The Non-P Jacob Story (Genesis 25–36) in the Neo-Babylonian Period: Its Composition and Its Theological Meaning

This study will argue that Gen. 28:10–22 was composed in the Neo-Babylonian period from exile in Babylonia, perhaps during Nabonidus’s reign (556–539 BCE). We tentatively argue that the author came from the territory of Benjamin, which had been incorporated into Judah, and perhaps specifically from the city of Bethel. As such, the importance of Bethel was part of his religious heritage. In the context of Babylonian exile, this author encountered the theology of Babylon as the “gate of the god(s)” (see Gen. 28:17) and of Marduk’s temple, Esagila, as the “house whose head is raised” (see Gen. 28:12). In a scribal setting, he also encountered the description of Esagila as the “houses of the great gods” (Enuma Elish V 129; see Gen. 28:17), as well as the topos of a localized heavenly stairway (simmiltu, A Bab 11; Gen. 28:12, סלם). He transferred this language and theology to Bethel in hopes of returning to worship there. At this time, the sanctuary at Bethel was likely in use, although it may have declined significantly (the evidence is inconclusive). If Bethel had significantly declined, Gen. 28:10–22 was composed in hopes of its restoration; if it was thriving or at least functioning, it was composed for its admiration. Either way, the author of Gen. 28:10–22 composed a narrative of Bethel’s founding in order to promote this site as an important religious sanctuary alongside of Jerusalem, whether temporarily or permanently.

This study will further argue that the promise materials in Gen. 28:10–22 cannot be separated from their context; instead, this passage was composed by a single hand. We also examine Genesis 32–33* and show that its individual narratives are unified (excepting Gen. 32:10–13 [Eng. 32:9–12] and parts of Gen. 33:17–20*) and that its author is also responsible for non-P Genesis 25–31*. The ending of the non-P Jacob story is comprised of Gen. 33:1–16, 18*; Gen. 35:1–2aα, 3, 6–8*, 16–20. The pro-Shechem materials are later and accommodate proto-Samaritan worship (Gen. 35:2aβ–b, 4, 6*); the anti-Shechem materials are later still and reflect a period of animosity between the Judean and Samaritan Yahwistic cults (Gen. 33:19–34:31; 35:5, along with Gen. 33:17).

Finally, we offer new possibilities for the theological meaning of the non-P Jacob story given a Neo-Babylonian time of composition. We show that Esau represents the theological concept of rejection and even the divine Judge himself; indeed, Esau and God play interchangeable roles. Despite the fear of lasting divine rejection, the story ends in the hope of Esau/God receiving Jacob favorably—a hope also extends to exiles who return to the homeland. Additionally, Jacob’s name change to Israel focuses on Jacob’s successful striving and prevailing, yet this name change is ironic; indeed, Jacob is not victorious in the wrestling match, which is a draw, and he leaves the encounter with a limp. In the context of the Neo-Babylonian period, this name change points to Israelite identity as one of weakness; yet this weakness leads to a (partial) transformation of character.