Talk:Wife–sister narratives in the Book of Genesis

message: You state in your edit summary that the article is from a few in-copyright sources. Just want to know if based the article on them, or copied from them? With blessings, 220.233.48.200 15:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The in-copyright sources are not the main basis of the article. There is certainly "fair use" going on. Beersheba's archaeology constitutes about a paragraph in a very large book by finkelstien for example. The JewishEncyclopedia is very much out of copyright. --User talk:FDuffy
Please check what fair use is. This most certainly isn't a case of it. And the Jewish Encyclopedia isn't out of copyright, just some very old editions are. Can you state which editions are you using. With blessings, 220.233.48.200 20:38, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm using the 1911 public domain edition. The one that scholars view as more worthy and of greater scholarship than any of the later editions. This is fair use. --User talk:FDuffy 20:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright 

message: In the "Beersheba" section, could you please add the Chapter and verse where these different translations are given, beside the text? Thanks ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 21:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Or possibly, that ABraham's Well of the Oath was in a different location from Isaac's Well of the Oath...  more than one place had the name Beersheba, did it not...? ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 22:05, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, just the one. It's still there today, called Beersheba, or rather the historical site is Tell-Beer-Sheva some way from the modern town. Every single academic source, even the apologetic ones, agree that the text refers to exactly the same place. --User talk:FDuffy 22:39, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beersheba 

message: WP:CITE doesn't just mean listing some sources at the bottom. In this article, the "striking similarity" between the narratives must have been observed by someone, whether this is Finkelstein, Friedman etc etc or of course Francis' favourite Jewish Encyclopedia.
I have no doubt the article is notable but only if the topic can be traced to individual discoveries by Bible critics and there is an indication that the Bible criticism community has accepted this view. At the moment, the article does not indicate this. JFW | T@lk 17:24, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently the idea is from Lane Fox. But the article doesn't say that. At the moment it is equally possible the idea is from FDuffy. JFW | T@lk 10:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The nature of sourcing 

message: FDuffy seems to have left Wikipedia for a little while. Meanwhile, we are left with an article that reads like original research but has some references at the bottom. Francis has consistently refused to reveal which writers actually pioneered the explanation he has attributed to "scholary views".
I have now moved the view of the classical commentators to the top (as they came first). I have also inserted an interesting view from Feldman. The articles in "Challenge" (Carmell & Domb) are very useful in dealing with Bible criticism. JFW | T@lk 11:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: Now that the whole deletion debate is over, I suggest that the title of this article be modified to something that is a more accurate description and slightly more neutral, such as Wife-sister narratives in Genesis. Dovi 20:48, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: One last inquiry whether there are objections or better title suggestions. Otherwise I'll just move it. Dovi 19:02, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest expanding it into a wider Wives of the Patriarchs, then we could also include what other information there is about them, like Rachel, Keturah, et. al.  Thoughts? ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 19:11, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: What do you think the article should be renamed to? --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 20:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: I added a merge tag. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 22:20, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

text: If no one gets around to it before I do, however anyone could. I would prefer if someone else did it, only because I am lazy. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  First we should notify any editors who are watching that article with a mergefrom tag... I'll do that part... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 00:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  This talk page should move there too, at present there is none there... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 00:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

text: What Dovi is proposing sounds good as well. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 05:21, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have moved it for now. --PinchasC | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:45, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like the new title. --User talk:FDuffy 20:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title of article 

message: In this article, under section "The treatment of women in the narrative", it's written: "According to Genesis 12.5, Sarah left her family to set out for the land of Canaan, which puts her in this same position as suggested in the ancient tablets of Mari (a Semite city which Abraham is presumed to have visited). This suggests that Sarah was not Abrahams half-sister, but adopted sister by law. 
1. It's not accurate. In Genesis 12, the Lord asked Abraham to "1 Leave your country, your people and YOUR FATHER'S HOUSEHOLD..." and so "4 So Abram left... 5 He took his wife Sarai... and they set out for the land of Canaan..."
2. According to Genesis 20:11-12, Abraham replied, "I said to myself, 'There is surely no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.' Besides, she really is my sister, the daughter of my father though not of my mother; and she became my wife."
--Joo 20 June 2009 (GMT+8)  —Preceding undated comment added 02:11, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is Sarah really Abraham's half-sister? 

message: Abraham and his people were a caste of Horite ruler-priests whose kinship pattern involved 2 wives. One was a half-sister and the other was a patrilineal cousin or niece. The pattern is first found in Genesis 4 and can be traced through later ruler-priests such as Elkaniah.
This research has been done by Alice C. Linsley whose kinship diagrams are viewable here:
http://biblicalanthropology.blogspot.com  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.143.190.82 (talk) 16:19, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horite Ruler-Priests had 2 wives 

message: Hepner, through Biblical exegesis and semantics, states that it is plausible that the union of Abraham and Sarah was actually incestuous with Sarah being Abraham's half-sister. For example, in Genesis 20: 13, Abraham, talking to Abimelech, alludes to Leviticus laws or the Holiness code, by using the the phrase "lovingkindness." The same word is found referring to the sin of incestuous relationships and can also take the alternative meaning of "disgrace." Abraham, in his discourse with Abimelech, could be openly confessing his "disgraceful" relations with his wife/sister Sarah but whichever translation of the word is taken, it shows Abraham's knowledge of the Holiness code and specifically the clauses pertaining to incest found within Leviticus. Hepner, Gershon (2003). Abraham's Incestuous Marriage with Sarah a Violation of the Holiness Code. Los Angeles: Koninklijke Bril NV. pp. 144–155.ZarathustraSay20 (talk) 14:06, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Best to attribute this view to Hepner. Otherwise, it's Wikipedia declaring that there's strong evidence about how to understand the bible. ProfGray (talk) 16:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: ZarathustraSay20, it's great that you put a heading before adding Hepner's approach. Minor concern -- it's the wrong level heading, please fix. Significant concern -- the heading is not neutral, since it implies that Hepner is correct. For the heading, please replace it with neutral wording for the particular subtopic or issue addressed by Hepner. Thanks! ProfGray (talk) 16:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: ZarathustraSay20, I tried a more neutral heading in the Article. What do you think of that? The term incest should be avoided, IMO, since it's the scholar's claim rather than the topic -- plus, this heading could cover other theories of the relationship, e.g., the Nuzi comparison. Your thoughts? ProfGray (talk) 21:23, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Theory of Abraham's Incestuous Marriage 

message: Coat's argues about the value of genre definition and the intention of each the stories. In the Wife-sister narratives in the Book of Genesis:
The three wife-sister narratives are all related to each other in some way sharing common content, structure and genre for communicating the content. In all three stories a promise for progeny is not a factor in the content and the structure rather the narratives have a focus on blessing.  AL2015 (talk) 17:18, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Theme and Structure of 3 Narratives

message: In my Hebrew Bible class at Miami University, we have to edit wikipedia pages that pertain to the subjects we are learning about. We are dealing with this article at the moment. The wikipedia article does not fully discuss the origin of these narratives. It just points out that they seem to be variants of the same storyline. There should be a mention of how the origin of these narratives can't be determine. This is my suggested edit:
"T.D. Alexander discusses how there can't be a clear answer to which source each of these three narrative derive from. There are many different theories but non can be proven to be flawless."
I think this edit should be in the introductory paragraph. It would give the reader an explanation for why the three narratives have different storylines; since it's not obvious which story came from which source.  
Alexander, T. D.(1992) Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 42. pp. 145-153. TWloveandhonor (talk) 18:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, but I'm a bit confused, TWloveandhonor. If the origin can't be found readily, then we'd have to make sure there is something for him to argue against. Well, how would his argument against (a theory) be framed or placed? ProfGray (talk) 02:51, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Authorship of 3 Narratives

message: These both support the claim that there are different versions of the story but each may be altered. As we know this to be true these claims support the facts that there are different stories and they need to be clear in wikipedia. 
"Other treatments of the wife-sisters narratives are more synchronic, exploring each as a version of one tale in its varieties". The stories behind the wife sisters narratives are similar and but resort to
to three different versions. According to Nidtch there is one story that has many different versions, but there are inconsistencies and they all refer back to the same story.  Niditch, Susan (1987). Underdogs and Tricksters: A prelude to Biblical Folklore 
"Instead of three versions of the same incident, these narratives are three different stories that share only the motif of the patriarch who lies about his wife to save himself". Biddle: "the endangered Ancestress" PP-601 2nd paragraph. 
According to Biddle, these are three different stories about the incident. This seems to be true as we read it.
 Biddle, Mark E. (1990). The " Endangered Ancestress" And Blessing For The Nations. PP 599-611
Adrugby (talk) 18:56, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Versions of the same tale or same incident? Adrugby, if Biddle and Niditch are both answering roughly the same question, and they be put under a single subheading: if so, what might this subtopic or issue be called? ProfGray (talk) 02:48, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Identification of Three different stories

message: Hi, I'm a student in a Comparative Religions class at Miami University. I found some information in an article by James K. Hoffmeier that I think would be useful here:
Political marriages were common occurrences in the Near East during the second and first millennia B.C.E., which typically meant that a resident alien would offer one of his daughters to the monarch as a diplomatic action and to protect himself and his family.[1] In every wife-sister narrative found in the Book of Genesis, Abraham and Isaac are traveling in foreign territory without any daughters to offer the local ruler. Therefore, in declaring that their wives were actually sisters, they attempted to create similar diplomatic relationships.[2]
Jump up ^ Hoffmeier, James K. The Wives' Tales of Genesis 12, 20, & 26 and the Covenants at Beer-Sheba. Tyndale Bulletin, 1992, p. 87.
Jump up ^ Hoffmeier, James K. The Wives' Tales of Genesis 12, 20, & 26 and the Covenants at Beer-Sheba. Tyndale Bulletin, 1992, p. 92.
Sctimmons (talk) 18:59, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point, Sctimmons, and which view in the article (already) should Hoffmeier be seen as disputing? If so, shouldn't these views be combined or at least juxtaposed? Thanks! ProfGray (talk) 02:44, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  adding historical context to wife-sister narratives 

message: Hello, I am a student at Miami University and for an assignment I have been looking through an article by Mark E. Biddle that I believe would contribute greatly to this article under the "Analysis of the narratives" section:
Each of these three stories seem to mirror one another, however each of them emphasize a different point and only share a motif. Genesis 10:12-20 emphasizes the unforgiving wrath upon the adulterer without considering the possibility that Abram was at fault. In Genesis 20:1-6, God tackles the issue of of inconsideration when He enters Abimelech's dreams and doesn't allow the adultery to occur. In Genesis 26:1-33, the emphasis is behind the argument that the nations may bring peace or famine upon themselves depending on their relations with Israel, since Israel is the holy nation.
Biddle, Mark E. (1990). The " Endangered Ancestress" And Blessing For The Nations. Jefferson City, CO: Carson-Newman College pp. 599-611
Grahamcrackered (talk) 20:03, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Grahamcrackered, where in the Analysis section should the idea of 3 emphases be placed? Also, is this a quote or a paraphrase? ProfGray (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Adding to the analysis of the narratives

message: The article says this: The place the covenant was made is consequently named Beersheba, which translates either to well of oaths or well of seven or seven wells...
So far as I know, bir means a well and sabaa means seven - no mention of an oath. PiCo (talk) 05:25, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: PiCo, hi there. You are correct that be'er means well. The three letters at the end of Beersheba (shin-beit -ayin) can be used to form the Hebrew word for seven or the Hebrew triliteral root for oath-making or an oath, which is used explicitly at Genesis 21:31. Thanks, ProfGray (talk) 15:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of Beersheba 

message: In the article "The Use of the Past to Address the Present" De Hoop points out that many stories in Genesis mirror other events in Israel's history and are merely a retelling of previous events instead of new events.  He states in relation to the similarities of the three wife-sister narratives; "There has been one version which was copied, revised and adapted, resulting in the present three versions of this narrative" (De Hoop, 366). De Hoop, Raymond, "The Use of the Past to Address the Present," In Studies in the Book of Genesis 2001, ed. A. Wenin (Sterling: Leuven University Press, 2001), 366. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkcincy (talk • contribs) 17:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Dkcincy -- inadequate citation, need author and the name of the article. What does the first sentence, in your comment above, have to do with the assertion that the 3 stories are adaptations of one story? Does he merely assert this -- or what reason or evidence does he bring to support the assertion?  ProfGray (talk) 17:45, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: More Support for these being the same story

message: DeHoop claims that the stories of Genesis, including the sister-wife narratives, were written as a precursor to historical Israelite events. He goes on to say that these three stories are an allegory that serve to paint David in a negative light. DeHoop adds that these stories were most likely written in the time of Solomon in order for Solomon to strengthen and legitimize his rule.
DeHoop, Raymond. 1998. The Use of the Past to Address the Present: The Wife-Sister Narratives, Pages 359-369.
kk_1291 (talk)   — Preceding undated comment added 18:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical purpose of wife-sister narratives 

message: Qzagnix-01 took out the information about Abraham and Abimelech and replaced it with an unrelated section about Jacob and Laban. If Qzagnix-01 thinks that Jacob and Laban should be included, they should find sources to corroborate it, but they shouldn't delete existing information from the article that is properly cited in order to include their pet theory.--Jcvamp (talk) 16:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reversion to Marcocapelle's version