And the Lord appeared to Avram, and said, “To thy seed will I give this land.”
Isn’t it interesting that when Avram arrives in Canaan, G-d does not merely gift him the land? That instead there is a mere future promise?
Can you imagine working at a job today with the promise that your great-great-grandchildren, whom you will never meet, will get to spend your earnings? Is that really such a motivation?
Consider that Terach was the first person to name his son, Nachor, the same name that of Terach’s own father, Nachor! Terach was the first person to explicitly link the generations. This may well have been a foundational event – after all, all of Terach’s children have Jews in their line: All the foremothers come from Nachor. All the forefathers come from Avram. And even Haran’s son, Lot eventually leads to Ruth and Naama.
Does G-d reward Terach, because Terach was the first to understand that our lives are more than merely for ourselves, that the mission we are engaged in is necessarily a multi-generational one? Isn’t this a founding principle of Judaism?
If so, is Terach actually rewarded (by having all Jews from him) in return for being the first person to explicitly link generations?
And thus all of Avraham’s descendants are to understand and internalize that we are also supposed to take the long view? Is this why Judaism values education so highly, as it gives spiritual muscle to the skeletal connections across the generations?
What if we zoom our perspective out when reading the Torah itself? For example, we understand that living in the wilderness after Egypt was akin to adolescence. As a people, we were not fully grown, not fully independent, and in fact tied to the manna, to the daily reminder that G-d provides everything in this world.
So if the wilderness was adolescence (and entering Israel began a period of adulthood that continues to this day), then perhaps Genesis is actually meant to be understood as the formative stage of development?
Think, for example, of parenting a child. We don’t necessarily micromanage children. We let them make mistakes, and we might let them, occasionally, even get hurt. But even the most permissive parent intervenes anytime a child is at serious risk – we don’t consider running into the street to be an opportunity to learn a valuable life lesson.
Might this explain why and when G-d intervenes in Genesis?
Compared to the interaction after Sinai, for example, G-d is very quiet in Genesis. After the Garden of Eden (which was a static environment), and then Cain, G-d is quiet: He seems to wait (in vain) for mankind to reach out to Him. He waits for many generations!
G-d’s interventions before Avram are all at the “keep the child from running into the street” variety: G-d shortened man’s lifespan when it was clear men “took” women instead of valuing them. G-d destroyed the Flood generation because mankind had become evil beyond repair. G-d talks to Noach and brings the Flood to save the world. G-d similarly confused the Babel crowd because it was in danger of ending individuality for the sake of totalitarian unity (and thus depriving mankind of the freewill to connect to G-d on an individual level).
Then…. nothing until Avram. From Avram through the rest of all of Genesis, G-d only seems to openly intervene (with an obvious miracle) when the intervention is critical to allow the arc of history to continue:
For example, Avram and Sarai went to Egypt. That may, according to some, have been an error. But G-d does not intervene. He does not even get involved when Avram tells Sarai to say that she is his sister.
But when Sarai is taken by Pharoah, then the entire destiny of the future of the Jewish people, like a child running into the street, has been put in peril. And at that point (and only that point!) G-d directly acts!
The pattern repeats: G-d gets involved to protect Sarai (the second time she is taken) and then Rivka in a similar situation. He tests Avraham, and saves Isaac at the Akeidah, and speaks to Jacob and then Lavan. But once Jacob comes back into Canaan, G-d is almost entirely silent. There seem to be no open miracles at all from that point on for Jacob or any of his sons. Because from then on, the epic of Jewish development is moving in the right direction, even though it may run into the occasional pothole.
It is astonishing how often G-d is silent: When Noach is violated by Ham, and Lot by his daughters, G-d does and says nothing. He does nothing with Dina was taken, as well! Most of Avraham’s and Isaacs actions are reported without comment. G-d seemingly takes a hands-off approach because none of those events threaten the future of the Jewish people and the Torah!
Is this broadly applicable? Indeed, are there any exceptions? Are there any cases of divine intervention in Genesis that is NOT fundamental to the future of the world? And are there any cases of divine non-intervention that derailed the story? (I suggest that the fact that you are reading a Torah sheet right now provides proof that G-d knew what He was doing. ☺)
Might this explain why, in the main, Genesis tells us almost no value judgements from G-d?! Judah is not judged (nor is Tamar). Joseph is not judged for his words, nor are his brothers for getting rid of him. Time and again, act after act, G-d seems to be content to let our forefathers make their own decisions (in stark contrast to after Egypt).
And is it illuminative to suggest that, before the Torah was given, the Jewish people were still very much in a formative stage, analogous to childhood? G-d wanted us to grow through experience? We want our children to learn and grow from childhood, yet we almost never judge our children?!
If the above is correct, then why does G-d openly intervene to save Ishmael’s life? Is Ishmael somehow essential for Jewish history or identity?