On the Three Patriarchs in Genesis: A Comparison

Introduction

It is in the book of Genesis that a Biblical refrain first occurs: “Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob” (50:24). This refrain shows up repeatedly in each of the books of the Pentateuch (especially concentrated in Exodus and Deuteronomy), in the Former Prophets (2 Kings 13:23), in the Latter Prophets (Jeremiah 33:26), as well as repeatedly in the Synoptic Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles. Its strategic placement both at the end of Genesis and at the end of the entire Pentateuch (Deuteronomy 34:4) gives the impression that the separate narratives of these three patriarchs can really be viewed as a single narrative from two perspectives: 1) the earth promised to them and 2) the Law that God requires to be obeyed on that earth (Tarazi 123-4). Besides these two themes, there is another important theme that recurs in all three narratives: the struggle to secure progeny. One might say that the patriarchal narratives are a case study in three different ways of relating to promised earth, God’s will, and difficulties in procreation. This post will compare and contrast Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob from four perspectives: 1) how his narrative fits in the overall toledot structure of Genesis, and then how he responded to 2) promised earth, 3) God’s will, and 4) challenges in procreation. Unless otherwise indicated, all Biblical quotations will be from the Jerusalem Bible translation.

Toledot Structure

The book of Genesis is structured as a series of stories called toledot, beginning with the toledot of the heavens and the earth (Genesis 2:4) and ending with the toledot of Jacob (37:2). In Genesis toledot has the technical meaning of “the coming about of something” (Tarazi 29). One of the striking things about the usage of toledot in Genesis is that the first mention of a person is always in the toledot of his progenitor (27), implying that a person’s fruitfulness determines his value (28). In the patriarchal narratives, we find something very interesting: 1) Abraham does not have his own toledot; rather, he is merely a sub-character in the toledot of his father Terah (Genesis 11:27-25:11), which also includes part of Isaac’s narrative. 2) Jacob has his own toledot (37:2-50:26), but the content is mainly Joseph’s narrative, who does not have a toledot himself. And 3) Isaac has his own toledot (25:19-35:29), which includes a small portion of his own narrative but mainly is Jacob’s narrative. This unexpected structure begs the question: What was the author of Genesis trying to communicate about Abraham and Joseph through the structure?

Drawing on Paul’s reading of Genesis in the epistle to the Galatians, we see that the key function of Abraham in the narratives is that of promise. In other words, he does not have an independent existence; instead, he is functionally merely the link to Isaac, in whom the promise made to Abraham is fulfilled (Tarazi 131-2). Furthermore, the author of Genesis does not even represent Abraham as being party to Isaac’s conception: “Yahweh dealt kindly with Sarah as he had said, and did what he had promised her. So Sarah conceived and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the time God had promised” (21:1-2). This is in contrast to Ishmael’s conception where it is said of Abraham that “He went to Hagar and she conceived” (16:4). Paul makes the argument even more explicit: “The child of the slave girl was born in the ordinary way; the child of the free woman was born as the result of a promise” (Galatians 4:23, emphasis mine). Thus in one sense, Abraham is not fruitful, thus disqualifying him from having his own toledot. At the same, this frees him to function fully as a link to Isaac, and later in Paul as the virtual father of all who believe (Romans 4:11).

Something similar happens with Joseph, though for a different reason. Like Abraham, he does not have his own toledot. After Jacob adopts Joseph’s sons Ephraim and Manasseh, Joseph is functionally left without progeny (Genesis 48:3-5), thus again disqualifying him from having a toledot. But like Abraham, Joseph’s lack of a toledot does not leave him without a legacy. Rather, Joseph uniquely among Jacob’s sons is buried in the promised earth of Canaan (Joshua 24:32). Thus, we can say that the lack of toledot for Abraham and Joseph communicates that the continuation of a person depends not upon human begetting but upon God’s intervention (Tarazi 179).

Promised Earth

God make promises about the earth of Canaan to each of Abraham (Genesis 12:1-3), Isaac (26:1-6), and Jacob (28:13-15), but the degree to which they experience these promises in their lifetimes differs. Tarazi makes this observation: “Abraham is born outside the earth of Canaan and dies in it. Conversely, Jacob is born in Canaan but dies outside it, in Egypt. Isaac is born in the earth of Canaan, never leaves it, and dies in it. It is then this Isaac in whom God’s will is realized and only in him” (124). Let’s unpack in turn each of the patriarch’s interaction with the earth of Canaan.

Abraham is born in Ur of the Chaldeans (Genesis 11:28), starts out with his father Terah toward Canaan, but makes a layover of indefinite length in Haran (11:31). In Haran Abraham is invited by God to leave his familiar earth and go to Canaan to inherit new earth (12:1-4). Once in Canaan, Abraham first camps in Shechem, then Bethel, and then in the Negeb (12:6-9). At this point, Abraham is faced with a test of trusting God’s provision in the face of famine (12:10-20). Abraham’s moving to Egypt demonstrates that he has not yet learned that “the solution to famine for bread is to listen to God’s will.” His lack of trust is further illustrated by his lying about his wife’s identity. If God had not personally intervened and inflicted plagues on Pharaoh to rescue Sarai, she could not have become the ancestress of Israel (Tarazi 137-8). After a life of more transience, it is only at the end his life that he can actually lay claim to some earth: He purchases a field near Mamre, where he buries his wife (Genesis 23:17-20) and later is himself buried (25:9-10).

Jacob is born in Canaan, growing up in Beer-sheba. After stealing his brother Esau’s birthright (25:29-34) and blessing (27:1-40), he flees to Haran to escape being killed by Esau, with his first stop on the way there in Bethel, both of which were stopping places on Abraham’s journey (28:10-22). After living in exile in Haran for decades (chapters 29-30), he flees from his father-in-law with his wives and children (chapter 31) and returns to Canaan. He purchases a plot of earth near Shechem (33:18-20), which again was one of Abraham’s dwelling places. Later, just like Abraham, a famine tests his resolve to trust God’s provision by persevering in the earth of promise. Not having learned from Abraham’s example that “man lives on everything that comes from the mouth of Yahweh” (Deuteronomy 8:3), Jacob and his sons also fail this test. They move to Egypt, where Jacob dies, and where his descendants live in exile for the next 430 years until again God personally intervenes by inflicting plagues on Pharaoh to rescue them (Exodus 12:40).

Isaac’s experience of the earth of Canaan follows a very different trajectory. Like Jacob, he is born in Canaan and acquires a wife from Haran. Unlike Jacob, however, the tension between Isaac and his brother Ishmael never drives Isaac out of Canaan, and his bride comes to him. Moreover, like Abraham, Isaac faces famine, but God intervenes and specifically prevents him from going to Egypt (Genesis 26:2-3). As Tarazi summarizes: “Isaac enjoyed fully what Abraham hoped for and what Jacob never fully enjoyed” (129). In contrast, there are many parallels between Abraham and Jacob with respect to their sojourns. Not only is Jacob exiled to Haran and Egypt, but after Jerusalem falls to the Babylonians in 587 BC, his descendants actually end up on the earth of the Chaldeans, where Abraham began. One might say that Jacob really follows in the footsteps of his ancestor Abraham (130).

Obedience to God’s Will

Having looked at the patriarchs’ interactions with the promised earth of Canaan, we now turn to their response to God’s will. From the beginning of Genesis, but especially since the story of Cain, there is one overarching expression of God will, namely, that “the earth of promise, and thus any earth, is not a possession, but rather a gift from God to be enjoyed by all its dwellers”--whether human, flora, or fauna (Tarazi 153). Psalm 24:1 succinctly expresses it like this: “To Yahweh belong earth and all it holds, the world and all who live in it.” In the Law, this will of God finds expression not just in the loving of the neighbors belonging to our clan (Leviticus 19:16-18), but even more emphatically in philoxenic command: “You must not oppress the stranger; you know how a stranger feels, for you lived as strangers in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 23:9). The Law also makes one’s ability to continue on the earth where one dwells a function of obedience to God’s will. The author of Genesis includes stories to grade each patriarch on whether he strives for peace with all people (Hebrews 12:14).

Considering that he never leaves the earth of Canaan, Isaac not surprisingly has a near perfect scorecard. There are two episodes of potential conflict. He and his half-brother Ishmael inherit the rupture that occurred between Sarah and Hagar, but they do not seem to exacerbate it. Rather, at the passing of their mutual father, the two sons come together and bury Abraham (Genesis 25:9). The second episode is when Isaac shares earth with Abimelech, the Philistine king at Gerar, in obedience to God’s command not to go to Egypt to escape famine. The Philistines envy Isaac’s prosperity, and pick fights over the rights to use wells. In each case, Isaac surrenders the well, moves further away, and digs another (26:1-25). Isaac demonstrates that it is better to “dwell as a sojourner (that is, without possessing the land) in the location assigned by God’s word (of command) and share it with the presumed enemy, rather than end up dying in slavery in a seemingly ‘friendly’ land of plenty” (Tarazi 161). Eventually, Isaac and Abimelech swear a covenant of peace between their two peoples, and on the very same day Isaac’s servants dig a new undisputed well and find more water (Genesis 26:26-33). Isaac’s life shows that it is “obedience to God’s will and sharing his earth with all others that secures his blessings” (Tarazi 162).

Abraham also has an excellent scorecard in this respect. He peacefully settles a land dispute with Lot by conceding the better-irrigated land (Genesis 13:1-18). He liberates the captives of Sodom and their possessions and refuses to take compensation for his services (14:21-24). Tarazi observes that by so doing Abraham acknowledges that his victory over the enemy is “as much a gift from God as is the earth of Canaan which Abram had to share with Lot the Sodomite” (141). Abraham hospitably entertains the three strangers who abruptly show up at his tent on their way to destroy Sodom (Genesis 18:1-15). Lastly, the enduring effect of Abraham’s positive example of hospitality is evident in that Lot hospitably entertains and protects the two angels in Sodom (19:1-29), despite his living long-term with citizens infamous for their inhospitality (Ezekiel 16:49 and Wisdom of Solomon 19:13-17).

Jacob, on the other hand, fails on almost all accounts. He takes advantage of Esau in a weakened condition by stealing his birthright (25:29-34). He manipulates his mother and takes advantage of his father’s blindness to steal Esau’s blessing (27:1-40). He shows favoritism to his wife Rachel over his wife Leah (29:30-31). He tries to steal Laban’s better flock (30:25-43). Right after reconciling with Esau, Jacob implies that he will join Esau in Seir but then directly heads to Succoth (33:14-17). And then the enduring effect of Jacob’s negative example of inhospitality is evident in his sons’ behavior. First, Simeon and Levi wipe out the citizens of Shechem using circumcision, the sign of God’s covenant, as a subterfuge (34:25-31). And secondly, his son Joseph is sold into slavery in Egypt by his other brothers (37:12-36).

As can be seen, Abraham and Isaac learn the lesson that “the earth granted to Israel is not a possession; it is a trust. It is another ground and a garden for man to live on, sharing it with all other beings, human and animal alike” (Tarazi 128). As a result, they are allowed to die in Canaan. Jacob, on the other hand, fails to learn this lesson and models that lack of learning for his sons to imitate. As a result, none of them dies in the earth of Canaan.

Challenges to Secure Progeny

The last perspective from which to evaluate the three patriarchs is the challenges they have to secure progeny and how they respond to these challenges. The fathers of both Isaac (Genesis 24:1-9) and Jacob (28:1-5) express their desire that their sons not marry a Canaanite women but rather take a wife from among Abraham’s kinfolk. Fulfilling this request would require taking an extended journey to Haran to secure a wife. Representing the true heir of the promise, Isaac himself does not need to leave Canaan; rather, his father’s servant goes and fetches a bride for him (chapter 24). Jacob on the other hand, having made himself loathsome to his brother Esau, has to flee for his life to Haran and live in exile there for decades, all the while slaving away for the right to marry the bride of his choice and being taken advantage of by his relative Laban (29:15-30:43).

The wives of all three of the patriarchs have difficulties conceiving. Isaac, again as the exemplar, “prayed to Yahweh on behalf of his wife, for she was barren. Yahweh heard his prayer, and his wife Rebekah conceived” (25:21). Later, when there is some sort of complication in the pregnancy, Rebekah follows her husband’s example and “went to consult Yahweh” (25:22). In a sense, Isaac executes textbook responses to the challenges to secure progeny, and God blesses him. This is in contrast to Abraham and Jacob, both of whom resort to polygamy to secure progeny in the face of barrenness, and both of whom suffer extensively because of the jealousy incited by having rival wives. So we see that Isaac secures a wife easily, overcomes barrenness easily, and remains monogamous; Abraham secures a wife easily, falters in his faith in God’s promise, and complicates his life to a degree by taking one extra wife in order to overcome barrenness; Jacob undergoes an endless trek and veritable slavery to acquire a wife (Tarazi 157), neglects her, and creates a highly dysfunctional family because of the mutual procreative competition of three more rival wives.

Conclusion

Analyzing the lives of the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is a rewarding exercise. Contrary to common assumptions, the details of the narratives are not just random but are chosen by the author of Genesis to communicate specific points. For example, including doublets (e.g., sojourning in Gerar nearby Abimelech) is not an editorial oversight; rather, the author is trying to make specific points about the patriarchs by holding some details constant and varying others. Using techniques like this as well as the overall toledot structure, the author of Genesis has highlighted Isaac as the heir of the promised earth, to which Abraham could only look forward and Jacob could only look back. Furthermore, we have seen that the right to continue living on our allotted earth is a function of obeying God’s will that we treat our co-inhabitants with respect and dignity. Lastly, we have seen that failing to trust God’s promises and failing to strive for peace with our neighbors lead to both complications and needless suffering in our lives. The whole patriarchal narrative adds new dimension to the Psalm that begins the eighteenth kathisma:

Too long have I lived
among people who hate peace,
who, when I propose peace,
are all for war (Psalm 120:6-7)

Works Cited

The Jerusalem Bible. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1968.
Tarazi, Paul Nadim. Genesis: A Commentary. St. Paul, MN: OCABS, 2009.