01_Biblica_Hong_Layout 1 08/07/13 12:54 Pagina 324 324 KOOG P. HONG prise both northern and southern traditions. Still, on the surface level, the two models conflict with each other: E is not equated with what tradition historians would identify as the northern tradition. In this regard, the Elohistic Abraham section (Genesis 20-22*) provides the main divergence 14. This section belongs to E (hence, it is northern) in the source-critical scheme, but in the block model it is construed as southern. In other words, according to the tradition-historical model, before the northern tradition was taken over by Judeans, northern Israelites remembered their past mainly through the memory of Jacob, not Abraham. One might object that discussing E sounds outdated in today’s Pentateuchal scholarship. Today’s emphasis on the late stage, how- ever, does not minimize the necessity of continually clarifying the ever-elusive early stage of the composition history of the Pentateuch. Besides, studies on E, despite widespread skepticism, have not dis- appeared 15. More importantly, when issues of the northern tradition are tackled, scholars frequently return, quite uncritically, to the out- dated Elohistic criteria in identifying the northern tradition 16. Thus, even if my discussion is on the surface directed against the more traditional forms of the source model, its implications for all related branches within the source model must be recognized. So, I ask again, did northerners remember Abraham as their father? Not surprisingly, this text has received some attention from scholars. T.D. 14 ALEXANDER, Abraham in the Negev. A Source-Critical Investigation of Genesis 20:1–22:19 (Carlisle, UK 1997); F. ZIMMER, Der Elohist als weisheitlich-pro- phetische Redaktionsschicht. Eine literarische und theologiegeschichtliche Un- tersuchung der sogenannten elohistischen Texte im Pentateuch (Europäische Hochschulschriften 656; Frankfurt am Main 1999). Though very different in their approaches, both authors reject the northern orientation of the text. To name some of the major contributions: H.W. WOLFF, “Elohistic Frag- 15 ments in the Pentateuch”, Interpretation 26 (1972) 158-173; A.W. JENKS, The Elohist and North Israelite Traditions (Missoula, MT 1977); H.L. GINSBERG, The Israelian Heritage of Judaism (TSJTSA 24; New York 1982); COOTE, In Defense; S.E. MCEVENUE, “A Return to Sources in Genesis 28,10-22?”, ZAW 106 (1994) 375-389; ZIMMER, Der Elohist; A. GRAUPNER, Der Elohist. Gegen- wart und Wirksamkeit des Transzendenten Gottes in der Geschichte (WMANT 97; Neukirchen-Vluyn 2002); WEISMAN, From Jacob to Israel; J. GOMES, The Sanctuary of Bethel and the Configuration of Israelite Identity (BZAW 368; Berlin 2006); YOREH, The First Book of God. E.g. GOMES, Bethel; YOREH, The First Book of God. 16 © Gregorian Biblical Press 2013 - Tutti i diritti riservati