180 JOEL S. BADEN It has long been recognized that Deutero-Isaiah builds his prophecies of Israel’s return from exile on the pattern of the exodus. Yet Deutero-Isaiah also knows that the Israelites are descended from the patriarchs: “You, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, seed of Abraham, my friend”. He makes clear mention of the patriarchal story: “Look back to Abraham your father, and to Sarah who brought you forth, for he was only one when I called him, but I blessed him and made him many” (Isa 51,2). In the next chapter, there is this: “Of old, my people went down to Egypt to sojourn there” (Isa 52,4). We thus find in Deutero-Isaiah, in addi- tion to knowledge of the exodus narrative, the notion of Israel’s ori- gins in the patriarchs as well as the descent into Egypt. While it is my belief that Ezekiel is dependent on P, for those scholars who date P to the post-exilic period Ezekiel necessarily pre- dates P. Thus even the evidence from Ezekiel may be discussed here. It is hardly necessary to demonstrate that Ezekiel is familiar with the exodus, as Ezekiel 20 in its entirety is focused on the exodus narra- tive. Yet Ezekiel also integrates the patriarchs. In Ezek 16,3 we read, “By origin and birth you are from the land of the Canaanites”. In Ezek 28,25 it is announced that Israel “shall settle on their own soil, which I gave to my servant Jacob”. In Ezek 37,25 the prophet fore- tells that Israel “shall remain in the land which I gave to my servant Jacob”. And perhaps most notably, in Ezek 33,23 the Israelites who remained in Canaan are said to have proclaimed “Abraham was but one man, yet he was granted possession of the land”. In a variety of contexts, with a variety of references, the book of Ezekiel makes ev- ident its familiarity with the patriarchal story in addition to its evident reliance on the exodus. It may be claimed that all of these pre-priestly prophetic exam- ples of the combination of the patriarchs and the exodus are in fact secondary additions to the original works. Yet there is no com- pelling reason to think that this is the case — other than the a pri- ori belief that the patriarchs and exodus were kept entirely separate before P. It could also be argued that the prophets who refer to both the patriarchs and the exodus do not know them as a continuous story, but only as independent narratives; again, however, there is no obvious sign that this is the case — certainly Deutero-Isaiah, with the reference to Israel going down to Egypt, already consid- ers the history to be continuous from the patriarchs to the exodus. Additionally, it is hard to imagine how an author could simultane- © Gregorian Biblical Press 2012 - Tutti i diritti riservati