History YMMV / BookOfGenesis

** Lot's proposed deal with the gang rapists at Sodom has some questioning how righteous he really was. On the other hand, before he offered them his daughters, the text states he ''went out and closed the door behind him'', thereby leaving himself vulnerable to the rapists while protecting both his daughters and his guests.

** When Noah is described as "a just man and perfect in his generations," does it mean that he was truly just and morally perfect?[[note]]This completely contradicts the central pillar of Christian theology: that after the Fall of Man, ''everybody'' who has ever lived or will live, with no exceptions, is imperfect and full of sin and needs Jesus to redeem them. Yet here, the implication is that Noah's perfection exempts him from this[[/note]] Or was he simply [[FairForItsDay the best of a bad generation]], who wasn't so perfect compared to later heroes – as evidenced by the fact he doesn't plead for God to spare the world, the way Abraham later does for Sodom and Gomorrah, and that all he does after the Flood is get drunk and curse his grandson for a sin the boy's father committed? Alternatively, are his post-Flood actions a sign of [[ShellShockedVeteran character-damaging trauma]] from having survived the world's destruction? Furthermore, adding up the dates that his descendants have children reveals that he did not die until Abraham was sixty years old, meaning that disregarding the unlikely case that the Tower of Babel was built only in the decade between Noah dying and God commanding Abraham to go to Canaan, he was alive when the Tower was built. Did he just become a hermit after his children’s children grew up and didn’t know about it? Did he know, [[PushoverParents but feel powerless to stop it]]? '''[[FaceHeelTurn Was it his idea to begin with?]]'''

** Why does Rebekah help her son Jacob cheat his brother Esau out of their father's blessing? Is it a shameless act of ParentalFavoritism? Or is she doing what she believes is God's will, since God told her before her sons were born that the elder would serve the younger? Or does she objectively realize that Jacob's character makes him better suited to be Isaac's heir? For that matter, is Isaac really fooled by Jacob's disguise, or – since he does briefly recognize his voice – does he only pretend to be fooled because he belatedly realizes that Jacob is the more suitable heir, but knows that the HotBlooded Esau will never willingly give up his blessing?

** Who did Jacob wrestle? The text is ambiguous as to whether it was an angel, God himself, or some kind of avatar. Jacob earns the name "Israel" (''yisra El'', "struggles against God") through his victory, which seems to point to his opponent actually being ''God'', but the Literature/BookOfHosea later refers to him having wrestled against an angel (''malak''). It gets fuzzier (and prone to fighting) when considering the opinion of most scholars that the story dates from pre-monotheistic traditions, when the terms "angel" and "god" were defined differently anyway.[[note]]Furthering the confusion is the fact that the name "Israel" shows up as a personal name elsewhere in the area, and may in fact actually mean something closer to "God prevails" or "El prevails." It's possible that the scene was essentially intended to make two separate folk heroes, Jacob and Israel, into a CompositeCharacter as the Israelites assimilated more tribes and cities around them.[[/note]]

** Due to ValuesDissonance, Lot can come off as this for unbelievers (and some believers as well) when he offers his daughters to the rapists. Yet he's described as a righteous man in the New Testament, specifically in the Literature/EpistlesOfPeter.

* DoubleStandard: Some people have put the blame of eating the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge solely on Adam, others[[labelnote: *]]including Adam himself[[/labelnote]] on Eve. Others [[TakeAThirdOption put the blame on both]].

** Since the time of the Roman empire, rabbis have believed King Herod was an Edomite and therefore a son of Esau. This association of Herod (a client of Rome) with Esau led rabbis to associate Rome with Esau as well. As a result Literature/TheTalmud and the Midrash describe Rome as "Esau/Edom". And since many of these texts were being composed when Rome was Christian, the rabbis ended up associating Christianity itself with Esau.

** Who did Jacob wrestle? The text is ambiguous as to whether it was an angel, God himself, or some kind of avatar. Jacob earns the name "Israel" (''yisra El'', "struggles against God") through his victory, which seems to point to his opponent actually being ''God'', but the Book of Hosea later refers to him having wrestled against an angel (''malak''). It gets fuzzier (and prone to fighting) when considering the opinion of most scholars that the story dates from pre-monotheistic traditions, when the terms "angel" and "god" were defined differently anyway.[[note]]Furthering the confusion is the fact that the name "Israel" shows up as a personal name elsewhere in the area, and may in fact actually mean something closer to "God prevails" or "El prevails." It's possible that the scene was essentially intended to make two separate folk heroes, Jacob and Israel, into a CompositeCharacter as the Israelites assimilated more tribes and cities around them.[[/note]]

* DesignatedVillain: Dinah's brothers. The narrative takes a dim view of their [[RapeAndRevenge getting revenge for Dinah's rape]]. However, the major problem with this view is that they pretty much butchered the whole city instead of the one guy, the prince, who actually raped Dinah, and took the women into slavery. The reason they managed to do that is because they convinced them all to get circumcised, an act which would have meant they were all now part of the pact with God and his followers. Circumcision was a sign that a man was part of the Abrahamic covenant, so for Dinah's brothers to use it in such an underhanded way destroys the idea that the Hebrew nation is trustworthy to her neighbours. (Their own father does call them out on this, too.)

** Since the time of the Roman empire, rabbis have believed King Herod was an Edomite and therefore a son of Esau. This association of Herod (a client of Rome) with Esau led rabbis to associate Rome with Esau as well. As a result Literature/TheTalmud and the Midrash describe Rome as "Esau/Edom". And since many of these texts were being composed when Rome was Christian, the rabbis ended up assoctating Christianity itself with Esau.

** God's promise to Abraham at 12:3 is also a source of division for modern Christians. God's promise that those who love the Jewish people will be blessed, and those who show hate will be cursed, has been taken by some to be a prophecy of the coming of the State of UsefulNotes/{{Israel}} in 1948, and conflate a long-ago promise to the people with the creation of a man-made nation state four millennia later. Other Christians argue it means no such thing and this has been taken wildly out of context, and given an incorrect meaning and a significance it should never have received. [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement Debate continues]].

** As mentioned above under "Alternate Character Interpretation," some scholars also think Isaac may have had autism or some other developmental disability, which could explain why his role is so passive compared to his active father, sons, and grandsons.

* DiagnosedByTheAudience: There are some scholars and Biblical historians who believe that Joseph might have had autism (albeit impossible to state due to not being classified at the time of writing). This stems from being seen as childish due to being on his own and spending time with the sheep, and not picking up social cues such as [[InnocentlyInsensitive telling his brothers about a dream where they bowed to him.]] His fascination with dreams (always asking God about their meanings) can also be seen as a special interest.

** God's promise to Abraham at 12:3 is also a source of division for modern Christians. God's promise that those who love the Jewish people will be blessed, and those who show hate will be cursed, has been taken by some to be a prophecy of the coming of the State of UsefulNotes/{{Israel}} in 1948, and conflate a long-ago promise to the people with the creation of a man-made nation state four millenia later. Other Christians argue it means no such thing and this has been taken wildly out of context, and given an incorrect meaning and a significance it should never have received. [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement Debate continues]].

* DiagnosedByTheAudience: There are some scholars and Biblical historians who believe that Joseph might have had autism (albeit impossible to state due to not being classified at the time of writing). This stems from being seen as childish due to being on his own and spending time with the sheep, and not picking up social cues such as [[InnocentlyInsesitive telling his brothers about a dream where they bowed to him.]] His fascination with dreams (always asking God about their meanings) can also be seen as a special interest.

** Lot's offer to let the men of Sodom have at his two daughters if they would leave his guests alone and not violate SacredHospitality is a fucked-up thing to do to one's own kids by modern standards at the ''very'' least, and as mentioned in AlternateCharacterInterpretation, has led to some people questioning just how righteous Lot really was.

** Due to ValuesDissonance, Lot can come off as this for unbelievers (and some believers as well) when he offers his daughters to the rapists. Yet he's described as a righteous man in the New Testament, specifically in the epistles of Peter.

* WhatDoYouMeanItsNotDidactic: Besides the creation story, there is Melchizedek, the HighPriest who gave Abraham and Sarah bread, wine, and a blessing in the name of their {{God}}. Some uphold him as a metaphor or foreshadowing of Christ, others just see him as some priest-king-dude who did something nice for Abraham and Sarah.

** When Noah is described as "a just man and perfect in his generations," does it mean that he was truly just and morally perfect? Or was he simply [[FairForItsDay the best of a bad generation]], who wasn't so perfect compared to later heroes – as evidenced by the fact he doesn't plead for God to spare the world, the way Abraham later does for Sodom and Gomorrah, and that all he does after the Flood is get drunk and curse his grandson for a sin the boy's father committed? Alternatively, are his post-Flood actions a sign of [[ShellShockedVeteran character-damaging trauma]] from having survived the world's destruction? Furthermore, adding up the dates that his descendants have children reveals that he did not die until Abraham was sixty years old, meaning that disregarding the unlikely case that the Tower of Babel was built only in the decade between Noah dying and God commanding Abraham to go to Canaan, he was alive when the Tower was built. Did he just become a hermit after his children’s children grew up and didn’t know about it? Did he know, [[PushoverParents but feel powerless to stop it]]? '''[[FaceHeelTurn Was it his idea to begin with?]]'''

*** Was Isaac a child or a young adult at the time? Was he completely helpless at his father's hands, or did he lie down willingly on the alter for God's sake? Does the fact that afterwards, he and Abraham are never shown directly interacting again imply that the incident estranged them?

** Who did Jacob wrestle? The text is ambiguous as to whether it was an angel, God himself, or some kind of avatar. Jacob earns the name "Israel" (''yisra El'', "struggles against God") through his victory, which seems to point to his opponent actually being ''God'', but the Book of Hosea later refers to him having wrestled against an angel (''malak''). It gets fuzzier (and prone to [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment fighting]]) when considering the opinion of most scholars that the story dates from pre-monotheistic traditions, when the terms "angel" and "god" were defined differently anyway.[[note]]Furthering the confusion is the fact that the name "Israel" shows up as a personal name elsewhere in the area, and may in fact actually mean something closer to "God prevails" or "El prevails." It's possible that the scene was essentially intended to make two separate folk heroes, Jacob and Israel, into a CompositeCharacter as the Israelites assimilated more tribes and cities around them.[[/note]]
** The Talmud contains a reinterpretation where Reuben's [[IncestIsRelative disturbance of his father's bed]] was not actually a euphemism. That is, instead of having sex with Bilhah, he was angry that Jacob favored her over his own mother and so forcibly modified their sleeping arrangements to give Leah her due honors. [[SeriousBusiness Jacob did not take this well]].
* BrokenBase: This, alongside the Literature/BookOfRevelation, is one of the most divisive books of the Bible. [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment Let's just leave it at that.]]

** Why does Rebekah help her son Jacob cheat his brother Esau out of their father's blessing? Is it a shameless act of ParentalFavoritism? Or does she objectively realize that Jacob's character makes him better suited to be Isaac's heir? For that matter, is Isaac really fooled by Jacob's disguise, or – since he does briefly recognize his voice – does he only pretend to be fooled because he belatedly realizes that Jacob is the more suitable heir, but knows that the HotBlooded Esau will never willingly give up his blessing?

** Why was Cain's sacrifice not accepted by God? Was it simply because God wanted an animal sacrifice (a scenario which seems to be unfairly stacked against Cain, given that Cain was a farmer and not a herdsman, and would not have livestock of his own to offer in sacrifice). John Milton's poem Literature/ParadiseLost gives an interesting alternative explanation: it depicts Cain as carelessly selecting crops as his offering, whereas Abel chooses the finest sheep from his flocks, thus suggesting that Cain's sacrifice was rejected because he performed it insincerely or without the appropriate care. Likewise, God's banishment of Cain: an excessive act of CruelMercy, or a just punishment? Of note is that Cain does not seem repentant even when confronted by God, sarcastically asking if he is to be his brother's keeper.

** Lot's offer to let the men of Sodom have at his two daughters if they would leave his guests alone and not violate SacredHospitality is a fucked-up thing to do to one's own kids by modern standards, and as mentioned in AlternateCharacterInterpretation, has led to some people questioning just how righteous Lot really was.

* MoralEventHorizon: The men of Sodom attempt to gang rape a pair of angels, thus establishing that they are too wicked to save. Since God sent the angels down specifically to see if there were any righteous people to be found in Sodom, this is the final straw that convinces Him to destroy both Sodom and Gomorrah, with only Lot and his family being allowed to escape.

** Lot's offer to let the men of Sodom have at his two daughters if they would leave his guests alone and not violate SacredHospitality is quite the fucked-up thing to do to one's own kids by modern standards, and as mentioned in AlternateCharacterInterpretation, has led to some people questioning just how righteous Lot really was.

* MoralEventHorizon: The men of Sodom attempt to gang rape a pair of angels, thus establishing that they are too wicked to save. Since God sent them down specifically to see if there were any righteous people to be found in Sodom, this is the final straw that convinces Him that both Sodom and Gomorrah need to be purged from existence, with only Lot and his family being allowed to escape.

** Lot's offer in Genesis 19:8 to let the men of Sodom have at his two daughters if they would leave his guests alone and not violate SacredHospitality is quite the fucked-up thing to do to one's own kids by modern standards, and as mentioned in AlternateCharacterInterpretation, has led to some people questioning just how righteous Lot really was.

* MoralEventHorizon: The men of Sodom attempt to gang rape a pair of angels, thus establishing that they are too wicked to save. Since God sent them down specifically to see if there were any righteous people to be found in Sodom, this is the final straw that convinces Him that both Sodom and Gomorrah need to be purged from existence, with only Lot and his family being allowed to get the hell out of Dodge.

* MoralEventHorizon: The men of Sodom attempt to gang rape a pair of angels, thus establishing that they are indeed full of sin.

** Joseph. Sold by his brothers to slavery, then wrongly accused of rape. It takes a while before he [[EarnYourHappyEnding earns his happy ending]].

** Hagar becomes Abraham's concubine with his wife Sarah's consent and bears him a much-desired son, Ishmael. Later, once Sarah herself conceives and gives birth to Isaac, she has Abraham evict Hagar and Ishmael, who have to wander around in the wilderness before [[DeusExMachina God intervenes]].

* DesignatedVillain: Dinah's brothers. The narrative takes a dim view of their [[RapeAndRevenge getting revenge for Dinah's rape]]. However, the major problem with this view is that they pretty much butchered the whole city instead of the one guy, the prince, who actually raped Dinah, and took the women into slavery. The reason they managed to do that is because they convinced them all to get circumcised, an act which would have meant they were all now part of the pact with God and his followers. Circumcision was a sign that a man was part of the Abrahamic covenant, so for Dinah's brothers to use it in such an underhanded way destroys the idea that the Hebrew nation is trustworthy to her neighbours.