Genesis Vol 3.pdf - College Press

ABRAHAM AND LOT 14: 17-24
Yahweh, using the Canaanite name or names in suitable
apposition, which is no less appropriate in his particular
case. That later religious Hebrew literature should have
identified El-Elyon with Yahweh, quite probably on the
basis of this passage, is readily understandable. But this
appears to be the only late reflex of Gen. 14. The narra-
tive itself has all the ingredients of history.” (We cannot
help wondering why so many commentators seem to be
blind to the fact that Abram’s confederates furnished
troops, in addition to Abram’s own 3 18 men.)
Cornfeld testifies in like vein (AtD, S9) : “Abraham
and his band of ‘hanikhim’ (followers) corresponds almost
exactly to the chieftains of the early part of the second
millenium, with their ‘hanaku’ or ‘hnku.’ We know from
cuneiform texts in Mari, Ugarit, Alalah (a state north of
Ugarit) , and Boghazkoi (the Hittite kingdom) , that city-
states and tribes were linked by treaties or ‘covenants.’
Although the opponents of Abraham cannot be identified
with certainty, the personal names Tudhalia (Tidal in
Hebrew), Ariukka (Arioch) , and place names which have
been identified, fit well into the contemporary picture of
the 18th-17th centuries, One of the Dead Sea Scrolls, now
at the Hebrew University, has a passage elaborating on the
events, and containing many new geographical names east
of the Jordan, around the Dead Sea and Canaan proper.
This material gives Genesis 14 a new timelessness for the
modern reader. Few stories in Genesis have had so much
written about them. The antiquity of this story and the
accuracy of the names referred to in it are being constantly
corroborated as new background material becomes avail-
able.”
As a matter of fact, the general authenticity of the
Patriarchal narratives is in our day seldom called in ques-
tion by those who are familiar with the findings of‘ the
archqeologists. The historicity of the personages* and events
137