Posts by peacefulpete

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

Well, I posted a couple threads on this forum on the topic in case you were unaware of the subject. Leolaia was certainly not the end of any discussion, in fact we disagreed on many finer points. I would also imagine she would have sharpened her understanding over the last 20 years (as I have) as well. To anyone interested in this topic, however, her reviews were a great resource from which to pursue further research.

On this topic, while I find Tsumura’s primary arguments sound, his conclusions/objections are something of red herrings. He seems to believe he is making observations others are unaware of. While some, especially early in the history of comparative religion research, may have suggested the authors retained the chaos theology, recent scholarship points out the language reflects a cultural linkage/indebtedness. Especially considering the lateness of the hexaemeron (5th-3rd) we would not expect the author to be simply repeating creation stories from a thousand years previous. He rather demonstrates the persistence of an ancient motif. Much like today when we refer to 'forbidden fruit' or making someone a 'scapegoat', these are metaphors/idioms/motifs that carry meaning separate from the larger specific religious origins. Cross used to say, when the language no longer posed a threat to the scribal elites, they were adopted and transformed in subtle ways. However, it's not just the words it's also some underlying conceptual theme that persists. In other words, my audience knows what being a 'scapegoat' is even if most have no idea where it came from nor are religiously Jewish.

In the case of the dividing waters, the idiom is also utilized in fresh ways by the second temple author/redactors. It would seem in many contexts the symbolism is no longer narrowly related to 'creation' but fresh beginnings and demonstrations of divine power. Note in the exodus stories the similar elements of tehom/yam interacting with wind/breath from God parting the sea as a divine act opening a new chapter for Israel. Perhaps the author intended a back reference to Gen 1 (as I suggested), perhaps not consciously. Regardless the idiom and motif are present.

So, I'm convinced the shaping of a formless world into a habitable world, and of dividing waters as are clear examples of inherited metaphor that was recognized by nearly anyone in the ANE.

As I said in my first post it's a hobby for me, hobbies should be fun. I don't feel like we're having fun any longer, so I'll let you go. Good luck with your research.

23

When will the Watchtower Society be desolated?

by Hiddenservant in

did you know that the answer is provided in the scriptures through the 70 weeks prophecy?.

daniel’s 70 weeks prophecy explained.. the 70 weeks were split into three parts.

here is the reason why.. the prophecy is not only about the messiah, it is also about god’s people and the holy city, as verse 24 makes clear.

peacefulpete

Daniel Made Simple!

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

The great part is, we are not bound to any dogma.

Regarding the chaos motif in the Tanakh, you may enjoy these old threads:

The skinny on the Leviathan and Rahab monsters.

Behemoth.

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

I guess I will simply summarize my thoughts.

I do not agree we can deny a demythologized version of the chaos motif in Genesis 1, it is pretty explicit and repeated throughout the Tanakh in back references to creation. This means the ordering/filling of the formless chaotic earth and heavens (featuring the dividing of restless waters blown upon by God, as in the Enuma Elish) is the theme. The formless heaven and earth are not created they are assumed to exist primordially. This eliminates 2 (heaven and earth) of the 22.

The parsing of the other 20 is not necessary or evident, the plants for example are featured twice in the narrative. The one is their creation (day 3) the other is the usage (day 6), these are not two creative acts. BTW green plants are divided 3 ways, grass, herb and tree. Why only count 2 at their creation on day 3 and only 1 at the command to eat them on day 6 when herbs and trees are listed separately? Then notice in the summary of vs30 all three divisions of plants are lumped as 'herbs'. Clearly the author was concerning himself with "green plants" and waxed on regarding the varieties but did not numerate them as separate creations.

In this same, vein vs. 26 in contrasting humans from the other creatures the author repeats his enumerating as 3 categories (not 6 as you do in the chart), creatures of the sea, air and land.

I'll also repeat that the widely accepted chiastic structure, 3 days and 3 corresponding days, works very well and is consistent with similar chiastic structures in Genesis. The approach you are suggesting is unnecessary and foreign.

Also, I believe it is a mistake to assume the Hasidic author of Jubilees had any insight into the original intent of the author of Genesis. In fact, he added and subtracted from the Genesis story freely. His respect for the work did not preclude his adaptation of it. As we know he drew from other parts of the 22 sacred writings for his angel creation on the first day for instance. His reordering Genesis material and creating artificial 7 and 49 year schemas are key features of the work. No, I don't believe the author is concerned with originality.

I also seriously doubt the author of Gen 1 was consciously referencing the Tent or ark. That later theologians saw symbolism in those objects with Genesis reveals the imagination of the theologians, perhaps with an eye to deny the designs were of non-Yahwist origins. There isn't sufficient verbal connections nor any explicit link in the Tanakh.

Hope that didn't come across poorly, in truth I find the topic and your research interesting.

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

The Twenty-two Works of Creation.

Israel, the people, stands in closest relation to God, the Father, the Israelites being His beloved children (ch. i. 24 et seq., xix. 29). While all other nations are subject to angels or spirits appointed by Him as the Ruler of the world, Israel is subject only to God (comp. LXX. and Targ. Yer. to Deut. xxxii. 8). As a sign of its union with God, both the Sabbath and circumcision have been given to it, privileges which it shares with the angels (ch. ii. 18-21, xv. 26-27: "The two highest angelic orders have been created thus from the day of their creation"; comp. the passage concerning Adam and the rest of the world's saints [fifteen in number] having been born circumcised, derived from Gen. i. 27—"God created man in his own image" [Ab. R. N. ed. Schechter, p. 153]). Upon Jacob, as the end, the whole Creation is centered (ch. ii. 23, xix. 24-25), and the world's renewal is effected through the Messianic kingdom in Jerusalem (ch. i. 29, iv. 26). Accordingly, the twenty-two works of the six days of Creation are enumerated (ch. ii. 2-22): On the first day—heaven, earth, water, the spirits, the abyss, darkness, and light; on the second—the firmament; on the third—the land, the seas, vegetation, and paradise; on the fourth—sun, moon, and stars; on the fifth—the sea-monsters (Behemoth and Leviathan, "the first things of flesh created by His hands"), the fish, and the birds; on the sixth—the wild and the tame animals, the creeping things, and man; these twenty-two works correspond to the twenty-two generations from Adam to Jacob, as well as to the twenty-two letters of the alphabet and the twenty-two books of Holy Scripture (ch. ii. 23; comp. Midr. Tadshe vi.; Epstein, "Mi-Ḳadmoniyyot ha-Yehudim," 1887, p. xx.; and Charles, l.c. pp. 11, 18).

JUBILEES, BOOK OF - JewishEncyclopedia.com

The above demonstrates that an agenda was at work in the 22 enumeration. The 22 are not self-evident but result from necessity.

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

I watched the video and better understand how you connect the ark with Gen 1. I don't see it. The ark followed an Egyptian design. (Search Egyptian bark) The winged cherubim have inspired imagination for millennia. Were they the standard four-legged winged bull minor-deities that pull Yahweh's chariot or some other more humanlike form that developed later? Honestly, I suspect the ark design was inherited, and the cherubim had cultic meaning lost to the ages, perhaps as guards of the contents. In the postexilic period, many attempted to interpret the symbolism with no little imagination through a lens of anachronistic strict monotheism. The later Rabbis offered a half dozen or more theories.

In short, the design of the ark/bark was likely historically ancient (from the period of Egyptian hegemony, see Hezekiah's seal) while Genesis 1 (as it reads, not the ancient chaos elements incorporated) comes from a much later tradition and the connections you outline linking the two are not persuasive. About the only suggestions of symbolism we have in the Tanakh is1 Chron 28:2 that seems to call the ark "the footstool of our God", which doesn't describe it in a tripart fashion and probably represents an early effort to reinterpret a cultic object no longer understood.

I hope you don't take offense, I'm just giving some observations and impressions, and having fun digging up stuff I hadn't thought about in nearly 20 years.

37

s-395 Adjustments-to-handling-serious-wrongdoing-in-the-congregation

by gavindlt in

this was posted on jw leaks.. my truth's | dad seeking truth.

.

peacefulpete

They df'd my wife for not shunning a df'd minor sibling and writing a letter to her mom saying she did not regret it. They called it apostasy. While she has no illusions about the church today, she has endured 20 years of needless and cruel separation from family. These changes do not seem begin to address the cultlike control over people's lives.

I know some are pretty excited about this development and perhaps there will be some incremental improvement for those who been unable to conform to the WT's rules and still keep running back for reasons of their own.

45

consequences for going against the direction.

by jehovaxx in

there are no serious consequences for doubting the gb.

there are no consequences for going against the direction.

we can now celebrate anything.. what will happen if you take blood, celebrate xmas and birthdays ect?.

peacefulpete

deleted

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

List of 8 created things, not necessarily living things. Hasty typing again.

76

Rekindled Light — The Narrative Structure of the Hexaemeron (Genesis 1:1–31)

by Mebaqqer2 in

i used to comment here many years ago when i had an interest in biblical research in relation to jehovah’s witnesses.

these days my biblical research is little concerned with jehovah’s witnesses.

i feel my time is better spent researching the diachronistic development of the biblical text and ascertaining what the biblical writers and editors intended in the times in which they lived.. i have recently placed a summary diagram for a paper that i have written with original research entitled the narrative structure of the hexaemeron on academia.edu.

peacefulpete

I forgot to mention, I am of the opinion that the widely accepted chiastic structure is probably correct. The comment:

One of the first difficulties to which scholars drew attention in the course of the exegesis of Gen 1 was that the number of the works of creation did not agree with the number of days. Eight works are distributed over six days, with two on each of the third and sixth days.

This results from overly ridged expectations of literature of poetic nature. The author was brilliant in his use of 7 and the had the constraints of listing 8 types of living things. There may be some cultic rational behind the splitting of wild and domestic but simply said he had 8 things to complete his list and so pairs a couple up in a logical fashion that kept his thematic chiasm intact.

There is such a thing as overworking a dough. Sometimes a detail is just window dressing for the larger image. In this case the inclusion of 8 things on six days, doesn't detract at all from the Sabbath week outline or the chiastic symmetry unless one gets overly stickled.

Regarding your drawing from Jubilees for 22 acts of creation, we have to remember that this author was himself freely reinterpreting the stories. He shows no special insight into what the original author intended. He adds details and leaves out details in Genesis, he creates a fresh harmonization of the stories in Genesis rather than simply repeating some centuries old original structure. In fact, the chiastic structure is lost due to the author's concerns. I question whether this offers us any help in decoding the structure of Genesis 1.