For many years now, it has become very common for Old Testament scholars to refer to the numerous parallels between the patriarchal customs reflected in the stories of Genesis and the Custom law of the cuneiform documents of the second millennium B.C. Particular attention has been given to the Nuzi texts and to custom law related to marriage. The present study is directed to a reexamination of the parallels to marriage customs as they have been applied to the story of Jacob's marriage to the daughters of Laban.

A recent article by George B. Murray draws the attention of philosophers and theologians to a problem in the thought of Teilhard de Chardin which they often tend to overlook. The “synthetic theory” of evolution held by the majority of contemporary biologists, Father Murray points out, is not to be found in Teilhard's scientific writings. Instead, Teilhard proposes a theory of orthogenesis, a word and concept now almost universally rejected by biologists. This discrepancy between Teilhard and the best contemporary biological thought is often ignored by those who find his writings a promising approach to the reconciliation of science and Christianity or to problems of science and philosophy. Father Murray gives a very useful analysis of probable reasons for Teilhard's insistence on retaining the word “orthogenesis” in the face of opposition from fellow-scientists and in spite of the fact that his modifications of the meaning of orthogenesis might have been more readily acceptable had he described them by a different name. However, much more important than the reasons why Teilhard insisted on the use of the word “orthogenesis” is the question, which Murray does not discuss, of the importance and place of orthogenesis in Teilhard's thought, whether it is legitimate for philosophers and theologians to accept the general outline of Teilhard's theories and leave this technical scientific question to the scientists, or whether Teilhard's whole system of thought stands or falls with a discredited theory of biology.

Although the relationship between the Biblical figures Abraham and Adam underlies episodes in Books V, VIII, XI, and XII of Paradise Lost, only the significance of the parallels in the last two books has been explored fully. Barbara Kiefer Lewalski finds that the transition from vision to narration in Michael's presentation of history, coinciding with the story of Abraham, symbolizes Adam's initial revelation through faith of a covenantal relationship with God. Stressing the similarities between Abraham's departure from Ur and Adam's from Eden, Mother Mary Christopher Pecheux believes that this association “enriches and universalizes Milton's theme, helps to emphasize the virtues of the Christian hero, and reinforces the paradox of the fortunate fall.” Moreover, the topic of Abraham's departure from his homeland affords Milton the opportunity of incorporating the epic-journey motif into his poem.