Biblical Hebrew Forum

[JimStinehart AT aol.com]

Firouz Khandjani wrote:  “I think that the concern  of fathers is more 
religious than tribal. The Law will forbid the marriage because they could 
have 
negative religious impact. Ezra and Nehemiah will extend the principle to 
Moabites and Ammonites even if the House of David had very close bood 
connections with them.  The situation seemed to have evolved in Jacob's time 
as it 
seems his sons had after Sheshem event some leading position in the country 
and a lot of Hebrews followed them there. Joseph would refer to Canaan as the 
"Land of Hebrews". Tamar seemed to be submitted to some Hebraic law about 
adultery. The  report to Judah " Tamar thy daughter in law hath played the 
harlot" suggests more conservative moral standards.”
 
Are there non-tribal religious reasons why (i) Abraham prohibits Isaac from 
marrying BNWT KN(N, (ii) Isaac similarly prohibits Jacob from marrying any “
daughter of Canaan”, yet (iii) both Judah and Simeon in the next generation 
marry Canaanite women?
 
As to the religious [non-tribal] issue, the BNWT KN(N who were ethnic 
Canaanites, and the BNWT KN(N who were ethnic Hurrians born in Canaan, and 
Milcah, and Milcah’s sister Iscah and, while out in eastern Syria at Harran, 
Milcah
’s descendant Rebekah as well, were all probably pagans.  We know for 
certain that Rebekah’s brother Laban has teraphim.  Those idols were so 
important 
to Laban that they were one of the reasons why Laban chases a fleeing Jacob 
all the way from eastern Syria to Gilead.
 
Thus from a non-tribal, religious perspective, all these women seem to be 
about the same:  they’re all pagans, and they likely all worship idols.  Why 
then must Isaac and Jacob marry a descendant of Milcah, whereas they are 
prohibited from marrying BNWT KN(N?  And why does that prohibition disappear 
in 
the generation of Jacob’s sons?  In my opinion, the answer has almost 
nothing to do with either religion or geography.  Rather, tribal 
considerations 
are the governing factor here.
 
One good way to determine the essential difference between Milcah [whose 
descendants Isaac and Jacob must marry] and the BNWT KN(N/daughters of Canaan 
[whom Isaac and Jacob dare not marry, but whom Judah and Simeon marry] is to 
consider Milcah’s sister Iscah.  Genesis 11: 29 says that Milcah and Iscah 
were the daughters of Abraham’s oldest brother, Haran, and that Milcah 
married Abraham’s middle brother, Nahor.
 
Like Milcah, and unlike BNWT KN(N, Iscah and her female descendants live in 
eastern Syria, at Harran.  But is that geographical consideration the key 
to understanding the surprising prominence of Milcah [as opposed to Iscah] in 
the text?
 
Here is the scholarly analysis of Iscah:
 
“‘Iscah’ is mentioned only here.  The etymology and meaning of her name 
are unknown.  Suggestions that Iscah is an alternative name for Sarah or that 
she was Lot’s wife are purely speculative.”  Gordon Wenham, “Genesis 1-15” 
(1987), p. 273.
 
“[W]hat reason could there be for the inclusion of Iscah, other than the 
fact that such a tradition had been handed down to J, who had no choice but 
to 
record it?”  E.A. Speiser, “Genesis” (1962), p. 79.
 
But if we think of what it takes to create the ideal tribe, then we can 
understand the role that Iscah plays in the tribal history of the Hebrews 
that 
is set forth in the Patriarchal narratives.   The key is to contrast Iscah 
with Milcah.  
 
A female descendant of Iscah would not be the ideal bride for Isaac.  
Iscah, like Milcah, lives in eastern Syria, but that geographical 
consideration 
is of marginal importance.  No, what’s of key importance, and distinguishes 
these two daughters of Haran from each other, is that only Milcah’s 
descendants are descendants of both of Abraham’s two older brothers.  Milcah 
is Haran’
s daughter, and Milcah is also the main wife of Nahor.  Thus a female 
descendant of Milcah is the ideal bride for Isaac, because it includes both 
of 
the other two branches of the family as sharing in Abraham’s divine 
inheritance of Canaan.  By marrying a female descendant of Milcah, rather 
than a 
female descendant of Iscah, Isaac thereby includes a line of descendants from 
both of Abraham’s two brothers in the inheritance of Canaan.  
 
Such marriage creates three horizontal common male heirs for the new tribe 
of Hebrews that is being formed.  Every Hebrew (that is, as to males, the 
male descendants of Jacob) will have Abraham, Nahor and Haran as three 
horizontal common male ancestors.  In conjunction with the Hebrew tribe later 
having three high-profile vertical common male ancestors -- Abraham, Isaac 
and 
Jacob -- an ideal tribe is being formed, based on ideal ancestral bloodlines.
 
Iscah’s role in the Patriarchal narratives is to clarify Milcah’s role as 
to ancestral bloodlines for the new Hebrew tribe that is being formed.  The 
fact that Milcah’s female descendant Rebekah lives in Harran in eastern 
Syria is of little importance.  What is of critical importance is not the 
geography, but rather the ideal ancestral bloodlines of the newly forming 
Hebrew 
tribe.  
 
Only by marrying a female descendant of Milcah [as opposed to a female 
descendant of Iscah] does Isaac’s marriage bring in both of Abraham’s two 
brothers as sharing in Abraham’s divine inheritance of Canaan.  That’s one 
key 
step in forming the ideal tribe.
 
The problem with the BNWT KN(N is not they’re from Canaan or that most of 
them are ethnic Canaanites, much less that they are pagans who worship idols. 
 No, the problem with the “daughters of Canaan” is that they cannot help 
Abraham or Isaac create a new tribe, the Hebrews, with ideal ancestral 
bloodlines.  Neither can Iscah.  It’s got to be Milcah’s line of descendants, 
because only Milcah’s descendants represent both of Abraham’s brothers, 
thereby allowing certain descendants of all three sons of Terakh to share 
Abraham’
s divine inheritance of Canaan.  Nothing but a descendant of Milcah will do 
as the ideal bride for Isaac and Jacob, despite the prominence of teraphim 
out in eastern Syria, given that the Patriarchs are bound and determined to 
create the ideal tribe [based on ideal ancestral bloodlines], which they 
deftly proceed to do.
 
Jim Stinehart
Evanston, Illinois