Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Part II of II
 
B.  Worship Should Be Focused at Jerusalem?
 
P (of JEPD), representing the Jerusalem priesthood, naturally enough believed 
that religious worship should be focused at Jerusalem.  But that idea is 
nowhere to be found in the Patriarchal narratives.
 
The Patriarchs anoint many sacred places in the Patriarchal narratives, but 
never Jerusalem.  Abraham builds the first altar to YHWH in Canaan at 
Shechem.  
Genesis 12: 6-7  The second altar is built at Beth-el (near Hai), and that is 
where Abraham first calls YHWH by name.  Genesis 12: 8  Abraham later has a 
profound meeting with YHWH on a mountaintop just east of Beth-el (near Hai).  
Genesis 13: 3-4, 14-17  At the end of chapter 14 of Genesis, Abraham returns 
Lot to the princeling ruler of Sodom, and is blessed by Melchizedek, at 
Salim, 
which is the same hamlet on the west bank of the Jordan River east of Shechem 
that is referenced by the identical name “Salim” at Genesis 33: 18.  (“Salim” 
is not a nickname for Jerusalem.  Salim is a hamlet east of Shechem.  The 
tiny hamlet of Salim had symbolic importance for the Patriarchs.  After 
traveling 
from the north, heading south through the northern Transjordan along the east 
bank of the Jordan River (always avoiding Beth-shan and the Jezreel Valley), 
the Patriarchs consistently re-enter Canaan at Salim, just east of Shechem.)  
The Covenant is made in the Valley of Hebron (chapter 15 of Genesis 15), and 
the promise that Sarah will yet bear Isaac is repeated in the Valley of 
Hebron 
(Genesis 18: 1-15).
 
Given the traditional locations of Bethel and Hebron as being a little north, 
and a little south, of Jerusalem, respectively, we see that two places fairly 
near Jerusalem are holy places for Abraham.  Yet Jerusalem is never mentioned.
 
>From the high altitude village of Beitin, one can literally see Jerusalem.  
On the traditional view, Beitin is Beth-el.  (In my controversial view, 
Beitin 
is the city of Arbe, overlooking the Hebron Valley.)  No matter how you slice 
it, the Patriarchs could often literally see the large Late Bronze Age city 
of 
Jerusalem.  Yet the text never once mentions Jerusalem.
 
Everyone remembers the famous scene in chapter 13 of Genesis when Abraham and 
Lot are on that mountaintop between Beth-el and Hai.  Lot looks northeast, 
and sees the inviting Jordan River Valley.  That’s where Lot picks to settle. 
 
If Hebrew or Jewish authors from Jerusalem were telling this story, then what 
would the text say next?  Of course, the text would logically say that 
Abraham 
then looked a short distance southeast, and saw the huge city of Jerusalem.  
Jerusalem has been the major city in southern Canaan from the Early Bronze 
Age 
to the present.  Jerusalem is eternal.  The text would then have YHWH tell 
Abraham that there, in Jerusalem, would be where Abraham’s descendants would 
ultimately find their manifest destiny.  But instead, the text says 
absolutely 
nothing about Jerusalem!  Nothing.  No human being on that mountaintop 
between 
Beth-el and Hai, in any era, could fail to see Jerusalem.  Yet the text does 
not 
even seem to know that Jerusalem in southern Canaan is visible from that 
mountaintop.  How can that be?  The only possible answer is that the author 
of the 
Patriarchal narratives was a very early Hebrew from northern Canaan, who 
focused solely on northern Canaan, and who had no interest in looking south 
into 
southern Canaan from Bethel, on the southern tip of northern Canaan.  If the 
Patriarchal narratives had 6 authors, per the JEPD + 2 editors theory, with 5 
of 
the 6 authors being from Jerusalem, there is no way that the text would fail 
to mention Jerusalem when Abraham is on that mountaintop in central Canaan 
between Beth-el and Hai, overlooking the large, eternal city of Jerusalem.  
No 
way.   


Jacob/“Israel” likewise has no time for Jerusalem.  Jacob sets up an altar 
for YHWH at Shechem, as Abraham had.  Genesis 33: 20  But Jacob’s two 
greatest 
meetings with YHWH are at Luz/Lu-u-si/Laish in the northeastern corner of 
Canaan.  Genesis 28: 19, 11-18;  35: 1, 9-12  In honor of these sacred 
meetings 
with YHWH in northernmost Canaan, Jacob gives Luz/Lu-u-si/Laish the nickname “
Beth-el”, meaning “house of God”.  (Abraham’s Beth-el/Hai is far south of 
Jacob
’s Luz/“Beth-el”.)  Jacob later ends up at the city of Arbe on a hill 
overlooking the Hebron Valley (Genesis 35: 27), where Jacob semi-reconciles 
with his 
elderly father Isaac, but as always, there is no mention of Jerusalem.
 
Far from focusing worship at Jerusalem, no Patriarch ever worships at 
Jerusalem, or even mentions Jerusalem.  (That’s because no Hebrew had ever 
set foot 
in Jerusalem when the truly ancient Patriarchal narratives were composed, 
with 
the sole author of the Patriarchal narratives being a northern Hebrew.)  On 
the traditional view, each of Abraham and Jacob passes right by Jerusalem, 
and 
on any view of the case Abraham could have easily seen Jerusalem on that 
mountaintop between Beth-el and Hai.  Yet Jerusalem is never mentioned.  
There are 
many holy places for the Patriarchs in Canaan, but Jerusalem obviously is not 
one of them.
 
Thus P is totally AWOL in the Patriarchal narratives as to the issue of 
focusing worship at Jerusalem.
 
C.  Conclusion:  There Is No P in the Patriarchal Narratives
 
Based on the substantive content of the received text, it should be clear by 
now that there is no P in the Patriarchal narratives.  P would roll over in 
his grave at the thought of there being one sacred tree after another in the 
Patriarchal narratives, and so prominently at that.  And you can imagine what 
the 
Jerusalem priesthood thought about the Patriarchs supposedly constantly 
passing right by the priests’ beloved Jerusalem, yet never mentioning 
Jerusalem 
even one time, and instead anointing all sorts of other places, two of which 
were 
quite near Jerusalem, as holy places. 
 
Richard Elliott Friedman and E.A. Speiser claim that all the ages of people 
in the Patriarchal narratives were edited in there by P.  But why on earth 
would P make the effort to edit in allegedly incomprehensible ages of the 
Patriarchs, while not editing out those sacred trees, and not editing in even 
one 
mention of beloved Jerusalem in the entire text?  Is that a plausible 
scenario?



The fact of the matter is that there is no P in the Patriarchal narratives 
whatsoever.  All those sacred trees, and no mention of Jerusalem, even when 
Abraham is on a mountaintop between Beth-el and Hai overlooking eternal 
Jerusalem, 
are dead giveaways.  The Patriarchal narratives are, pure and simple, 
antithetical to the views of P.  P did not edit, much less write any portion 
of, the 
truly ancient Patriarchal narratives, which are stunningly historically 
accurate in representing the Late Bronze Age world of northern Canaan.  
Rather than 
being late fiction, the Patriarchal narratives are early history, being the 
solid historical foundation of Judaism.  It’s all readily verifiable in the 
plentiful secular historical documents, if we’re willing to jettison the 
traditional misinterpretation of the Patriarchal narratives and look to  
n-o-r-t-h-e-r-n  Canaan in the Late Bronze Age.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois




**************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family 
favorites at AOL Food.      
(http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)