Map of life expectancy at birth from Global Education Project.

Sunday, March 24, 2019

Sunday Sermonette: Matters of great portent that don't matter

A central concern of Genesis, as we have seen, is tracing the line of descent of the people who become the Jews. Who's in and who's out, as determined in large part by actions of the family patriarchs. When Isaac is deceived into blessing Jacob rather than Esau, Jacob becomes the ancestor of the Jews.

So now Genesis 48 has a parallel story about Ephraim and Manasseh. It's not quite as portentous -- they're both still Jews, but one gets a bigger share of the inheritance. Okay, but why is this story important? It turns out that by the time it is written, in the 6th century BCE, both of their tribes have long since disappeared. Indeed, all of this concern with the sons of Jacob and the 12 tribes is hard to explain. As we go along in later books, the listing of the tribes actually varies somewhat but ultimately there are only two. The question of the lost tribes, and whether they ever existed, is vexed. But the point of it all escapes me.

Some time later Joseph was told, “Your father is ill.” So he took his two sons Manasseh and Ephraim along with him. When Jacob was told, “Your son Joseph has come to you,” Israel rallied his strength and sat up on the bed.
Again his name shifts back and forth at random.

Jacob said to Joseph, “God Almighty[a] appeared to me at Luz in the land of Canaan, and there he blessed me and said to me, ‘I am going to make you fruitful and increase your numbers. I will make you a community of peoples, and I will give this land as an everlasting possession to your descendants after you.’
“Now then, your two sons born to you in Egypt before I came to you here will be reckoned as mine; Ephraim and Manasseh will be mine, just as Reuben and Simeon are mine. Any children born to you after them will be yours; in the territory they inherit they will be reckoned under the names of their brothers. As I was returning from Paddan,[b] to my sorrow Rachel died in the land of Canaan while we were still on the way, a little distance from Ephrath. So I buried her there beside the road to Ephrath” (that is, Bethlehem).
This seems a digression but okay, Jacob is on is deathbed so he is rambling.  By adopting Joseph's sons, Jacob raises the status of Joseph in the patriarchy, as Joseph is not Jacob's firstborn. That seems to be the point of this.
When Israel saw the sons of Joseph, he asked, “Who are these?”
“They are the sons God has given me here,” Joseph said to his father.
Then Israel said, “Bring them to me so I may bless them.”
10 Now Israel’s eyes were failing because of old age, and he could hardly see. So Joseph brought his sons close to him, and his father kissed them and embraced them.
11 Israel said to Joseph, “I never expected to see your face again, and now God has allowed me to see your children too.”
12 Then Joseph removed them from Israel’s knees and bowed down with his face to the ground. 13 And Joseph took both of them, Ephraim on his right toward Israel’s left hand and Manasseh on his left toward Israel’s right hand, and brought them close to him. 14 But Israel reached out his right hand and put it on Ephraim’s head, though he was the younger, and crossing his arms, he put his left hand on Manasseh’s head, even though Manasseh was the firstborn.
15 Then he blessed Joseph and said,
“May the God before whom my fathers
    Abraham and Isaac walked faithfully,
the God who has been my shepherd
    all my life to this day,
16 the Angel who has delivered me from all harm
    —may he bless these boys.
May they be called by my name
    and the names of my fathers Abraham and Isaac,
and may they increase greatly
    on the earth.”
17 When Joseph saw his father placing his right hand on Ephraim’s head he was displeased; so he took hold of his father’s hand to move it from Ephraim’s head to Manasseh’s head. 18 Joseph said to him, “No, my father, this one is the firstborn; put your right hand on his head.”
19 But his father refused and said, “I know, my son, I know. He too will become a people, and he too will become great. Nevertheless, his younger brother will be greater than he, and his descendants will become a group of nations.” 20 He blessed them that day and said,
“In your[c] name will Israel pronounce this blessing:
    ‘May God make you like Ephraim and Manasseh.’”
So he put Ephraim ahead of Manasseh.
21 Then Israel said to Joseph, “I am about to die, but God will be with you[d] and take you[e] back to the land of your[f] fathers. 22 And to you I give one more ridge of land[g] than to your brothers, the ridge I took from the Amorites with my sword and my bow.”
Well actually no. As you may recall, Jacob's sons Simeon and Levi avenged the rape of their sister Dinah by massacring the men of Shechem and enslaving their women and children. Jacob was against it. And again, why does it matter whether Ephraim or Manasseh are foremost? It has no consequence at any time in the story to come. I will say that in my background reading for this post it seems to puzzle some of the rabbis as well.

Footnotes:

  1. Genesis 48:3 Hebrew El-Shaddai
  2. Genesis 48:7 That is, Northwest Mesopotamia
  3. Genesis 48:20 The Hebrew is singular.
  4. Genesis 48:21 The Hebrew is plural.
  5. Genesis 48:21 The Hebrew is plural.
  6. Genesis 48:21 The Hebrew is plural.
  7. Genesis 48:22 The Hebrew for ridge of land is identical with the place name Shechem

2 comments:

Mark P said...

It does make you wonder just what was going on with these stories. Maybe there are lost portions of the story where these events make some kind of difference. Maybe when they wrote down the stories some portions were already lost, and the writers realized it, but were afraid to leave anything out. Kind of like all the crap I save in my basement thinking I might need it, but never do.

Don Quixote said...

So much inconsistency. And yet, even if we pick it apart, the stories and events portrayed are a hell of a lot less crazy than the world we're living in now.