; cf. Psa 74.13-14), Hebrew cognate of Ugaritic Lotan, a dragon personifying, to a degree, the primordial waters of chaos and enemy of the storm god (Baal Hadad in Ugaritic myth, Yhwh in biblical myth). This is the most likely meaning in Gen 1, reducing Leviathan from a ‘mythical’ monster to a mere ‘kind’ of animal created by God.

1.24 — Traditionally ‘cattle’, inferred as domesticated animals. Hebrew singular here, but the plural is ‘behemoth’, given as a name to a land equivalent of Leviathan (Job 40.15; 41.1). The individualized monsters Behemoth and Leviathan were identified in Second Temple apocalyptic tradition as created by God at the beginning of the world for eschatological purposes (e.g. 4 Ezra 6.49-52; 2 Baruk 29.3-4).

1.26 — The authors were monolatrists, but they were not monotheists. The first person plural (us, our) refers to the ‘divine council’, the pantheon of the gods. The terms ‘image’ and ‘likeness’ elsewhere refer to the appearance or shape of a thing, sometimes as an analogy, but never as an abstract, immaterial, invisible similitude. Humans were created to physically resemble God.

2.2 — P’s creation story functions in part as an etiology for the Sabbath, the weekly cessation of work. The story also was heavily inspired by Enuma Elish, in which divine rest is associated with the creation of the temple/house for the ruling god (cf. Psa 132.7-9), which may suggest humans, being the ‘image’ of God, function as his idol within his temple (i.e. the cosmos as a whole; cf. Psa 103.19; Isa 66.1).

4.25-26 —

Genesis 5

The genealogical table in Gen 5 features language found in P’s creation myth but absent from the stories of Adam and Cain: create (ברא, brʾ, Gen 1.1, 21, 27; 2.3, 4), likeness (דמות, dmwt, 1.26), image (צלם, ṡlm, 1.26, 27), history/descent (תולדה, twldh, 2.4a). This genealogy comes from P. A precision for the passage of time is found throughout P, even well beyond Gen 1-11, but the numbers provided differ at some points between the three major versions of Genesis (Masoretic Hebrew, Greek, and Samaritan). The story of the flood was a comparatively late decision in the compilation of the non-P and P sources to create the book of Genesis. That story existed independently in both the non-P and P traditions, such that its inclusion disrupts the thematic flow of the non-P narrative triptych as well as the chronology of P’s genealogy in Gen 5. In the latter case, this resulted in three patriarchs surviving the flood (Yared, Methushelah, Lamech). The differences in the three major versions of Genesis came about by various scribes recognizing this problem and employing different text-altering solutions.

5.3 — P’s genealogy begins where the non-P story of Cain concluded, with the birth of Adam’s son Seth. The genealogy which follows is thus Seth’s lineage, not Cain’s.

5.5 — The incredible lifespans of the patriarchs suddenly plummets after the flood. This has led to natural comparisons with ancient documents such as the Sumerian King List, which similarly features fantastically enormous lifespans before a global flood, followed by a steady decrease in lifespans afterward.

5.9 — Though traditionally translated ‘Kenan’, the Hebrew spelling is just one consonant longer than ‘Cain’. At first glance, this is an odd coincidence, but it becomes a serious problem as the genealogy continues. All of Seth’s descendants have names uncannily similar or identical to those of Cain’s descendants, in approximately the same order: (1) Cain (קין, qyn) / Kenan (קינן, qynn); (2) Enoch / Enoch (חנוך, ḥnwk); (3) Irad (עירד, ʿyrd) / Yared (ירד, yrd); (4) Mehuyael (מחויאל, mḥwyʾl) / Mahalalel (מהללאל, mhllʾl); (5) Methushael (מתושאל, mtwšʾl) / Methushelah (מתושלח, mtwšlḥ); (6) Lamech / Lamech (למך, lmk). The genealogy in P was either based directly on Cain’s lineage in Gen 4, or both were derived from the same pre-textual source.

5.21-24 — The mysterious disappearance of Enoch is never explained in Genesis, but his apparent importance is similar to his counterpart in Gen 4, connected to the building of the world’s first city. The earliest extant document to elaborate on Enoch being ‘taken’ by God is the book 1 Enoch, which became immensely influential in late Second Temple Judaism. Similar to Genesis itself, the creation of 1 Enoch was a complex process which spanned several centuries, compiling various documents, fragments, and supplementary material into a single whole. Its oldest material (called the Book of Luminaries), surveying a proper calendar and the movement of the sun, moon, and stars, probably began its evolution in the late fourth century BCE. The first section to deal with Enoch himself (the Book of the Watchers) is a transparent expansion on passages in the Torah (including Gen 5.21-24), revealing that Enoch was ‘taken’ to be a witness of divine mysteries and to eventually reside in heaven. The Book of the Watchers, when isolated from the larger 1 Enoch, was itself the product of a compilation of independent materials concerning related topics. The Book of the Watchers as it exists may have been written in the late third century BCE, but the traditions it built from developed over the previous century or two. Enoch’s placement as seventh in the list, and his association with a solar calendar (i.e. his lifespan of 365 days, and the incorporation of astrological concerns in 1 Enoch) have drawn comparisons to Enmendurana, who was seventh in the Sumerian King List, who ruled from Sippar (a central worship site for the sun god), and who was taken to heaven to learn divine mysteries. Altogether, the traditions in 1 Enoch regarding the titular patriarch may have developed as early as when Genesis was being compiled by its editors in the early to mid sixth century BCE, or even before.

5.28-31 — The paragraph concerning Seth’s descendant Lamech breaks the formula which was followed without deviation by all the previous patriarchs. The text as it currently stands has a passage from the non-P triptych inserted, providing a folk etymology for Noah’s name, just as had been done for Eve, Cain, and Seth. It is widely agreed that P’s genealogy here would have simply followed the previous formula (i.e. verb 28 ending with ‘he became the father of Noah’, immediately followed by verse 30). What disagreement there is about this passage is where the non-P text belongs. Because P’s genealogy mirrors the lineage of Cain, it has commonly been assumed that the lists in Gen 4 and Gen 5 both concluded at the same point, alternate versions of Lamech becoming the father of Noah. This would mean that Gen 5.28b-29 originally followed directly after Gen 4.24 in the non-P source, while Gen 4.25-26 was an addition by the editor who combined the P and non-P documents, who also relocated Noah’s birth in Gen 5.28b-29 so that he was no longer the son of Cain’s descendant Lamech. A few interpreters have come to a different conclusion, that the non-P triptych of Adam-Cain-Noah always contained Gen 4.25-26, which immediately led into Gen 5.28b-29. The original text would have comprised something to the effect of: ‘To Seth also a son was born, and he named him Enosh. At that time people began to invoke the name of Yhwh. And to Enosh a son was born, and he named him Noah’, etc. The editor, then, was not specifically concerned with detaching Noah from Cain’s lineage, but with placing him at the ‘right moment’ in history: in Gen 5, Noah is the tenth generation from Adam, a solid, round number in biblical numerology.

Genesis 6

Although Noah is the third major character in the original non-P material, the narrative triptych of Adam-Cain-Noah did not originally include any flood story. Instead, Gen 5.29 led directly into Gen 8.20. The non-P flood story was added at a later time to the triptych.

6.1-2 — Traditionally translated ‘sons of God’, but the Hebrew text uses the definite article, so that ‘sons of the gods’ is probably the more accurate translation. In either case, similar terminology is used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible and in Ugaritic texts to designate the pantheon. These are gods, though later scribes and theologians were uncomfortable with such a notion, changing the text to say ‘angels’ or interpreting ‘sons of God’ to mean saintly humans. The book 1 Enoch elaborated on the opening four verses of Gen 6, identifying several angels by name, outlining the extent of their rogue actions, and prophesying their eventual punishment by God.

6.3 — Yhwh’s statement is riddled with ambiguities and translation difficulties. The meaning of the verb in the first sentence is uncertain. Older translations favor ‘strive’, in the sense of God’s rule/judgment ‘prevailing’. Recent translations favor ‘abide’, that God is somehow ‘dwelling’ among humans. A case may be made that the verb means ‘strong’, that God’s presence or influence is waining. There is also the matter of translating the subject noun (רוח, rwḥ). This has invariably been translated ‘spirit’, but the same word means ‘breath’ or ‘wind’. Gen 1.2 was most commonly translated ‘the spirit of God’, but ‘a wind from God’ is now widely accepted. Yhwh’s sentiment in Gen 6.3 may be that the breath he breathed into the first man (cf. Gen 2.7, using the word נשמה, nšmh, often a synonym of rwḥ) has begun to dwindle. There is also the question of whether Yhwh’s declaration that the human lifespan is limited to one hundred twenty years is merely an observation of the natural consequence of his spirit/breath dwindling in strength, or if he is imposing some form of punishment. The latter seems to be correct, with this being the second occasion Yhwh intervenes directly against humanity to prevent them from achieving immortality (i.e. children born with divine parentage), after Gen 3.22. Despite the perception that Yhwh’s limitation of the human lifespan is found between the two halves of the P genealogy, with humans living for centuries in the first half (Gen 5), but collapsing down to mere decades in the second half (Gen 11), this is coicidental. The reduction of lifespans in P’s genealogy happens as a consequence of the flood, and the reduction happens gradually, as seen in the Sumerian King List.

6.4 — The gods produce children through human women, and their children become a tribe called the Nephilim (נפלים, nplym). The literal meaning of this Hebrew word is widely agreed to be ‘fallen ones’, but ancient Greek translations chosen γιγαντες, ‘giants’, affecting most recent translations. The Nephilim are called ‘mighty ones’ (גברים, gbrym) from the ancient world. Despite Yhwh’s ban against human immortality, the demigod Nephilim achieve it in a way, by making an eternal ‘name’ (שם, šm) for themselves. The extant form of this little story has been edited. While it fits within the themes of the early non-P material, and favors the same vocabulary, it clearly functions as an etiology for the warrior ‘giants’ found in other biblical texts unknown to the ‘original’ storyteller of the triptych (cf. Num 13.33; Deut 2.10-11, 20-21; 3.11, 13; 9.2; Josh 12.4; 13.12; 15.8; 2 Sam 5.18, 22; 21.15-22; Amos 2.9). In this web of traditions, the Nephilim seem to be essentially identical to the Rephaim, a class of dead heroes and rulers (cf. Isa 14.9; 26.14, 19; Psa 88.10; Job 26.5). The term Nephilim, ‘fallen ones’, would thus be apt (cf. Ezek 32.27, mentioning ‘mighty ones’ (גבורים, gbwrym), who are now ‘fallen’ (נפלים, nplym), and in the underworld).

6.5-7 — The flood story in non-P, beginning in this passage, is a later addition. It interrupts non-P’s themes (curse on the ground, prevention of apotheosis), and Yhwh killing all life in the world inexplicably fails to extinguish the Nephilim, whose progeny survive well into the monarchic period. Against later theologians, there is no singular ‘fall’ of humanity in Gen 1-11. According to the non-P text, Yhwh gradually realizes that humans are simply prone to ‘wickedness’ and ‘evil’. In effect, he ‘made humanity’ wrong and regrets his decision.

6.8 — The non-P story does not explicitly say that Noah is exempt from the evils of humanity. He simply receives ‘favor’ from Yhwh. Noah as a uniquely just and wise folk hero existed by the exilic period at the earliest (Ezek 14.14, 20), and he was firmly associated with a worldwide flood by the early post-exilic period (Isa 54.9), but when precisely Noah was attached to the flood myth is unclear. P’s flood story is a conscious retelling of the non-P flood story, but the non-P flood was a late addition to wider non-P triptych of Adam-Cain-Noah. It seems to have been influenced by the Mesopotamian flood myths, with Noah replacing the likes of Atrahasis, Utanapishtim, and Ziusudra.

6.9-22 — The flood story in Gen 6-9 cuts back and forth between the non-P and P versions. The P text immediately follows Gen 5.32, and echoes the framework narration of Gen 2.4a (‘These are the histories/descents of the sky and the earth’) and 5.1 (‘This is the story of the history/descent of Adam’). P clarifies that Noah was indeed ‘a just man, blameless’, and that he, like Enoch, ‘walked with God’ (Gen 5.24). P also clarifies the nature of humanity’s corruption: ‘the earth was filled with violence’. The editor who combined the non-P and P stories decided to keep only the P version of the construction of Noah’s boat (called a ‘box’, תבה, tbh). Similar to P’s concern for recording the passage of time in Gen 5, P gives the precise dimensions of Noah’s boat. The storyteller repeats language from P’s creation story (cf. Gen 1.21, 24, 27).

Genesis 7

7.1-4 — The two versions of the flood story frequently contradict in their details. Unlike P, the non-P version clarifies that Noah must bring not just pairs of all animals onto the ark, but must bring ‘seven by seven’ of animals which are ritually pure. (It is unclear whether this means seven of each type of animal, or seven pairs.) What qualifies as ritually pure is not explained. The storyteller assumes the reader’s familiarity with contemporary ritual culture.

7.5-24 — The extant text cuts back and forth between the P and the non-P versions. The non-P story has the seven (pairs?) of pure animals, and time passes in increments of seven days or forty days, with the flood story taking place over about two months. The P version assumes only two of each animal were taken on the ark, and the flood lasts far longer, nearly an entire year.

Genesis 8

8.1-19 — The differences between P and non-P continue to be obvious. The P version has Noah learn that the flood has subsided by sending out a raven from the boat, which continually flies until the earth is dry. In the non-P version, Noah sends a dove out three times: first, the dove finds nowhere to land and returns; second, the dove returns with a leaf taken from a plant growing from the newly exposed ground; third, the dove flies away, demonstrating that it found a place to survive away from the boat. In the combined story, Noah sends the raven first, making the dove entirely redundant.

8.20-22 — This passage is part of the non-P triptych of Adam-Cain-Noah. It was not part of the flood story, but the editor of the non-P text utilized it as an appropriate conclusion to the flood story. This is why the non-P flood specified that ritually pure animals required ‘seven by seven’: if there were only two of these animals on the boat, whole species would go extinct with this sacrifice. Regardless, Gen 8.20-22 originally followed directly after Gen 5.28b-29, which itself followed Gen 4.26. In this earlier form of the non-P text: Adam brought a curse on the ground, Cain worsened the curse, Enosh fathered Noah and declared that he would bring ‘rest’ from the curse, which Noah accomplishes with his sacrifice.

Genesis 9

9.1-17 — The P flood story does not conclude with Noah offering a sacrifice, because the larger P narrative does not feature any sacrifices at all until Moses inaugurates Yhwh’s ritual tent (Exo 40.29). Instead, P’s flood concludes with God ‘establishing’ a covenant with Noah never to destroy the world with a flood a second time. (The storyteller purposely does not say God ‘cut’ a covenant, an act which would include a sacrifice.) Gen 9.13 may be read as an etiology for rainbows, invoked as the symbol of this covenant.

9.18-19 — These sentences may come from P, but they have been heavily edited to account for the combination of the non-P and P texts which make up Gen 1-11.

9.20-27 — After Noah’s sacrifice lifted the curse on the ground in the non-P text, enabling humans to easily work the ground (Gen 8.21), Noah became ‘a man of the ground’. Alongside his contemporaries in Gen 4.20-22, Noah is credited as the progenitor of an entire profession, vineyard-keeping. Unfortunately, Noah learns the danger of alcohol and passes out drunk and naked, where he is discovered by his son Canaan. Canaan humiliates Noah, and Noah retaliates by cursing Canaan to be enslaved by Shem and Japheth. In the original form of the story, Noah’s three sons were Shem, Japheth, and Canaan. The editor has sloppily edited the text to conform with the P narrative, which instead received a tradition in which Noah’s three sons were Shem, Japheth, and Ham. The result is that the extant text draws suspicion because of how unnecessarily it stresses that ‘Ham was the father of Canaan’ multiple times (Gen 9.18, 22), yet, when Ham humiliates his father Noah, Noah curses Ham’s son rather than Ham himself. Further, the editor failed to modify the wording of Noah’s curse, which explicitly identifies Shem and Japheth are the ‘brothers’ of Canaan, not his uncles (Gen 9.25). The episode, which provides an etiology for the subjugation of the Canaanites, brings the Adam-Cain-Noah triptych to its end.

9.28-29 — P’s genealogical table briefly returns.

Genesis 10

The following passage provides the origins for the different nations known to the kingdom of Judah. Like the flood, the editor has spliced together non-P and P versions of this table, along with a small pericope which likely followed Gen 11.9. P’s table of nations developed in the late seventh or early sixth centuries BCE, evident in that most of the locations named are mentioned throughout Ezekiel.

10.1 — P continues its formula for establishing a new textual unit, ‘These are the histories/descents of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth’.

10.2-9 — P’s list of nations descended from Japheth, identified as ‘the coastland peoples’, i.e. nations north and west of Judah, particularly those in Asia (i.e. Türkiye) and along the Mediterranean Sea, and known through Phoenician trade: Gomer (cf. Akkadian Gimirru, i.e. the Cimmerians), Magog (from Akkadian Mat Gugi, ‘land of Gugu’, i.e. Lydia), Madai (Media), Yawan (Ionia), Tubal (Tabalu), Meshech (cf. Akkadian Mušku, i.e. Phrygia), Tiras (possibly Truwisa (i.e. Troy), Thrace, or Teres), Ashkenaz (cf. Akkadian Iškuza, i.e. Scythians), Riphath (ריפת, rypt, probably mispelling דיפת, dypt, preserved in 1 Chr 1.7; possibly from Persian dahyu pati, a title used by Median rulers), Togarmah (Tegarama), Elishah (Alashiya, i.e. Cyprus), Tarshish (Tartessos), Kittim (Kition), Rodanim (רדנים, rdnym, misspelled in the Masoretic text as Dodanim, דדנים, ddnym; Rhodes).

10.6-7 — P’s list of nations descended from Ham, nations south and west of Judah, in Africa and the Arabian peninsula: Cush (northern Sudan), Mizraim (Egypt), Put (cf. Akkadian Puta, i.e. Libya), Canaan (the central land of the biblical narrative, comprising Israel and Judah, along with Phoenicia, the coastland north of Israel), Seba (the Sabaeans, in Africa and Arabia), Havilah (Hawlan), Sabtah (cf. Old South Arabic Shabwat, capital of Ḥaḍramawt in Arabia), Raʿamah (cf. Old South Arabic Ragmatum, capital of Najran in Arabia), Sabteka (probably Shabakat, a city in Ḥaḍramawt), Sheba (a divergent pronunciation of Seba), Dedan (cf. Akkadian Dadanu, a city in Arabia).

10.8a — Cush fathering Nimrod may be an editorial addition.

10.8b-12 — Nimrod, ‘a mighty hunter before Yhwh’, derives from Ninurta, a Mesopotamian god of hunting. Nimrod is called a ‘mighty one’ (גבר, gbr), possibly intending to identify him as one of the Nephilim. Early interpreters made this connection, prompting the Greek version to call Nimrod a ‘giant’ (γιγας). Nimrod establishes the world’s first kingdom, which spans ‘the land of Shinar’ (cognate of Akkadian Šanhar, i.e. Sumer, though the two names are not etymologically related) and Asshur (Assyria; cf. Mic 5.5). Cities within his kingdom include: Babel (Babylon), Erech (Uruk), Akkad, Calneh (Kinalua), Nineveh, Rehoboth-ir (historical location unknown; possibly referring to the ‘broad’ streets of Nineveh), Calah (Kalḫu), ‘the great city’ (applied either to Kalḫu or Resen), and Resen (location unknown; possibly a textual corruption of Dar-Sharrukin, or referring to Assyrian canals near both Nineveh and Kalḫu). The pericope of Nimrod does not fit any of the rest of the Table of Nations. It does not cohere at all to the P version, and though it fits non-P’s literary style, it does not conform to its present context. This has led to the theory Nimrod’s pericope originally followed Gen 11.9 (which comprises the origin of Babylon and must chronologically precede the incorporation of Babylon into Nimrod’s kingdom in Gen 10.10), but was relocated to the Table because it concerned a nation and its cities.

10.13-14 — A fragment of the non-P list of nations. Descended from Mizraim (Egypt) were the Ludim (Lydians, contradicting P’s Magog), Anamim (unclear), Lehabim (Lybians), Naphtuhim (cf. Egyptian pʾtʾḥmw Lower Egypt), Pathrusim (cf. Egyptian pʾtʾrsy, Upper Egypt), Casluhim (unknown), Philistim (Philistines), and Caphtorim (cf. Akkadian Kaptaru, Cretans). The text says the Philistines descended from the Casluhim, but other biblical texts connect the Philistines instead to the Caphtorim (e.g. Amos 9.7; Jer 47.4), which may indicate a scribal error here. Through this connection, the Caphtorim (Cretans) may distantly refer to the Sea Peoples, from which the Philistines settled in southwest Canaan.

10.15-19 — A fragment of the non-P list of nations. The text lists various tribes descended from Canaan, and their approximate locations in the land known to Judah.

10.20 — The conclusion to P’s list of nations descended from Ham, originally following directly after Gen 10.6-7.

10.21 — A fragment of the non-P list of nations. Non-P provides a folk etymology for each of its major characters, but Shem and his son Eber are not as obvious. Noah’s son ‘Shem’ (שם, šm) is introduced to the reader soon after the pericope of the Nephilim, who achieved immortality through their ‘name’ (שם), i.e. fame. Whether the storyteller intended to imply any folk etymology for ‘Eber’ (עבר, ʿbr) is unclear, but the term may ultimately derive from a Mesopotamian term for people who lived beyond (, ) the Euphrates river. Nothing in the narrative This is the only text in Gen 1-11 which specifies any of the birth order of Shem, Japheth, and Ham (or Canaan).

10.1 —