The Messenger of the Lord in Early Jewish Interpretations of Genesis

Camilla Helena von Hcijne The ~Icssengcr of the Lord in Early J ewish Intcrpretarions o f Genesis

Beihefte zur Zeitschrift fUr die alttestamentliche Wissenschaft

Herausgegeben von John Barton · Reinhard G. Kratz Choon-Leong Seow · Markus \Xfitte

Bond 412

De Gruyter

Camilla Helena von Heijne

The Messenger of the Lord in Early Jewish Interpretations of Genesis

De Gruyter

ISBK 978-3-11-022684-3 c-ISBN 978-3- 11-022685-0 ISS~ 0')34-2~73

U!msry if CtJ»f/tsS CarM.ging-iH-PNWiiatiM D,#a A CIP c.u:dogue terotd for this book i$ av:Lil:tble from the Ubr..ary of Congres5.

BiWN!,mphir inJ(IrJtMJiM fmWiJhM 0' tht Dnmthr NAticJMibiMktiHk The Deutsche Na tic.m:~lbibhothck Jim 1his publication in the Dcutsehc N:uion:tlbibliogmt'ie; dc:uikd bibliogr.tphic dat:a :tre :1\':til:tble in the lmemer :lt http:/ / dnb.d-nb.dc. @

2010 \~ '.ahcr de Gtu~'ter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/ New Yo1i: Priming: Huben & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, GOuingcn ~ ])cimt d on ;~ cid~frtt p:tpok to my parents with deep love.

Uppsala, March 2010

Camilla vo11 Heijne

Notes on Abbreviations and Pictures, etc. The abbreviations used are from the list in Anchor Bible Diclionary (ABD) vol. 1, 1992, with the exception of the abbreviation of Dictionary of DeWes aud Demons in t!Jt~ Bible (ODD) which is not included in the above mentioned list.

Unless othenvise stated, whenever a Bible text is quoted in English translation the Ne\"' Revised Standard Version (NRSV) is used.

In the end of Excursus 2, there are three pictures showing :

1

Doura Eu ropos synagogue, painting on the upper panel o f To· rah shrine (third century C.E.).

2

Beth Alpha synagogue, floor mosaic (ca. 525 C.E.).

3

Scpphorissynagogue, floor mosaic (fifU,/sixth century C. E.).

Contents

Preface ...... ................................................................................................... ix Notes on Abbreviations and Pictures, etc. ........................................... xiii

1. 1.1 12 1.3 1.3.1 1.3.2 1.3.3 1.4

Defining the Issue ...................................................................... 1 Aim and Scope of lhe Study ................................................................. 1 EarlierResearch - SomeRemarks ...................................................... 3 Material and Approach ......................................................................... 4 BibUcal Texts ............ ............................................................... ........... 4 Post-Biblical Sources ......................................................................... 8 Outline of the Thesis ....................................................................... 10 Angelology - Some ~1troductory Remarks .................................... 11

2. 2.1 2.1.1 2.12 2.1.3 2.1.4 22 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3

Early Jewish Exegesis - A Survey ......................................... General Background ............................................................................ TI1e Written and the Oral Torah ................................................... TI1eOriginandGrowth oftheOraJTorah ................................. TI1e Rabbis and tl1eOral Torah .................................................... The Evolvement of tl1e S}o1agogue .............................................. An Introduction to the World of Midrash ...................................... Definitions of Mid rash ................................................................... Some Examples of Midrashic Influence on Angelology .......... The Midrashic Sources ...................................................................

3. 3.1 3.2 3.2.1 3.22

The Ambiguous Identity of the Angel .................................. 49 Introduction ........................................................................................... 49 Genesis .................................................................................................... 51 Hagar and the Angel .................................. .................................... 5 1 The Three Heavenly Visitors and the Doom of Sodom and Gomorrah ..................................................... .................................... 58 TI1e Aqedah a nd the Angel .................................................. ......... 62 TI1e Wooing o f Rebekah - the Angel as a Protector a nd Guide ................................................................................................. 66 jacob a nd the Angel ........................................................................ 69

3.2.3 3.2.4 3.2.5

15 15 15 18 21 22 26 26 32 36

xvi

32.6 3.3 3.3.1 3.12 3.3.3 3.4 3.4.1

3.42 3.4.3 3.5 3.6 3.6.1 3.6.2 3.6.3 3.6.4 3.7

4. 4.1 4.1 .1 4.1 .2 4.1 .3

4.1 .4 4.2 42.1

42.2 42.3 42.4 4.2.5 4.3 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3

Conl enLe Books of Joshua a nd Judges and Od>erTexts .................. 101 ConclusiOJ>S ....................... ............. ................................................ 105 The Book.< of the L1tter Prophets .................................................... 106 Isaiah ............................................................................................... 107 Hosea ............................................................................................... 108 Conclusions .................................................................................... 113 1l>e Writings ........................................................................................ 113 Attempl< at Explan.1tion in Modem Exegesis ............................. 114 Introductory Remarks .................................................................. 114 The Interpolation Theory ............................................................ 115 1l>eories d>at Focus on the Function of d1e Angel .................. 117 1l1eories d1at Focus on the Nature o f the Angel ..................... 119 Conclusions ........................................................................................... 119 1l>e Angel of the Lord - Early Jewish Interpretations of Genesis ..................................................................................... 1l1e Book of Tobit and Wisdom of Solomon and the Gospel of Luke ................................................................................................... Introduction ................................................................................... 1l1e Book of Tobit a nd d1e Gospel of Luke - Type-scenes .... 1l>eWisdomofSolomon - AIIusions ........................................

121 121 121 126 141

Summary and Condusions ......................................................... 147 The Pseudepigrapha a nd d1e Qumran Documents ................... 150 Introduction ................................................................................... Hagar a nd the Angel .................................................................... The Aqedah .................................................................................... Jacob a nd d1e Angel ...................... ................................................

150 156 159 166

Summary and Conclusions ......................................................... 190 Philo of Alexandria ............................................................................ 192 Introduction ................................................................................... 192 Hagar and the Angel .................................................................... 206 The Aqedah .................................................................................... 208 1l1e Wooing of Rebekah .............................................................. 210 Jacob a nd d1e Angel ...................................................................... 212

4.l4 4.3.5 4.3.6 4.4

Summary and Conduding Discussion ..................................... 232 1l1e Jurlean Anliquilies by Flavius Josephus ................................... 235

4.4.1 4.4.2

Introduction ................................................................................... 235 Hagar a nd the Angel .................................................................... 244

Conhml$

4.4.3 4.4.4

4.4.5 4.5 4.5.1 4.52 4.5.3 4.5.4

4.5.5 4.5.6

4.6 4.6.1

4.6.2 4.6.3

5. 5.1 5.2

xvii

josephus' Aqedah a nd His Version of Genesis 24 .................. 249 jacob a nd the Angel ...................................................................... 253 Summary and Conclusions ......................................................... 263 TI1e Targums, Rabbinic Mid rash an d Talmud ............................ 265 Introduction ................................................................................... 265 Hagar and the Angel .................................................................... 271 The Aqedah a nd the Angel ......................................................... 292 TI1e Wooing o f Rebekah According to Gem'SiS Rn/Jbnlr ........... 303 jacob a nd the Angel ...................................................................... 306 Summary and Conclusions ......................................................... 340 Excursus 1. TI1e Angel in Early jewish Liturgical Poems ...... 343 Excursus 2. The Aqedah and the Angel in Early Jewish Art 345 Scl1olarly Reflections on john 1:51 .................................................. 349 Introduction ........................ ........................................................... 349 The Gospel o f john and jacob's Divine Encounters ............... 3511 Summary and Conclusions ......................................................... 363 Comp~uative Analysis and Conclusions

............................. 365 Introductory Remarks ....................................................................... 365 C<mduding Discus:;;ion ..................................................................... 369

Bibliography .. .............. ..................................................... ...................... . 379 Primary Sources and Trans lations ........................................................ 379 Secondary Literature ............................................................................... 383 In dex of Modern Authors ...................................................................... 401 Selective Source lndex ............................................................................ 406 Selective Index o f Terms and Names ................................................... 416

1. Defining the Issue 1.1 Aim and Scope of the Study In the Bible' we encoun te r the e nigmatic figure 'the messenger/angelo( the Lord/YH WH/God/Eiohim' seveml times. The relationship between God and this angel is fa r from clea r a nd the id entity o f YHWH a nd His a ngel is merged in many tex~s, e.g ., Gen 16:7-14; 21 :17-20; 22:1-19; 31:10· 13; 48:15- 16; Exod 3:1~; Josh 5:13-15; 6:2, a nd Judges chapters 6 a nd 13. 1n these perico pes, ' U'e a ngel o f YHWH'' seems to be comp letely inter· changeable with YHWH Himself. According to Exod 23:20-21, the an· gel possesses the name of God, it is ... in him', and it appears to be im· plied that this ' divine name angel' has the power to forgive s ins, an ability tha t elsewhere in the Bib le is reserved fo r God. This angel is always a nonym ous and speaks with divine authority in the fi rst person singular as if he is God Himself, thus there is no cle.u d istinction between the sen der a nd the messenger. 3 UnJikc other biblical angels, the 'angel of the Lord ' accepls being worshipped by men and seems to be acknowledged as divine; e.g ., Gen 16:13; 48:15-16; Josh 5:13-15, and )u dg 13:17-23.' The aim of the present study is to explore the ambiguous relation· ship bct'".recn GOli and His angel in early Jewish biblical in te rpretation

2

3 4

In"'>' iln.llysis of the biblical texts, I follow the Jewish division of the Hebrew Bible-: Torah, (the Pentateuch) Nevi im (the former P•'Ophet$! Josh - 2 KingS-. the Iauer Prophers: Isaiah - Malaki), .and Ke nwim (the Writinss: Ps.1lms- 2 Chr011ide..'l, including Daniel), d.,. Luke 24 ~14 . I U$e the Hebrew Masoretic text (t>.IT) of Biblia Heb•·aica Stungt..xl he struve with Cud. (41 He s tn)ve with the angel and pre vailed, he wept and sought hi$ fa\•or; he met him at Bethel_ and there he spoke with him {51The LORD th~ God of hosts, the LORD is his name!

Th e prophet Hosea alludes to ~'e tradition of jacob's wrestling bout and designa tes h is combatant as a 1~'0, an a ngel/mes...c;enger. However,

19 20 21 22 23 24

An a l h~l'flati \'e interpretation of \..en 28:13 is that Cod is said to be stand ing in front of o•· beside Jacob. See also Gieschen 1998,57-69. Verse30 in lher..rr. See also KOckerl 2007, 52.. and Eynikel 2007. 113·114. Verse3 Jin the r..rr. ~ealso ju d g 6:22-23, and 13 ~21·23.

7 he does not mention jabbok as the site of the confrontation b ut refers to Bethel as the location of the divine en counter, the 1X;~{'a nge l' is said to be the one who spoke to Jacob at BeU1el, i.e., God Himself. Thus, the "angel" is equated with God, cf., Gen 48:15-16, w here U1e design ations 'God' a nd 'angel' also are used synonymously and in pamllel. Different strands of the Jacob·tradition appear to have been fused in this state· menl. The passage is also related to Gen 28:10.22; 31:10· 13, a nd 35:1·15 by the referen ce to Bethel. In the presen t thesis I have d1osen to focu s primarily o n the first category o f texts, i.e., the so-called explicit references to 'the angel of the Lord ' but Genesis 32 is a n exception to t-his rule. It is included as a main text in my study for hvo reasons. Firstly, it constitutes an insepar· able part of the Jacob·saga as a \"thole, as all the Jaoob· pericopes are closely interrelated. Secondly, although strictly speaking the designa· t ion 'the angel o f the Lord' does not occu r in Gen esis 32, the prophet Hosea explicitly identifies Jacob's opponent as an a ngel, \\1ho in tu m appears to be equated with God:u However, the narrative of the visita.. t ion o f the three "men" in Genesis 18 and its interpretations will not be focused upon in the study, although references to the perioope a re u navoidable.., sin ce all ' the a ngel o f the Lord· texts' in Genesis are intercon· nected. Some persons in Genesis, e.g.... Melchizedek,.:u. Enoch, and Ja· cob{lsrae)2' have bt."en endowed with a kind of angelic character in early Jewish legends.~ and it could be assumed that, for example, the Enoch/Metatron· tTaditions of early Ju daism would be includ ed in my study. However, although the disappea rance of Enoch in Gen 5:24 is indeed mysterious a nd served as the starting poin t for many of the Enoch/Metatro n·speculations~. there is no ambivalence between God and Enoch in the biblical text as such, and the same applies to Melchi· zedek. However, because of the connection "vith Genesis 32, the tradi~ t ion of Jacob's a ngelic id enti ty/coun terpart will be take n into considera· t ion.

25

26 27 28

A" will be s hown below, !here ..'X.44 However, while d:yytAo.; in th e LXX can denote both h uman and heavenly agents, the word 1tQECJt3u.; is often used for human messengers.45 The te rms ciyyu\o.; and 1~7/:) were not originally used to denote Cherubs a nd Seraphs, d ue to the fact that they are not messenger$.~ In contrast to Cherubs and Seraphs, the heavenly LP:n\:7i:> 'angels' are depicted as similar to h u mans in appearance, and w ithout w ings. Sometirncs they a rc simply called 'men', e.g ., Gen 19:5, 10; Ezek 40:3; Josh 5:13; Zech 1:ll-12, and Dan 10:5, 15·18." However, in the later texts o f the Hebrew Bible, the Apocryp hal books, a nd the NT, 1~'>n and O.yyeAo:; became gen eric terms fo r a ny of God's supcmatural ser·

42

4..1

Meier J995a, 81. Bol mberger 1971,957, a nd \101\ Rad 1964, 7&;7i. In, e.g .• I Sam 19:20, Hag I:13. o~e Wl'U'
16 According to traditional Orthodox Jud aism, the Bible is eternall)' relevant and in fallible, ins pired by a perfect a uthor, God himself. ., He has e ntrusteVe are Is rael; we are the children of the Lord." And Israel wo uld declare : "We are the childnm of the Lord" TI1e scales would appear to be balanced between bMh daims, but then the Holy One, blessed be He, wThe lXX therefore g radually gained a bad reputation in Jud aism, and new Jewish-Greek translations v~.rere made1 such as the o ne by Aqvila. A main characl'erl'itic of the oral Torah is that of discussion; there may be more than o ne interpretation of the same biblical text."• In con.. trast to the written Torah (and the n ucleus mentioned below), another characteristic of the oral Torah is its fallibility. The oral trad itions are not regarded as inspired by the Holy Spirit in the same way as the Bi .. ble. The oral Torah is consid ered a process, as opposed to a fixed reve· lation.17 God has entrusted His word to Israel. Rabbinic disputes are solved in a d cmocrat"ic way; the majority is right. According to the Rabbinic interpretation of Deut 30:12-14, tl1e w ritten Torah is indeed fro m heaven, but its practical application, the o ral Torah, is earthly and as such subject to h uman irnperfection.' 11 Th us, the status of the NT in Christianity and the oral Torah in Rabbinic Jud aism is not comparable. Both constitute in terpretations of the Hebrew Bible but, according to Christian belief, the NT is part o f the Bible itself, and most 0 1ristians consider it to be of greater importance than the OT. The "cano nical" works of the o ral Torah, the Mishnah and the Babylonian Talmud, are not regarded as d ivinely ins pired in the same way as the Bible. As a Ch ristian coun terpart, Hyam Maccoby mentions the status of the works of T11o mas Aq uinas in the Catholic Chu rch.I-t It is clear, however, that the Mishnah has a high authority o f its 0\~t.'n and its laws can be taught independently o f the Bible.?A, In Christianity, Christ is the centre of the d ivine revelation, while in Judaism the Torah occupies this position. Jews and Christians thus study the Hebrew Biblc/OT from d ifferent paradigms of in terpretation. For Jud aism the Torah is the centre, w hile Ouistians tend to read the

14 PI!Sikla Retbbtlli, vol. I (ed. and trans. Braude) 1968,93. 15 Bowker 1969, 49. See also Trebolle Ban era 1998, 1()6.107. 16 M.1cooby 1988. 1-3, and 8. 17 !'vlacooby 1988.2-5. 18 rvtacooby 198.1), 5. Mae Both positions have supporters.l.i' Daniel Patte con· dudes that there are two sources fo r the oral Torah: cultural customs and traditions and biblical interpretation. Revelation has two loci;. the Bible and the cultural changes of history."'

31 J2

3:3

34 35 36 37

38

Kugel 1998, 2·1 -l,.mdStein. ?x ~ilil:O::· refers to something in the plurnl, \'l!hich cannot be the Temple, since it is mentioned in v. 7: "you r sanctuary/ the dwelling place of your name.'' Is this perhaps a n early reference to syn agogues? l n his d is.c;ertation Runesson refe rs to J. Mo rgenste rn, w ho dates the origin of the synagogu e institu tion as fa r back as the Josian ic reform and uses Ps 74:8 in support of pre-exilic "syn agogues.""' In the revised English version o f Ernil SchUrer's handbook it L'i stated that ' " ,,.~\1::> refers to syn· agogues.&.J The a rguments fo r a Josianic o rigin are u nconvincing.. a).. though the Psalm may ind icate the existence of some kind of "syn ago· gues'Tin exilic times. However, o ne quite \~t.reighty counter argument is tha t the LXX d oes not understand the expression as 'synagogues' but translates ;~ ~1:1~ in Ps 74:8 as 'til:ynasogue was re"ised b)• Cave.

2.1 Gen~~ral Background

25

and the Vulgate. The problem \Vith this interpretation, however, is that the?~ ~li11; in v. 8 are o bjects o f bumiug while the LXX instead says ... Ka'ta'llaL'' ' places of standing·.

26 mn'nmlrtl as:;embled, when its turn came, W read pa.ssages of Scrip ture a>r·

res po nding t the sacrifi ces taking place in Jerusalem. (t was from these 'a-S$emblies' that 'synagogues' in Palestine seem 10 have d eveloped.ili

Other scho lars hold the opinion that from the beginning prayer was a central factor in the syn agogues.i't ln ancient sources, the synagogue is sometimes designated as itQOOt:UXti 'house o f prayer" . i(l Maybe there was a difference in function between synagogues in the Diaspora and the land of Israel,. and perhaps also between synagogues in the Galilee and judea as long as the Temple stood." To conclude, it must be stated that the importance of the synagogu e and the Torah after the fall of the Second Temple is undisputed. It was then that the Pharisaic/Rabbinic branch of jud aism gradually became normative. It was able to survive s ince it was not dependent on the Temple cult. The Torah became the 'portable sanctuary' and "homeland" of the Jews.Sl The crises o f 70 and 135 C. E. eventually resulted in the writing dov~m of the core d ocuments of the oral Torah, Mishnah, and its commentary Gemara, that is, the Talmud.&

2.2 An Introduction to the World of Mid rash 2.2.1 Definitions of Mid rash The noun w,,t/'midrash' derives from the root w,,_In biblical Hebrew 1 ilt,i as a verb means ' to search/seek , ' investigate', ' inquire about', 'examine', 'tum to q ueslion', 'care aboul,' 'study', 'expound', etc."" The verb is found in, fnr example, Ezra 7:10: "For Ezra had set his heart to study [;;m'>] U1e law of the LORD, and to do it, and to teach the statues and ordinances in lsraei.''K> Tn late biblical Hebrev~.r the verb had ao-

i8 Bowke r 1969,9. 79 E.g., Pane 1975,3 1-JS. for example, L. I. Le vine 2003, 1-21. .1nd a.ms.,..:;en 2003,147...\ san exam ple we ma)' mention the inscrip tion (rom Sche-dia wuth o f Alexilod •i a f1'()m the ti:ml~ of PloW-my Ill (Euergete..'l, reigned 2·16-221 B.C. E.). 81 See, h w example, L. I. Levine 2003, 1-21, and Falk 2003. 404·428. 3 2 Bowker 1969, 42. Ht)ltz 19S4a, 17. 83 The W I'Y meaning: of the word Talmud i..'l sludy, tha t is, s/Jtdy ofJhe T.mlh. 84 In the Bib!~... the most usual o~>tect of ~-.., is Cod, and can in the.c;e cases a1:;o haw the me.'ul ing 'wor.JII Mid rash has been defined as

. .. a type uf literature. o ral ur w ritten.. which stan ds in direct relationship to a fixed, can(mical text, cons-idered the authoritative and revealed word of God by the midrashi.st an d his aud itmce, and in which this canonical text is explicitly cited or dearly aUuded to.'i'J

Th is d efinition has not, however, been generally accepted .lro In ner· biblical exegesis does not quite fi t th is d efinition o f midrash! as the Bible d oes not comment upon itself in the same \o•.:ay as later mid rashic works.un Rabbinic rn idra..'ih may, however, be seen as a development of a process of interpretation dating back to biblical times.uu In my view, Porton's definition is somc\"'hat too narrow if we want to include, for examp le, the Ta rgums as midrash. Porton nevertheless count~ them as examp les of mid rashic activity.u•lThe Targums are certainly witnesses of the midrashic mi!I!Jod, wh ich will be discussed in more detail further on in this cha pter. Attempts to d escribe midrash as a literary genre have been objected to as too narrow a classificationj it is rather a certain nUitrtde towards

95 Jaffee l997. 71·7.1. Eve1\ the contents of some Ps-:1lms ace midrashiC', e.g... Psalm 78. Cf ... 2 Sam uel 12. Hohz 19$4b. 178. ~e Kugel 1990, 1-2. and Signer (1994. 6.~) who \Y"I'iles: ..The re are some remnrkable parallels between the Midra...oohim and patriS-tic licemnu-e. both Greek and Sr•·iac.. in he••meneutic.1l methods. Origen and Jerome both reve-al an 3\v.ueness of Midras.hk literature."' The NT is considered by nh1ny s.cholars as a source of early midrashic interpretations. e.g., Neu!)ner 1987. xi. 7-8, nnd 37-40. see belm'l. Cf.,. al.;o Horbury 1988. no-776. As a complement to midra!)h, jewish sages have always U$ed the literal in cervn~c.l! ion of Sc1iptu ~ No mau,~r how myscical and deep the meen.ue.o; of his day .m

2.2.2 Some Examples of Midrashic Influence o n Angelology Saul O lyan emphasizes the increasing irnportance of exegesis in early Judaism for ~'e development o f angelology and argues that much of the angelology in the Sc'ol'ld of Mid rash

33

Mastema, Penuel, Doc.1iel, lahtiel, Mahphekiel, and Haphekiel{Haphkiel. '" In addition to the Cherubs and Seraphs, in terpreters have also " discov· ered'' the angelic hosts Ha!fYOI!J, Op!Jamtim, Galgallim, Maasim, Hnslruml· lim, and Tars!J;sltim in the theophany d escribed in Ezekiel 1 and 10.1:!!1 The angelic class Shittaim is derived from the obscure text in Ps 68:18 (v. 17 in NRSV):'.JO "\\lith mighty chariotry, twice ten thous..-u1d, thousands upon tlwusnnds [(?) l~lit'], the lORD came from Sinai into tl1e holy place." The meaning of the word S!Jinnn, a llapnx lesomeuott, is unclear. This is a typical example o f a common pattern in 1nidrashic exegeses; angelic names and brigades often have their origin i11 linguistic problems 'md rare words in the Hebrew texts.Ul The fallen angel Azazel, mentioned in 1 Etwc!J and the Apocalypse of Abraham, is d erived from the strange word found only in L-ev 16:8, 10 and 26.m Theological problems often constitute the starting point for many mi· drashic interpretations. \\' hy did God command Abraham to sacrifice his son? According to Jub. 17.16, it was the demonic angel prince lvfastL...

128 Olyan 1993, 25-27, 66-67, and 105·109. Another prominent angel Lc; of course RaphaeL a m ain characler in lhe book of Tobit. In Jewish tradition, Ra phael is coonfed am'" pears in a magic book from the Cairo Ge1t iz..1h. see Olr

m and Gomorrah in Genesis 19, whe re two unn.1med angels a 1-e mentioned. Cf., Gen 19:25: " . .. and he e a lsoJ £11. 7. 1. Also P!i 68: 12-13 ll.ils gh•e•t rise to angelic interpreMtim,s: who .ue the messengers in v. 12. and who are t11e kings of lhe armie.o; tlw.t flee in v. 13? Many manuscriprs IMve ~161)/angels/messengets' instead of ·~';;w"Jci ngs' in v . 13, see also Olyan 1993, 2 1-22. 131 Olyan 1993, 30,61).69, 87, 116·11 7. 132 Oly.l n 1993, 109--11 1. Cf., f En. 8.1; 9.6: 1 0.4~. 8; 13.1·2. etc. See also A(JIX'. Ah.l3.6·14; 14.6-J.I, elc.

34 ma \Vho challenged God and provoked Him to test Abraham by com· manding the latte r to sacrifice Isaac (cf., job 1:6-12)."' According to Olyan, the name Mastcma is derived fTom the noun :.oottn:> \'lrhich only occurs in Hos 9:7 and 8.U' To sup port h is view, O lyan points out that the root of :"'?Jc~ [cow: ' bear a grudge ag ainst', ' harbor animosity tcr ward' ] is very similar to the root of satan [lotti: 'to accuse', -'act as adver· sary'] both in fo nn a nd meaning.u:> Another angel mentioned in juiJilet~ is the angel of the Presence, probably first de rived from lsa 63:9: ''In all their affliction He [God( was afflicted, And the Angel of His Presence saved them .. .''U6Th is angel is the narrato r in Jubilees, but the book also mentions other angels of the Presence. ll'lese angels are of a very h igh rank in ancient Jewish litera· ture, often equated with the archangels.m According to Ja n \.Villem van Hen ten: ... th~ g roup of four a rchang~l$ll8 p robab ly d eveloped from the four living creatures from Ezek I. They are s tanding (m the fo u r sides ( ) f the d ivine th rone (d . the 'An gels o f PrOrS fo r the :oliug F(llher, Pr-im•c of PcliCt!.(m y italic..;).

133 Sec also Ol>•an 1993, 25-26. 134 Verbal forms of Lhis root occur in Gen 27:·1 1; 4~23: 50: 15, and Job 16:9; 30:2 1. l3S O lyan 1993, 66-67. Both in late biblical and Rabbinic Heb1't'W, finotl mem and nun are sometimes L'Onfused. In Lhe Qumran War Sc•-oll {e.g., JQM 13.1), Be lial is calf.ed mal'ak m11Sit'»li1. PtiuCI' ,'vla.strma is also mentioned. in la ter Onisti.an Coplic sow·ce.o;, :iee MUller 1959, 187, 1 ~1 9.). 196. There is also a plurality of dem onic angels term ed mllSitmmt in .a Quntrcm sectarian apc1Cetlypse. 4Q390 1.11. 136 N KJV. S..~e Olyan 1993. 108. See also fote>:am ple Jub. 1.27-29. IJ7 /llbilt't'S and other ancient Jewish sources t~ lso ment«m several ' a ngels of the Presence' in the plural. E.g... Jub. 2.2, IS; l$.27; 31. 14; T. /ltd. 25.2 and, T. L.•vi 3.5. Acrord· ing to ·1 E1Wd1, they are the angelo; ~·tkhael. Gabriel. Raphael, ilnd Phanuel (l>Omecime..o; Raphael and Gabriel are interchBI\ged). See al"ll Luke I:19. Gutm.mnJEditorial

Stilff 1971. %3. 138 The archangels etre som e1ime:;. said to be sewn ill n u mber. Gutm.ann/ Edilorial Staff 1971, 962. 139 v.an Henten 1995b, IS2.

2.2 An Jntroduction to lhe \'\>'ol'ld of Mid rash

35

In the LXX these four d esignations are cornbined into one, ' The Angel of Great Counsel.' •.m Barker w rites: The Angel wa:'l fo urfold. It has been suggested that the fo ur title-s uf the Angel were indh•idually r~pre.o;.tnted by the four archangels and these ev~ntually o bscun.>d the s-ingle identity of the m ig:inal Angel {... ) In Isaiah's pruphecy Wonderful Coun.' on the path between a litcrMy \'etsion and the long mid •·ashic com men ~ tolrie.c; (1/ the Rabbinic period." He al"'o S-tiltes tha t the LXX is one of the literary ~ow•ce."' of T•trgmn OniJI-·11-s .1nd Targ11m fot~allum, 1998,326. 155 Samely 1992.. 159. Samely dOL>: nol wish to de."'igno11e lhe Ar-amaic' transla tion of job found in Qumra!l a..!i a T.ugum in o~e usual sense of the "-'Ord. He P•~fers to call it a translation., be.longing to thl~ same gmup as, for example, the LXX. V'l'e must also l'emember that the Tn.rgums were JL!'l~t·r i11tt:11dtd '" r!!plaa• the n.~ading l"'fthe Heb1't'W Bible in the synagogu e service. The Targums were never used as s ubstitutes hw lhe Bible, but were COt1111Jemcn18ry lranslalt~mskl:J'Iicalivt p.uapftrli'ik":l of llle original texts. F1·aade 1992, 256-259 and 282-286, and Alt'x.11\der 19$8. 238-239. Heb1't'W {though not in iLc; biblical form) oonlinued h) be a pt>pular spoken limgu.:1ge in the land of Israel. even after the fall of the Second Temple in 70 C. E. The fin'ol'ld of Mid rash lulinf{ for Gud. Consequ(!ntly, it is said, the correct saw the glt>ry (yeqara) of the God of (:-;rael. "1st

rend ~ ring

39 is "And they

It is generally assumed that a common cha racteristic o f the Targums is

the avoida nce o f a nthropomorphisms.•611 In this context, scholars o ften refer to the targu mic use of the concept ~Memraf\+Vord' as a circum· scribing of God. O ther such concepts arc ' Yeqara/Giory' (see above) and Shekin ta/Presencc. In contrast to the la tte r two, 'Menu a' is only to be found in the Ta rgurns.l61The e mploy rnent of these concepts has been the subject of rnany sd'IOia rly discussions, and I will lirn it myself to a few oom.m entc; upon the subject. Th e targumic avoidance of anthropo~ morphism is likewise a subject o f debate, and some scholars have poin ted out that the Targums are not consisten t in this regard.•~ The most characteristic design a tion fo r God in the Ta rgums is ' the Menna of the Lord'. The Ara maic word memra is the defin ite foml of memar, the Aramaic counterpart o f the La te Hebrew ma'amar, from nmar, ' to say'. Tile word also means ' to issue a comm an d' . l~>.1 Most scholars agree tha t it is a misconception to interpre t ' the Menna' as a kind of d ivine hyp ostasis. The concept is generally seen as a bu ffer word used by the Targums to prevent any d irect con tact IJe.. tween God a nd the world of h uma n ki nd.• ~ For example, whenever the Bible states that God t.vill be with w meone, the Ta rgums in general employ ' the Memra' ,u.s H owever, the fact tha t ap pa rently a nthropomo rphic statements ha ve nevertheless so me times been left u nchanged in the Targums h as led scholars to seek alterna te exp lanations fo r the e mployment o f the term. It has been proposed that the Menn a also h as a d eep theological significa nce. 'The Memra' connotes the manifestation of God's c reative power in the world, but it should not be und e rstood as an in te rmediary "being'' between mankind and God.•M The relationship between ' the Memra' a nd Philo's ' Logos' has nalu · rally been the subject of many discussions. The general conclusion has been that the Targumists and Philo, despite U1e superficial te rmino logical

159 l e vine 1988, 59. 160 E.g ... le Deaul 1989, 5$6-587. Pane 1975, 66, and TreOOne Barrera 1998, 325. 161 Abellinn 1912, 150. 162 Alexander 19SH, 226, .1nd Levine 1988, ·15-61. Alexander and Levine both daim 1h.a t m~~ concem in the Ta•-gums is u·l~·rmtt: for God. rall-.e•• tha1' avoidance of antlwopo-

n\Orphil;ms.. l63 16ol 16S 166

Moo1-e 1922, 47, and Grossfeld 1988, 25. See, for examp~ ~'I 001-e, 1922.. 4 1-55, Gro..sfeld 1988, 25-27, and McNanMI''ol'ld o f Mid rash

41

L1w of Moses." This was a "creed" that all Je\vish groups could accept even Jewish Christians.m Many scholars claim that the ' targumic institution' was never total· ly under Rabbinic controiP' To some degree the Targums contain fo l· kloristic traditions.m This is apparent in the so~called Palestinian Tar· gumsY'{, Targum Pseudo-Jonalhatt includes interpretations that \\*ere censured in Rabbinic literature, sometimes as early as the Mishnah.m Alexand er Diez Macho claims that Targum J'-J'eofHi 1 contains paraphras· es from pre~Christian Limes, d ue to the fact that they favor Ch ristian interpretations of Scripture•.-s that were Jat·e r censured by the Rabbis because of the polemical struggle ben.,·cen jud aism and Christianity regarding.. e.g., the ···correct'' interpretation of the Hebrevo.' Bible/QT. The Silz im Leben of the Targums was the synagogue service, pri· vate d evotion, and the (religious) schooJ. •N The Targums are designat· ed as a branch of study that falls benveen the Bible and the Mishna.llll1 The liturgical u se of the Targu ms gradua lly ceased with the coming of Islam and the emergence of Arabic as the vernacular in the Middle East. 1111 The Yemenite Jewish liturgy is an exception, and Targum Ouqe· los is still used in the synagogue scrvice.111z The Targurns jouatlum and Ot~qelos are to this day studied in Jewish religious schools and in pri· vate devotion. I ~V The Targums are invaluable sources of knowled ge about early Jewish interpretation and, as such, belong to the 'world of mid r-ash'.

liJ l e vine 19$8, VIII. 174 levine 1988, VIII and 154· 166. Fksher cla ims lhal the Palestinian Targ.ums and the l"'l'iginal fonn l"'f Tatgw11 Om]l•lt?:l Ol'iginllled in pliestly drdes, and that the priesls, and not the Rabbis, were the main leaders of jewish society e\•e n Ions a fter 70 C.E. Flesher 200.), 467-501. See a lso Cohen 1992. 157-173, L I. levino." 1992, 201·222. and Shinan 1 992.24 1 ~25 1 . 175 Shinan 1992. 24'1-251. 176 E.g., Ale>:ander 1988, 249. 177 Alexnnde•· l992. 322. t78 Dlez Macho 1960,225-233. 179 Alexande r 1988, 238-24 1, 247·250, and le Oeaut 1989, 564-568. ISO Grossfeld '1971, 8·12. and Fraade 1992,263, and levine 1988, 10. lSI Alexander 1988,250. levine (1982, 365} writes lll.illthe l.muiuus ad qu~m for the " official"' Targums must be the S.1ssanid tegim e in Dab)•lon; ·· ... h)t there are no d ear references to the fa ll o f Babylon by the Arabian conque.• references to the Arabs ill aiL No.•are there"'">' Ar.lbic linguis-tic C'rih~ria which wo o ld s uggest da!ing the fina l redaction of the targum later thiln 640 C.E." 182 Alexander 198.~. 250, and Cro'5Sfeld lt:fi I, 1W4. 183 Alexande •· 1988.250, and C rossfeld lt:fil, 1W4-845.

42 TI1ere are, however, marked diffe rences between the Targums and other kinds of mid rashic sources. Th e exegetical melltod in the Targurns is that of midrash, but in litem/ form the Targums are "transJa .. tions"/paraphrases and not Bible commentaries as the Ra bbinic Midra· shim. The Targums, for example, never refer to Rabbinic authorities by name, and seldom openly quote the Bible.'llt The Targums also distin· guish thernselves from the works of the 'rewritten Bible', though they may be closer to them in genre. (2) Examples of sources belonging to t/Je seco11d category of midrashic sources, the so~ca lJ ed 're,·vritten Bib l e'~ are Jubilees, Geuesis Apo.. crypllou.. and Liber Atlliquitalum Biblicarum [LA.B.), sometim es c.=-t lled Pseudo·Pitilo.'Ms The differences behveen th ese works and the Targums a re that the la tt e r are bound by the wordiug o f the original Hebrew text l11e 'rewritte n Bible' sets out to retell th e biblical narrative in Us owu words, a nd '".rith its own literary d evices. The 'rewritten Bible' could be said to be interested in story, '"'•hile the Targum is interested in the bibli .. cal text. 1~ Porton does not want to clas..~ify the ftuleau Antiquities by Josephus or Philo's Life the fifth centu•·y CE. It is dill-puled whether these Midrll.him contain semlllt'IS actu ally held in the Synag~ gues,. see StrackJStemberge••1991. 261-262. 206 HetT 19'71. 15 10. The earlie..aid, "1/(lt't' I rl·tdly se-en Cod (mtl rcrmrintd alive tifkr suiug him?" ['~1 ' 'VoN. •n' N.1 o?:-~ Q):IJ' (14] Therefore the well W-Sta'S"; a/:;,>set•tl Him wlloSt't'S 111e?'"

hlr she said, ''ha\'e I

52

3. The Ambiguous Identity of the Angel

ny. It is a meeting between t\vo persons in the desert.lo The curious thing is that the angel is obviously familiar with Hagar, since he ad· dresses her by name and refers to her position in Abraham's household. l11c question in v. 8a is thus most probably rhetorical. as the angel al· ready knows the ans"'"er; it is a kind of greeting. The angel of the Lord does not in troduce himself to Haga r; in the \'-fOrds o f Claus \'Veste rma nn; " ... he is unknown, he comes from and retun1s to the u nknm"m." '' Hagar replies that she has fled fro m her mistres.~, but the angel en· oourages her to return to Sarai and submit herself (vv. 8b·9). The angel of the Lord also promises Hag ar abunda nt offspring (v.l O), tells her to give her yet u nbom son the name Is hmael f~~~o!V'J; " ... fo r the LORD has given heed (::ntt~ lit. •heard') to your affliction" (v.ll). The in terpretation of the name constitutes a u nique phrase in the Hebrew Bible, being an amalgarn of two distinct id ioms. Generally,, God sees [iil\1] a fA iction, e .g ., Gen 29:32; Exod 4:31, and He hears (;;~:>w) the outcry o f the oppressed, as in Exod 3:7 a nd Deu t 26:7. 12 The a ngel p redicts Ishmael's life and destiny, v.12. Tt is probably the conten t of the message that makes Hagar realize that she has met a divine emissary. 13 She seems to iden tify the an... gel/messenger of the lord with Cod Himself, since she exdairns (v. 13b): " ... 'You a re El-roi/ You-Are-lhe-Gorl·WIIO-Sees';" ['K~ ?K ;;nK... )"

tO

II

12 13

14 15

In th is s-espect, there i$ an appares\ t difles-ence between Gen 16:7 and Gen 21: 17, see below. Like M.anoah .md his w ife, Hagar does not at first reali?..e tha t she is meeting a heavenly emis."W'' sy . In Judg J3:2·22.thc ongel of the lord appears to the cmsple as a snan.• in "'human fos·m.'' Although it is M t explicit!)• s tated in the text, it i$ highl)' probable that the angel of the lord likewi$e .1 ppeas'ed to Hagar in hum being.' Be tha t as h may, the autho.· did not distinguish between God w ho tested and the angel \oJho s:poke the com mand." Likewist>, Freedman-Wilh)ughby claim." to use Ha· mori's designation, a fMt that s.h e Mkes as an illu ~tration of the special relationship between God and the patriarchs. Regarding the ''iltheophany', see furthe•· below. See also Letellier 1995, 88-89. 56 See also Hamori 2004, 44-47. 57 According to a text critical note to v. 22. the original wording M the verse was:" and the Lord rema ined standi11g before Abr-.1ham". 58 Samaritanus Iu s i:·':\"~ in C'.en 19: 12. 59 In this ver"Se the two angels refer to Cod in the third person. 60 The seemingly pleona.. Sau· ft~iriu38b. Seeals.oSegal 1977, 12 1·134.

3.2CenesLJ In both cases, the divine emis.,c.;.aries a re invi ted to share a meal with their hosts."' Hamori admits that the rnan/angc1 of the Lord in, for example, Judges 13 appears in concrete hu man form, bu t she remarks t-hat the narrative lacks the realistic anthropomo rphism w hich characterizes Genesis 18 and 32.ftS. In contrast to the three " me n," the div ine messenger in Jud ges 13 refuses to cat the food offered to h im. She fur ther poin ts o ut that, although the two angels in Genesis 19 a re d early depicted as having a physical hu man fo rm, since the men of Sodom even \'fish to have sex ,.nth them/H> they behave in an utte rly superh uman \"-'ay when they blind the inhabitants of that city."' Robe rt I. Letellier, however, sees no major diffe rence in the d egree of anthropornorphism ben.veen Genesis 18 a nd the explicit narratives of the a ppearance of the "'~' i X'>I:> /' the a ngel of the Lord' in the OT. In both Genesis 18 and the 'angel of the l.ord·texts' the central issue is the a ppearance o f the Lord in human shape, but this should not be con· fused with mere a nthropomorphism. Although YH\>VH is de picted as eating in Genesis 18, his extem al ap pearance is not described.~ Letellier writes: The ~J e ment of ambig uity i~ n ()t that YH\>VH appears to men.. but that he (in Genesi::o 18) is accom panied by mnl'flkim who later mo ve to Sodom and co ntinue the dfect u f tht! theophany there? carrying God's presence into the city and evcmtua11y seeming I() merge into the person o f YHWJ-1 him.'ielf w hen they speak to Lot in the singular and with th!! voice of omn iputcnce (19. 21). The voice an d p resence vf th!! mal'tlk varies in a nu mber o f s tories, seeming to appear and sp eak for YHWH so closely that it is d iffi cult to un·

61

Hamori 2004. 1-$.

62

~e
The servant is warmly welcomed by Rebekah's family and tells them about the reason for his journey, namely to find a wife fo r Isaac, vv. 29· 41 . In v. 40, the servant refers to Abraham's words in v. 7 concerning the angel. As a matter of fact, vv. 3741 repeat vv. 2-9 and vv. 42·48 repeat vv. 11·27. Rebekah's fa U1er and brother both acknowledge the hand of God behind the events: ICen 24:50) Then Laban and Beth ue1 answered, '7he thing comes from the LORD; we cannot speak to you rth~ scrv<mt o f Abraham! anyth ing bad o r goud. (5'1) lc)l)k, Rebekah is befo re yt)u, take her ;md gu, and Jet her be the w ife of your master's son.. as the LORD has spoken." f52) When Abraham's ~ rvanl heard their words, he bowed himself tu the g-rm md bt:!fure the LORD.

Rebekah thus follows the servant back to Canaan and marries Isaac: (24:66) And the servant told Isaac all th~ thing..:; that he had d t)ne. (67) Then L.:;aac b roug h t her intu his me that all the goat$ that leap o n the Aock are striped~ speckled, and mottled; fo r 1 have ~n all that Laban is doing to you. (13Jlttm the God of Bethd, ·w hert you mwit11t'd a Jlillnr tmd nwde n vow to m~. Now leave this land at once and return t() th ~ Jand of your birth"'/ nnwll ,11/1\ ;.~ 11:1 '?~1 'JlK) r vn?lb j"1K i~ ~r.1'1 !IXT:'l f"'''tl~:'llt< K'l 0 \? :1/"1!;' ·m 0'.1''7 rmJ ,19~ :0~1! 0\!l

Here Jacob addresses his two "vives Rachel and leah and tens them about a revelation in a dream. In the context o f the pericope we read that laban and hL'i sons have become jealous o f Jacob because o f his increasing wealth, vv. 1·2. God then exhorts Jacob to return to his ho· meland, v. 3.~ He decides to flee and therefore summons his wives to explain the situation, v. 4. Jacob tells them that Laban has behaved un· justly b ut that God has been with him, vv. 5-9. jacob attributes the in· crease in his livestock to a divine revelation in a dream, vv. 10·12. It is noteworthy that jacob refers to '1/~e angel of God· in v. 11. Diana Lipton points out that although angels appear elsewhere in Genesis,. this is the only dream w hich is mediated by an angel; speaking in God's name, and she further rernarks that in the mid dle o f v. 12 the angel's voice has become indistinguishable from that o f God. Despite this am· biguity, Lipton claims that the angel in Genesis 31 is to be understood as a d istinct being. sep~uate from God, a conclusion she bases o n the simi· laritics between the fu nction of the angels in Gen 31:10.13 and Zech 5:5· 6. like Zechariah's angel, jacob's angel appears as an angelus inte-rpres, i.e., an interpreter o f d reams and visions. Because Zechariah' s angel is d early depicted as an independen t being. she claims that the same most probably applies to the angel who appeared to jacob."' I admit that there

$8

89

Cl... the "ange l's" instruction in Gen 3 1:13. D. lipton (1999.. 30} remarks that the dre1llll reported in Gen 3 1:10-13 is the onl>• Cene.l."i. can be t ranslated as "I am the God Bethel." Jn the words o f Nahum Sarna; . .. the succeed ing double use of "where," (Heb. $./wm), show:=. that "Bethel ... here is a plact,e name? not a d ivint! n ame.il' The title i.s intended not to limit the living Cod to a ::Opl!Cific locale but to can to mind the t)riginal theophany ICen 21k10-22), specifically the prom i:=.t~ of a mstant protectit)n and safe re· turn. ln like manner? the emphasis on the vow is a reminder to the p a· triarch that his self-impc_)..;ed obligation assumed at Bethel hc.i h l you in Bethel .. ."{My t•••msla+ tion). According 10 \Nevers (1993, 501-502), it is made totally d e~tnotat i on of 'holy place/site', see below. literally: "he mt'J a certain plat--e .. ." Acco•"S"l lN~'J:> ~P9' l'V"1 f16] (1::1 0'1"'Y'l o·;~ tl':l;.~ ':>.~?J:i

r

.O'J:>'o!l:l 1~'W ;m C':'l;X i'l':! C~ ~ :Tt f~ :'l;:l 01jm:'l ~ :'Ill 1~~"1 X1""'1 I TJ '1'\~"1"

(1 8) St'l Jacob rose early in the muming. and he t()(lk the stone fpN.., ]tl'll that he had p ut und er his head and set it up fur a p illar (:"l:!~t-) and poured oil u n th~t top of it. [19] He mll~d flint pfnte Bctllrll n'J l:1:t Dlp~:'l oe•:t i'IN X1"'' ; x); but the name ()f the city was Luz at the firSt. (20] Then Jacob made a vow, saying. ''If Gud ( o·:r'?~ J ,,.. ill be with me, and wi11 keep me in this way that I go, and will g ive me b read to eat and clothing tu wear, (21 ) so that I come again tu my fath~r's hou~ in peac~t, then the LORD ( :11:;"] ;o:;hall be my Cod (O':i?"S:'? ''1. [22) and this s tune? which J have ~t up fur a pillou , shaH bt! God's hou~ (o•:;;.~ l"'":!J; and of aiJ that yuu give me I will ~"U re1y give une tenth to yuu." 1/li.

This dream is the initial theophany in the life o f Jacob and constitutes the first occasion when God appears and spe~1ks to h im. Tn a sense the vision can be designated as his calling as a senrant o f God. 1co. Jacob is to be the o ne who will carry on the spiritual heritage of his fathers. The pericope belongs to the narratives of encounters with God and o f &1 • c:red sites inserted in the jacob ..Esau story (see also Cen 32: 1 ~21 22 ..32; 35:1 ·15). 11" God introduces Himself as "' ... the LORD, God of Abraham your fa ther and the God of Isaac ...'' This is dearly an allusion to the cove .. nant made with Abraham and Isaac. God links Himself to jacob's fa.. thers a nd continues by repeating the promises of land, abundant offspring, and blessings previously given to the earlier patriard1s (vv. 13-14), see, for example, Gen 12:1·3; 13:14-1 7; 22:15· 18; 17:6-8 (Abra·

103 Or: alxwe him/it (the ladder). lO.f Cf.. Gen 28: I I. lOS Cf... Gen 3 1:13.

l06 Cf., the c-alling M lhe prophet Isaiah: Isaiah 6. See also Westel'm.mn 1985, 454·455, and Kugel 1993, 211. 107 Westermann 1985. 452.

74

3. The Ambiguous Identity of the Angel

ham), a nd 26:2·5, 23-25 (Isaac). O ne pu rpose o f the VlSIOn is th us to confirm Jacob as the heir to the divine promises and th e third pa tria rch. In contrast to his predecessors, Jacob rnects God in a d ream. As mentioned before, early Jewish exegesis takes its point of departure in p rob lems found in the texts. One intrigu ing q uestion is why God d lose to ad dress Jacob in a dream.""' Why could He not talk to h im d irectly, as he did \Vith Abraham a nd lsaac?lll9 A-:. shown above~ ~1 ccording to Gcn 31:10·13, the angel o f God also a ppeared to Jacob in a drea m.' " Another question is the meaning of the v ision of the heaven ly lad · der o r stairway'n with a ngels going u p and d own on it If the pu rpose of the d ream was merely that God v~.ranted to assure Jacob th at " ... the l,md on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring'' (\'. 13),

108 Cf ... Num 12:6b-8a:

(Num 12:6bl ... When there are pmphets 'e..,termaiUl 1985. 505. See alw Sam.a 1989. 223. 142 See als.o KOckert 2f.XY7, SS-59, Alter 1996, 177, and Sarna 1989, 223. 14.3 Cf ... Hos l2:4(v.S in theMT). l44 See also V.aw!er 1977,3419-3.150, and Hayn'clrd 2005, 18-24. 145 See Vawter 1977,349, HamcU'i 2004,86-93, Ha>•ward 2003,25, We.-.terma•m 1985, S IS, and Sama 1989. 403.

3.2CenesL ' presence' of God in Dcut 4:37 p lays a role simila r to ' the angel of the Lord' in many texts, see, for example, Exod 23:20·24. However, in my opinion, the difference between Exod 33:14-16 a nd Deut 4:37 is very subtle and many schola rs interpret the la tte r passage as also referring to God in person, as will be shown in section 3.3. The meaning o f Jacob's new name 'Israel'/'~,rv· has been much dis· cussed in scholarly circles. The expla nation provided in v. 28 (29) indi~ cates that it means ' he strives/contend s \Vith God', although most prolr ably God is to be u nderstood as the subject of the verb ~'t> 'strive/contend ', hence 'God strives'.Its However, additional e tymol meaning i$ con· tentious. Some s.:holars suggest that its proper m e.m ing L'l 'ha\•e d ominion.. l'l.lle ', rhus the -!lame as ;-Jl) Sam a 1989, 405.

3.2CenesL o·~ J . (231 But the LORD Solid to him. "Peace be to you; do not fear, you s hall not die:" Gies.chen 1998, 57-69. See alsoS)•I'i!n 2CXX>, 247-251. H.1mori 2004,1-8, 133-190. SeeGen32:2S: IS:S.S,and Hamori 200-i, 1·8, 14 1-155. See Judg 13:6,8-11. Note, however, lhat the designation 'man·t man of God' in the story de.wly renects Manoah's and his wife's mis.amception of the ide ntity of the angel of the Lord. II is not the perspective of the n.UTator, see, e.g., Judg 13:3, 9, 13, 15· 16. In the ltal'ra tivc, it is no« until vv. 20-22 tha t Manoah and his wife realize his true identity. In Judges 6 the ongel l') f the ll"ll'd is never design.ated as ' a man'. H1)wever, in addi· tion hl Gene.o;is 18 and 32, the dhrine emi.o;sa ty \,.oho n~1s Joshua (chapter 5) L\' J-lf iK \'tim)'I'Ot; l M: t i}' iu.t tQt.t~ Td. 3:2,4). Neverthel~s, this \'elSe may reAect some trad ition assudated with Bethel, not pre.'*'n•ed in Genesis, concerning an angelic guardian o f Jaa)b (d. 31:13; 35:3). An echo of this may lx! fou nd in Hosea 12:.5.!$

Sarna thus points out that the epithet ' angel' for God in v. 16 is something extraordinary and Samaritanus has here used the rendering 1'>0:1/' tlte Kit~g'.

~e also Ps 7&35: P1'0V 23: II; Jer .50:3·1. In Job 19:25 Ote tenn. however, m.1y refe r to another he-.we•\ly fisw-e, a medi ator between Cod d with jacob Bl lhe ford of Jabbok is the same person who jacob is said hl have encountered in Belhel (\ ...enesi ~ 28 X.,b/angels in the p lurat namely

230 Properly spe.lking. the )o1cob story begin.igna ted by schol.us as the rentral event in the )arob story, e.g .• Westermoum, 1985, 405-409. See also \'\>'allers 1992,. 599-608.

96

3. The Ambiguous Identity of the Angel

Gen 19:1, 15; 28:12, and 32:1. These angels seem to be distinguished from God. It is remarkable that the angel of God{Eiohim who appears to jacob in Gen 31 :1 0·13 identifies himself as the God of Bethel who addressed Jacob in Gen 28:13. The narratives of Genesis 18-19 and 35 contain arn biguities similar to the explicit 'angel o f the Lord-texts'. As for Genesis 32, it is clearly not an "ordinary'', earthly man who struggles with Jacob, but some kind of supernatural op ponent Like ' the angel of the lord', he acts with divine aut hority~ blessing the patriarch and giving him a new name, cf., Gen 16:10-12; 17:5-8, and 35:9 -10. There is an apparent resemblance between Hagar's and Jacob's reactions to the divine e nt:oun ... ters, see Gen 16:13-14 and 32:29-30.

3.3 The Rest of the Pentateuch and the Books of U1e Former Prophets 3.3.1 Exodus

After Genesis, we first encounter the angel of the Lord/YHWH in Exo--

d us 3, appearing to Moses in the burning bush, vv. 11>-6: [Exod 3:1b) ... he (M(k;e.S) led h is flock beyond the wildcme;;s, and came to Horeb, the mo untain of Cud. {2) Th