Genesis 21:26

KJV

And Abimelech said, I wot not who hath done this thing: neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I [of it], but to day.

KJV (with Strong's)

And Abimelech {H40} said {H559}, I wot {H3045} not who hath done {H6213} this thing {H1697}: neither {H3808} didst thou tell {H5046} me, neither {H3808} yet heard {H8085} I of it, but {H1115} to day {H3117}.

Complete Jewish Bible

Avimelekh answered, "I don't know who has done this. You didn't tell me, and I heard about it only today."

Berean Standard Bible

Abimelech replied, “I do not know who has done this. You did not tell me, so I have not heard about it until today.”

American Standard Version

And Abimelech said, I know not who hath done this thing: neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I of it, but to-day.

Commentary

### SUMMARY
Genesis 21:26 records Abimelech's immediate denial of knowledge regarding the seizure of Abraham's well, stating he was neither informed nor had heard of the incident until that very day. This declaration serves as a pivotal moment, clearing the way for a resolution between the two patriarchs and the eventual establishment of a covenant concerning water rights.

### CONTEXT
This verse is situated within a significant narrative detailing Abraham's interactions in Gerar, the territory ruled by Abimelech. Prior to this dispute, Abraham had a complex encounter with Abimelech involving Sarah, as detailed in [Genesis chapter 20](/chapter/bible_verses_kjv/genesis/20 "Explore the narrative of Abraham, Sarah, and Abimelech in Genesis 20"). The focus here shifts to a critical dispute over water rights, a vital resource in the arid ancient Near East. Abraham had diligently dug a well, but Abimelech's servants had forcibly taken possession of it, prompting Abraham's complaint in [Genesis 21:25](/genesis/21-25 "Read Abraham's complaint about the well in Genesis 21:25"). Abimelech's statement in verse 26 serves as his direct response to Abraham's accusation, setting the stage for reconciliation.

### EXPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Abimelech's reply, "I wot not who hath done this thing: neither didst thou tell me, neither yet heard I [of it], but to day," conveys his alleged ignorance regarding the seizure of the well. The archaic phrase "I wot not," derived from the King James Version, precisely means "I do not know" or "I was unaware." Through this statement, Abimelech articulates three distinct claims:

* He asserts he has no knowledge of the specific individuals responsible for seizing the well.
* He claims Abraham had not previously communicated this grievance to him.
* He declares he had not received any information about the incident from any other source until the very moment Abraham confronted him.

This comprehensive denial of prior knowledge is crucial, as it provides a basis for Abimelech to engage with the problem without admitting direct culpability or foreknowledge. His immediate acknowledgment of the issue "to day" marks a turning point, indicating his willingness to address the grievance and enter into a covenant with Abraham concerning the well, a resolution that culminates in the naming of Beersheba, as recorded in [Genesis 21:31](/genesis/21-31 "Discover the covenant and naming of Beersheba in Genesis 21:31").

### THEOLOGICAL AND THEMATIC CONNECTIONS
* **Dispute Resolution:** The verse highlights the initiation of a process to resolve conflict over essential resources, demonstrating a pathway for grievances to be brought to light and addressed between parties.
* **Communication and Transparency:** Abimelech's insistence that Abraham "didst not tell me" underscores the critical importance of direct and timely communication in addressing wrongs and preventing misunderstandings or escalating conflicts.
* **Leadership Responsibility and Accountability:** While Abimelech denies personal knowledge, the incident implicitly points to the overarching responsibility of leaders for the actions of those under their authority, even when those actions are unauthorized or unknown to the leader.
* **Truth and Reconciliation:** Whether Abimelech's ignorance was genuine or a diplomatic maneuver, his acknowledgment of the issue "to day" signifies a crucial step towards reconciliation and the re-establishment of trust between Abraham and the Philistine king.
* **Divine Providence in Human Affairs:** Even in disputes between individuals, God's providential hand guides events toward His larger purposes, including the protection of His chosen people and the establishment of peace.

### REFLECTION AND APPLICATION
Genesis 21:26 offers valuable insights for contemporary interactions. It reminds us of the profound importance of direct and timely communication in resolving disputes, encouraging us to address issues head-on rather than allowing resentment to fester. Furthermore, the narrative underscores the principle of accountability, particularly for those in leadership roles, who bear ultimate responsibility for the behavior of those under their care, even if personally unaware of every transgression. The willingness of Abraham to voice his complaint and Abimelech to acknowledge it, even belatedly, demonstrates a constructive path towards the peaceful resolution of conflicts. This narrative encourages us to be proactive in communication and diligent in oversight, fostering environments of fairness and mutual respect, much like the wisdom found in [Proverbs 15:1](/proverbs/15-1 "Consider the power of a gentle answer in Proverbs 15:1") about a soft answer turning away wrath.

### FAQ
**What does "I wot not" mean in Genesis 21:26?**

Answer: "I wot not" is an archaic English phrase from the King James Version, meaning "I do not know" or "I was unaware." Abimelech is stating his ignorance regarding who seized the well.

**Was Abimelech being truthful when he claimed ignorance?**

Answer: The text does not explicitly state whether Abimelech was genuinely ignorant or feigning ignorance for diplomatic reasons. His response allows him to address the issue without admitting prior knowledge or direct culpability, which facilitates a peaceful resolution and the subsequent covenant.

**Why was a well so important in the ancient Near East?**

Answer: Water was an extremely scarce and vital resource in the arid ancient Near East. Ownership and control of wells were crucial for survival, sustaining livestock, and supporting communities, making disputes over them common and significant.

**What is the significance of Abimelech's immediate response "but to day"?**

Answer: The phrase "but to day" emphasizes that this was the first time Abimelech had heard of the problem. It signifies his willingness to address the issue promptly upon being informed, demonstrating a commitment to justice and setting the stage for reconciliation and the establishment of a covenant.

### CHRIST-CENTERED FULFILLMENT
While Genesis 21:26 describes a human dispute and its resolution, it points to a deeper reality found in Christ. Abimelech's denial of knowledge and subsequent willingness to address the wrong foreshadows Christ's perfect knowledge and righteous judgment. Unlike Abimelech, who may have been genuinely ignorant or merely diplomatic, Christ is the One who perfectly knows all things and justly resolves all disputes. He is the ultimate Peacemaker, not merely reconciling two parties over a well, but reconciling humanity to God through His atoning work. The temporary covenant established at Beersheba points to the new and eternal covenant in Christ's blood, where true and lasting peace, justice, and access to the "living water" are secured, fulfilling the deepest human longings for resolution and life that earthly wells and agreements could only hint at.

Note: Commentary is generated by AI with a directive for Biblical fidelity. Always rely on the Holy Spirit for discernment. The Scripture text and cross-references are from verified, non-AI sources.