Water Restoration in Genesis 26:18–20

Abstract

This essay examines the story of the quarrel between Isaac and the Gerarites over water in the Gerar Valley (Gen 26:18–20). In an ecological reading using Eric Higgs’s focal restoration perspective, the essay illustrates the ecological culture of the ancient Gerarites, who respected and appreciated the hydro-geological conditions of the Gerar Valley region. By maintaining the water ecology in the area, the Gerarites ensured a sufficient supply of water during dry seasons.

Introduction ¹

The reality of drought leading to water scarcity in some karst-structured ² areas of Indonesia prompts an understanding of biblical texts that encourages the restoration of water habitat areas. Biblical passages addressing water (and other ecological resources) have been interpreted for generations through an anthropocentric perspective and need to be re-explored to form positive ways of relating to nature and develop a culture that is in harmony with ecological processes. Sacred texts need not be read exclusively in anthropocentric ways; there is room also for ecocentrism (putting ecology at the center) and even cosmocentrism (putting the world at the center).

The story of the water dispute with the Gerarites in Genesis 26 offers a useful test-case for a more ecocentric reading. Laura Hobgood-Oster states that there are hints of justice in this story with regard to restoring the integrity of the water ecology in Gerar. ³ Rather than focus on the quarrel between Isaac’s and Gerar’s shepherds, an eco-hermeneutic reading places water at the heart of the narrative and provides space to understand the attitudes and actions of the Gerarites, namely the closing of the wells dug by Abraham, and the true meaning of the quarrel.

Using an eco-hermeneutic approach, the text of Gen 26:18–20 will be examined alongside Eric Higgs’s theory of “focal restoration.” The study will call attention to the absolute dependence of the Gerarites on water. This group of people must sustain water’s existence in selected habitats in the form of springs and wells. They understand and adapt their way of life and culture to the ecological processes of water on earth. This paper will present textual evidence supported by archaeological evidence that the Gerarites were maintaining an ecological restoration of damaged water habitats in Gerar. The quarrel between the Gerarites and Isaac is not about land ownership so much as it is about the preservation of the precious and limited water resources. The Gerarites were in conflict with Isaac’s people because of their desire for the preservation and conservation of sustainable water habitats.

This kind of interpretive approach considers the existential threat of the destruction of water habitats in our present context. Ecological hermeneutics provides space to understand the ways in which the local Gerar community interpreted their relationship with water. That the Gerar people evidently lived in harmony with ecological processes can expand our understanding of restoration to ensure the health of water all over the world. In particular, this reading presents water habitat restoration efforts in karst areas in Indonesia as an ethical-religious issue.

Focal Restoration to Answering Tradition

Traditional Christianity has tended to perpetuate anthropocentrism, but this does not preclude alternative approaches. Sitler argues that there are resources embedded deep in the texts, traditions, and experiences of faith that can be reclaimed and reformed to sustain earth’s community and aid visions of justice and peace on earth. ⁴ Mary Eve Lyn Tucker and Jhon Grim encourage Christians to utilize sacred texts as sources of wisdom that can tell the story of the universe in a manner that helps us address the environmental crisis. ⁵ When applied creatively, sacred traditions and certain biblical texts can be a resource for symbolic ideas, spiritual inspiration, and ethical principles. ⁶ The text of Gen 26:18–20 reveals the Gerarites’ relationship with and recognition of the sacred value of water. Intersecting this biblical story with Eric Higgs’s theory of focal restoration will suggest that the Gerarites’ water restoration activities in Genesis 26 can generate discussion on issues of water restoration today.

Eric Higgs initiated the concept of “focal restoration” by elaborating on the spiritual and moral elements of ecological restoration. Focal restoration is the act of building meaningful, peaceful, human and non-human relationships through land conservation. When done correctly, this type of restoration should accelerate the natural process of ecological healing, namely the replication of structure and composition, function and durability of non-human communities. In addition, focal restoration is directed at rebuilding political, cultural, social, economic, and moral trust. ⁷ Cultural and ecological processes are integrated into communal experiences to form strong relationships between humans and non-human communities. The integration is continuous, creating the character, historical, literal, and metaphorical experience of a place.

Higgs identifies four key components to assess the extent of good ecological restoration: (1) ecological integrity, (2) historical fidelity, (3) focal practices, and (4) intentionality or “wild design.”’ ⁸ Ecological integrity refers to the natural components and processes that enable ecosystems to adjust to environmental change. Higgs does not use the term “ecological health,” because the implied conditions of flourishing, wellbeing, vitality, or prosperity change over time, and any rigid attempt to define them is doomed to failure. An ecosystem may be healthy but not have the intact qualities of its original undamaged, complete, and undivided state. The element of historical fidelity means intentionally respecting the previously disturbed condition of the ecosystem and attempting to restore it to a range of those original conditions, which may or may not include ongoing human participation and presence. Focal practices emphasize local community participation in restoration activities to reintegrate individuals and communities into ecosystems and places. Ultimately, all of these efforts involve an element of intentionality or “wild design.” But paradoxically, to restore “wildness” means to restore the integrity of nature to function sustainably without large-scale human manipulation. Higgs proposes landscape co-evolution, the idea that ecological and cultural processes influence the natural evolution of landscapes. Ecological history intersects with cultural memory, cultural reflection with historical reference conditions, and ecological futures with cultural imagination. According to Higgs, a restoration focus helps to ensure that culture and human activity remain or become tied to local evolutionary ecosystem processes that promote the sustainability of renewable ecosystem capacity and health. ⁹

Focal restoration is a human conversation with the land about the true value of nature and the serious spiritual and moral significance of nature. Restoration creates spiritual-moral and communal-cultural values associated with a particular landscape. This means restoration is an opportunity for atonement, as well as cultural and spiritual healing. Focal restoration has two key aspects: (1) participation-restoration promotes “community engagement, experimentation, local autonomy, regional variation, and a degree of creativity in working together with natural patterns and processes,” and (2) celebration-restoration promotes events that renew “the spirit of community sharing in the regeneration of native ecosystems” (e.g., burning celebrations for tall grass prairies). ¹⁰

What Higgs calls “focused” or “participatory” restoration is more local and grassroots: it integrates local communities and their cultures into a participatory process that engages the relationship between people and ecosystems. Higgs considers the use of science and technology to be part of ecological restoration projects. ¹¹

Focal Restoration and Gen 26:18–20

In the context of Gen 26:18–20, there is evidence of focal restoration efforts in Gerar. Although there is no direct textual evidence, an eco-hermeneutical reading of Gen 26:18–20 follows a process of suspicion, identification, and retrieval. ¹² The traditional (anthropocentric) interpretation that emphasizes God’s blessing of Isaac tends to overlook the significance of water in the narrative. The Genesis text provides insight into an ancient communal memory of ecological restoration and how the entity of water played an important role in the dynamics of economic, political, and religious life. That water management seems to have shaped the central concerns of the Gerar people invites interpreters to consider ways in which people today can integrate concern for water resources into their economic, political, and religious understandings.

When examining the text more closely, Gen 26:18 describes the closure of the wells that Abraham dug. These closures suggest a practice of wetland restoration. Abraham dug a well in the valley of Gerar (Gen 21:22–26), but it was taken over by Abimelech’s servants, with Abimelech’s approval. Genesis 26:19–21 then describes the result of those restoration efforts. The heated argument between the shepherds of Gerar and Isaac about the water’s habitat directs the reader’s attention to the geographical and hydrological conditions of the area in the valley of Gerar. Gerar was an important ancient location, because it had a large wadi in the Negeb, namely the Wadi Shari’ah, which was supported by the mountainous area to the east of Gerar. ¹³ This is evidenced by archaeological findings. ¹⁴ Tell Abu Hureira indicates that the land of Gerar was a typical intermediate area located between the settled state and the grazing lands of the nomads. ¹⁵ In addition, there are several other sites, such as Tell el ‘Ajj’l (Beth ‘Eglayim), Tell Jemma (Yura), and Tell el-Far’ah (Sharuhen). Geographically, Gerar borders Beersheba. Thus, the wells of Esekh, Sitnah, and Rehoboth mentioned in Genesis 26 may all be located in the valley of Gerar, ¹⁶ generally described as an area of fertile pasture and large tracts of good land, an area that farmers and herders sought for their livestock. Based on the text of 1 Chr 4:39–40, the area then known as “Gedorwas” inhabited by the descendants of Simeon in the time of King Hezekiah. ¹⁷

The passages in 1 Chronicles and Genesis offer a glimpse into the ecological memory of Gerar, a memory that includes the Gerar valley in the putative time of Abraham, Isaac, and Hezekiah. The Gerarites were able to maintain their existence and civilization on a fertile landscape that they guarded and protected. The narrators of Genesis 21, 26, and Chronicles speak of a state of what we could call focal restoration that was consistently practiced by the Gerarites. The Gerar people were focused and consistent in resisting any attempts to destroy the water habitat. When Isaac’s herders dug wells in the land of Gerar, the Gerarites quarreled with them, because the water resource would be compromised. The two wells were named Esekh (“Contention”) and Sitnah (“Hostility”) because the Gerarites resisted Isaac’s well digging in that place (Gen 26:20–21).

The hypothesis that the Gerar valley is a focal restoration area is supported by geographical and geological factors. The soil structure in the Gerar valley area is a mixture of calcareous, rocky, sandy gravel, and clay layers. A geo-electrical survey showed that the river below the surface of the channel contains a thicker layer of gravel; the water meanders and is not always continuous. Although usually impenetrable, in limited areas the limestone is fractured by some pressure. Where these fractures occur under or along riverbeds, water penetrates and dissolves some of the chalk, widening the fractures and creating subsurface channels that allow groundwater flow. ¹⁸ Humans and animals depend on wells and groundwater because of the relatively low annual rainfall, less than 300 millimeters per year, in this area. ¹⁹ Archaeologist Yohanan Aharoni explains that the Gerar Valley is the center of the largest wadi or spring in the Negeb. ²⁰ The area is located on the border of human settlements. This region is an area of perennial vegetation with deep roots that maintain the water. The water that appears in the wells comes from riverbeds that fill with water during flash floods in winter. ²¹

Conflict between Settlers and Nomadic Herders

As long as natural resources were abundant, nomadic farmers like Isaac and the Gerar people lived in a kind of peaceful symbiosis. However, when nomadic farmers tried to settle in an occupied farming area due to its sustainable water availability, they increased the amount of water use, which would lead to increased soil salts and create dead zones in the soil. When such a situation of dead zones occurs, it is difficult to change. Even if irrigation stops and water levels eventually return to pre-farm levels, salt remains in the soil, preventing further agricultural efforts. ²² The imposition of irrigated and cultivated agricultural systems generates severe stresses that create imbalances in the soil-water complex. Under these stresses, vegetation, soil, and water lose their resilience and are unable to properly maintain their integrity and balance. ²³ Agriculture-induced salinization likely was a persistent problem for cities in the region during biblical times. Intensive cultivation of wheat, barley, beans, lentils, millet, and spelt would have altered the balance of available water. This is why the Gerarites are protective of their land and water in the narrative. ²⁴

The attitude of the Gerar shepherds towards Isaac shows a picture of a rain-dependent society accustomed to extreme fluctuations in arability and access to water. They presumably had rules about the water below ground level. They released the water gradually through relatively small channels that formed springs. Such regularity allowed them to have an irrigation-based culture in an arid land. ²⁵ They placed water rights as a fundamental argument in the management of the water living area. ²⁶ The character of land and water is guarded against the exploitative tendencies of nomads like Isaac. ²⁷

Cultural and Ecological Resilience

As the Gerar community in Genesis emphasizes the responsibility to maintain the health of the water habitat, interpreters can perceive that they perpetuate a continuous direct or indirect ecological obligation to preserve the water habitat. This in turn perpetuates the restoration activities of the communities involved. If humans assume that aquatic habitats are self-restoring but require human intervention, they may reform their social and cultural behavior while continuing to engage in restoration practices that maintain aquatic habitat health. When humans make meaning out of ecological restoration, they can justify rituals that promote restoration and discourage any attempt to degrade the original condition of the water landscape.

The act of closing the wells dug by Abraham was in concert with the Gerarites’ belief in restoration practices. The Gerar people evidently practiced agriculture and animal husbandry that maintained biodiversity. Therefore, they shut down the wells, watched Isaac’s movements, tried to stop the digging of more wells, and expelled Isaac from the Gerar area. Their actions were not taken out of sheer economic or social jealousy; they were following a deeply embedded moral imperative to protect the water. ²⁸ Considering the sustainability of water in Gerar in times of famine, one has to wonder how a large spring could meet the needs of all the natives and migrants like Isaac who practiced agriculture and animal husbandry. Some commentators support the Gerar people in asking Isaac to obey the law of protection of the water habitat in Gerar. ²⁹

An Ecological Community

The water that flows in the springs of Sitnah and Esekh provides its own history. What we see and know from the text gives us clues as to the historical legacy of the Gerar people as an ecological community. The passage tells us that the Gerar people were willing to invest mind, energy, and perhaps funds to address any problems created by nomadic herders like Isaac, whose presence would over-tax the water supply.

The interests of nomadic herders were valued less than maintaining the ecological processes of the Gerarites’ water. The Gerar people knew that the prevention of exploitation makes much more sense than restoration. Restoration of wetland ecosystems is complicated. The willingness to close wells and fight off usurpers is an indispensable part of survival for such a people. Restoration is an act of salvation that resonates with the care and loyalty of the relationship with the wetland ecosystem.

The water in the Gerar valley area is an example of how focal restoration involves communication, ingenuity, and respect for eco-systems in dealing with activities that are not in harmony with nature. Restoration fulfills ecological goals despite tremendous socio-economic upheaval and resistance (cf. Gen 26:12–14). Moreover, the cultural practices of agriculture and animal husbandry have contributed to the ecological character of the Gerar area.

Wheat was the staple food of the rich, and barley was the food of the poor and animals. ³⁰ Barley is a crop that is resistant to soil salinity and requires a small amount of water to grow, whereas wheat requires a lot of water and low soil salinity. Soil salinity can be removed only by using a large supply of water above the soil surface. ³¹ This means that it is possible that Isaac was practicing stubble farming that did not consider soil nutrient balance and water availability during dry periods. Wheat cultivation can lead to soil salinization. The description of Isaac’s herds of sheep and oxen is a clue to excessive water consumption. ³²

Such dynamics become more problematic in the context of famine. The challenge for wetland restoration is difficult because it involves raising the water level to a sufficient point while taking into account the technical characteristics of the landscape site. The grasslands and tamarisk, oak, and pistachio trees in the Gerar valley area today are cultural artifacts, made possible by ecosystems and centuries of ingenuity. Isaac’s act of naming the water shows his attitude towards the Gerar shepherds and the water. Isaac apparently accepted the authority of the Gerar shepherds over the water. Isaac chooses not to quarrel anymore. He respects the existence of the relationship between the Gerar shepherds and the water. ³³ Giving the names (i.e., Gen 26:20 “the herders of Gerar quarreled with Isaac’s herders, saying, ‘The water is ours.’ So he called the well Esek, because they contended with him”) becomes his commitment not to disturb the water for the benefit of himself and his flock.

The interaction between the Gerar people and Isaac is an example of active engagement between both parties to preserve a water habitat. . The Gerar valley became a space for experimentation in sustainable restoration. Such a reading recognizes the conflict between the Gerar people and settlers like Isaac, but the conflict is resolved with good advocacy and communication for the health of the Gerar valley water habitat. ³⁴

The value of justice is demonstrated in this advocacy. The Gerarites and Isaac’s people show regard for the interrelationship, interdependence, and integrity of humans and nature as a unified whole. They demonstrate the complexity of the relationship between humans, water, and the rest of creation, and how these can contribute to the restoration of nature. This narrative shows how humans and natural processes are intertwined in ways that enhance human wellbeing and ecological health. Humans actively promote systems of justice that foster wellbeing on the one hand and the health and integrity of water on the other. Such advocacy helps preserve the Gerar valley as an ecological system.

Reading Genesis 26:18–21 through the lens of focal restoration allows the interpreter to identify the means by which the resilience of the socio-ecological system of Gerar and the surrounding area is promoted. The grasslands of Gerar are a valuable ecosystem taken seriously in the restoration design. The preserved condition of the Gerar valley from the time of Abraham to Isaac shows the moral and cultural excellence formed and built by the Gerarites. The wild design direction implies a deep appreciation for what the water ecosystem of the Gerar valley needs in order to thrive, and then making favorable conditions possible. There is an intention to maintain the fertility and diversity of ecological-hydrological processes in the karst landscape. The Gerar people work hard for the conservation and protection of the Gerar valley habitat, thus weakening anthropocentric ambitions through active participation of as many visitors as possible. ³⁵

When we read Gen 21:19–26 as a precursor to the Genesis 26 story, we see that the Gerarites filled in wells that Abraham’s servants had dug in an attempt to restore the water. Ecological history intersecting with cultural memory is reenacted from the image of the Gerar people’s encounter with Isaac as they advocate for the water. Abimelech’s actions show hospitality to Abraham and Isaac but still uphold the cultural rules that protect the future of the water reservoir. Abimelech’s silence to Abraham’s complaints about the actions of Abimelech’s servants provides an image of cultural imagination that directs the attention of his audience back to the restoration of the damaged water reservoir through the closing of the wells in the city of Gerar (Gen 26:12–17). Abimelech and the people of Gerar consistently uphold the ecological right of the water habitat to rest and renew itself so that it returns to life. The Gerarites show themselves to be a conscious community of water habitat restoration for the sustainability of all ecosystem communities throughout the seasons. The image of the Gerar people and Isaac in relation to the water habitat gives hope that the practice of restoration becomes an ethical issue that leads to the preservation of any degradation.

Conclusion

This text supports today’s ecological restoration agenda in response to the issue of water scarcity in Indonesia. The text can play an important role in dialoguing with other local, global religions such as Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism in Indonesia on the maintenance and restoration of water habitats.

Regarding theology, there is an urgent need for a theology that makes room for the maintenance and restoration of water habitats. This theology depicts humans as consistent caretakers of the earth. At the same time, water is understood not only as an object but also as a subject that has intrinsic value, voice, and purpose that is interconnected and mutually influences human civilization and other natural communities. With a focus on restoration, we can adopt interpretive modes that provide a counterweight to the dominating, hegemonic, and anthropocentric attitude of the past.