Lej Lejá (Genesis 12:1-17:27): a study of exegetical, historical-archaeological, and the thesis of Abraham as “the liberator of captives,”

1) Delineation and structure of the parashah

Lej Lejá covers the call of Abram and his journey of faith and covenant:

• Call and promise (12:1-9): output of their land with promises of land, seed and blessing universal.
• Famine, and the descent to Egypt (12:10-20).
• Separation of Lot and renewal of the promise (13).
• War of the four kings against the five and release of captives; meeting Melchizedek; rejection of the booty (14).
• Covenant between the halves (15): confirmation solemn of land and offspring.
• Hagar and Ishmael (16).
• Covenant of the circumcision and name change (17).

VIDEO PARASHAH LEJ LEJÁ 2025 IN SPANISH

2) Axles theological and literary main

• Faith obediencial and mobility: the imperative of “Lej lejá” inaugurates a journey where the confidence precedes the evidence. (12:1-3).
• Blessing universal: the choice of Abram has horizon berajá to “all the families of the earth”. (12:3).
• Justice and the renunciation of the profit: the refusal to accept the loot from the king of Sodom stresses independence and ethical rejection of enrichment by the war. (14:22-24).
• Covenant and signal: the berit (cap 15), and circumcision (cap 17) articulate a promise and a commitment for life.

VIDEO PARASHAH LEJ LEJÁ 2025 IN ENGLISH

3) The “Abraham historical: what allows us to affirm the evidence

3.1 Chronology and geography of fund

• Ur and Haran: the tradition places the origin in Ur of the chaldees and a stay in Make (Upper Mesopotamia), paths consistent with networks in the north of the Middle Bronze age. Ur it is a great sumerian city (Tell el-Muqayyar, Iraq), with zigurate del s. XXI.C.; his identification with the “Ur of the chaldees” biblical is discussed, but Ur in the south mesopotamian is the dominant hypothesis in the general bibliography.
• Context amorites and north-mesopotamian: the archives of Mari (c. 1900-1700 to.C.) document onomastics and customs semitic western (e.g., Binu-Yamina/Benjamin), and place names such as Will, offering a cultural backdrop credible clans semi-nomadic pastoralists such as the Abram's wife. (The relationship is contextual, not probation).
• Judicial traditions of the Bronze: the texts from Nuzi (c. 1600-1400 to.C.) show practices on the adoption of hereditary, the use of slaves to procreate and contracts familiar, similar —though of chronology back— to scenes patriarchal (Hagar, inheritance, etc); today, it is used with caution as parallel cultural, not as “evidence”.

3.2 The battle of Genesis 14 and its historicity

• The cap 14 places to Abram in an international framework (coalition of elamite-mesopotamian cities and the Kikar of Jordan). The identification of names such as Chedorlaomer/Kudur-Lagamar it has been proposed and controversial; there is no confirmation of epigraphic conclusive, and the majority sees the passage as memory epic with possible historical echoes.

3.3 State of the academic debate

• Perspective skeptical (minimalist/moderate): doubt of a biography recoverable Abraham and prioritizes composition late; go to the patriarchs as traditions etiologic of the Iron Age.
• Perspective conservative (maximalist/moderate): emphasizes the convergence of cultural ANE (Mari/Nuzi/laws) to have a historical memory basic stories patriarchal. (Kitchen, Hess, etc).
• Synthesis prudent: today it is legitimate to speak of likelihood cultural (routes, clans semi-nomadic, forms of covenant and limited war) without the possibility of check biographical direct of Abraham. The best works of general reference (e.g., Britannica) presented to Abraham as a foundational figure in the tradition, with dating conventional in the beginning of the II millennium.C., leaving open the historicity strict.

4) Abraham as “the liberator of captives,”: read-positive and foundation textual

• Made textual: after the defeat of Sodom and Gomorrah by the coalition, east Abram “recovered all the goods and brought back (...) women and the people” together with the Lot (14:14-16). It is a rescue operation of captured civilians —captive that, in the context ANE, they were destined to enslavement—, followed by the waiver booty to the king of Sodom.
• Historical reading is plausible: in the Brass, making the population as loot human it was practice closely linked to the enslavement. Recover to “women and the people” and to return them to their place is a act discharging in functional terms (the release of captives of war). This reading is compatible with the text and with the recognition that makes Melchizedek of the act and of the God that “delivery to the enemies in your hand.”
• Scope: it's not about abolitionists (notion anachronistic for the time), but release point in front of an expedition of prey; the ethics of Abram is reinforced by his refusal to be enriched by the war (14:22-24).

(5) Notes exegetical select key passages

• 12:1-3 (Called and blessing): the vocation includes universal promise; faith is shown as movement geographical and existential.
• 13 (Separation of Lot): Abram prioritizes peace and trust in the promise; the geography (Bet-The/Hevrón) and the altars mark possession symbolic.
• 14 (War and rescue): tactical use of a force domestic (318 hanikim) and night attack; meeting with Melchizedek (enshrine the victory), and rejection booty (autonomy ethics).
• 15 (Covenant between the halves): ritual ANE alliance with theophany; promise against evidence (sterility).
• 16 (Hagar): social practice consistent with parallel ANE (use of a servant as a surrogate mother), to read with ethical sensitivity by voltage generated. (Parallel Nuzi: analogy cultural, dating back).
• 17 (Circumcision): signal the covenant with family and generational; change of names expressed new identity.

6) Framework archaeological and cultural: what and what not to argue the findings

• Yes hold:
  • Existence and strength of Ur and its urban environment-religious; plausibility of movements from the south to the mesopotamian to the northwest (Will) and then to Canaan.
  • Parallel cultural (contracts, adoption, inheritance, slave-concubines) in texts of the Bronze (Mari/Nuzi) that make it believable the background of Genesis.
• Do not hold (until today):
  • Direct evidence from the biography of Abraham or identification indubitable of the kings in Genesis 14; the proposals (e.g., Kudur-Lagamar) remain hypothesis.

7) Synthesis: a portrait of Abraham

In Lej Lejá, Abraham appears as pioneer of faith (leaves securities), agent of blessing (disclaimer profit unfair), leader responsible (rescues captives), negotiator of peace (with a Lot) and man of covenant (cap 15 and 17). Historically, a chief of clan semi-nomadic insert into networks ANE of the II millennium.C. is plausible; the biography verifiable it is not achievable with the current state of the evidence. The thesis of the “liberator” supports quote (14:16) and contextually (captive = future enslavement), with a limit of not extrapolarla the abolitionists modern.