DOCSLIB.ORG

Using "Chaos" in Articulating the Relationship of God and Creation in God's Creative Activity

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Using Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Dissertations (1934 -) Projects Using "Chaos" in Articulating the Relationship of God and Creation in God's Creative Activity Eric Michael Vail Marquette University Follow this and additional works at: https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu Part of the Biblical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Vail, Eric Michael, "Using "Chaos" in Articulating the Relationship of God and Creation in God's Creative Activity" (2009). Dissertations (1934 -). 5. https://epublications.marquette.edu/dissertations_mu/5 USING “CHAOS” IN ARTICULATING THE RELATIONSHIP OF GOD AND CREATION IN GOD’S CREATIVE ACTIVITY by Eric M. Vail, B.A., M.Div. A Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Milwaukee, Wisconsin December 2009 ABSTRACT USING “CHAOS” IN ARTICULATING THE RELATIONSHIP OF GOD AND CREATION IN GOD’S CREATIVE ACTIVITY Eric M. Vail, B.A., M.Div. Marquette University, 2009 Out of dialogue with Old Testament studies and the sciences, there has been a rise in recent years in the use of “chaos” language by theologians in their articulation of a theology of creation. There has been little uniformity in how the word is used among the fields, or even within some fields—especially by biblical scholars doing ancient Near East comparative studies. Under the umbrella of this popular terminology, some ideas have found refuge whose theological implications warrant evaluation. Within this dissertation the range of ideas that fall under “chaos” within the physical sciences, Old Testament studies, and theology is identified and evaluated. However, the more focused evaluation is on the appropriateness of the choice to apply the term to particular circumstances, whether that is entropy or unpredictability in science or the tohu wabohu and tehom of Genesis 1:2 in biblical studies. Choosing the term “chaos” as a label reflects an interpretation of the data and shapes subsequent thinking and speaking about the data. As much as reflect the world (the facts), it construes a world/worldview in which scholars work in their fields. The implications of the ideas that have been developed under “chaos” are evaluated herein, but it is the initial application of the term to the data that is the root issue which receives the greater focus. After critiquing the current uses of “chaos” in the physical sciences, in interpretations of Genesis 1 by scholars such as Jon D. Levenson, and in the creation theologies of contemporary theologians like Catherine Keller, an alternative grammar of creatio ex nihilo and God’s relationship to creation is proposed. This framework builds upon the pneumatology of Lyle Dabney—in which he develops the language of “possibility” and the Spirit operating “trans”-creation—by developing the idea of the Word operating trans carnate to creation. It is within this framework that it is suggested that “chaos” be used as a label for circumstances where any part of creation expresses itself discordantly with God and neighbor, both with whom God makes possible for it to participate in loving community. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Eric M. Vail, B.A., M.Div. In any type of personal expression, there are fingerprints all over it of our relationships with others and our history of experiences. It leaves me asking whether anyone can be excluded, past or present, from being acknowledged for the part he or she played in shaping this project. There are some, nevertheless, more immediate to this work who deserve special mention. I would like to thank my advisor and dissertation director Dr. Lyle Dabney for his shaping of my thinking from coursework onward, as well as for both taking an interest in this project and asking some key questions through this process that pushed me along. I would like to thank Dr. Ralph Del Colle and Rev. Philip Rossi, S.J. for stretching me in my time at Marquette and for continuing to work with me from my coursework all the way through this process. Also, I would like to thank Dr. Sharon Pace and Dr. Deirdre Dempsey. Dr. Pace has been prodding me on my interpretation of Scripture from my coursework into this project, for which I am grateful even though the timing did not work for her to be on my board. Thanks to Dr. Dempsey for her interest in my work and willingness to join the board on such short notice. The support I have received from the community of scholars here at Marquette and the Department of Theology has been such a blessing. It is such a joy to work among people who sincerely love God and live the faith they wrestle to put into words. In this process of doctoral studies, it is impossible to say enough thanks to my family. My first and highest thanks must go to my wife Carrie who has walked with me iii every day. She has worked and sacrificed much to put me through two graduate programs; she has given me a great gift to be able to focus on my studies. She, with my two sons Dalan and Rowan, have so often held me up and pushed me on in the times I have been discouraged. I am grateful to my parents for their encouragement and counsel, as well as their willingness to read an early draft of this dissertation with their editor’s eyes. I am grateful to my local faith community at Milwaukee First Church of the Nazarene for embodying what it means to be the family of God during these years here in Milwaukee. In addition, the Office of University Apartments and Off-campus Student Services here at Marquette deserves many thanks for taking a chance on employing a married doctoral student with children; they have been a great community with which to be involved and provided my family a much higher quality of living the past three years than we ever could have had otherwise. Lastly, I want to thank Dr. Thomas Jay Oord for his helpful comments on the penultimate draft of this dissertation. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...................................................................................................ii CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION...................................................….....................1 A. Some Background Concerning Recent “Chaos” Language in Christian Theology and the Problem at Hand……………………………..1 1. Current Interest in “Chaos” Language in Biblical Studies and Science-Theology Dialogue………………………………1 2. Some Recent History behind the Interest in “Chaos”…………2 3. Unsettledness Concerning Creation Theology within the Theological Milieu into which “Chaos” Notions Are Being Considered……………………………………………...6 4. A Problem Needing Consideration……………………………7 5. Present Status of the Problem…………………………………9 B. The Place of this Dissertation in the Conversation…………………...19 1. What this Dissertation Hopes to Accomplish Relative to the Problem…………………………………………..………19 2. Approach……………………………………………………..21 3. Cases that Will be Made……………………………………..27 4. Relation of these Positions to Others Previous………………29 II. SHIFTING CONTEXTS: INVESTIGATING THE HISTORY OF CREATION THEOLOGY, SCRIPTURE’S ROLE IN THE CONVERSATION, AND SCIENCE'S USE OF “CHAOS” …………32 A. Introduction…………………………………………………………..32 B. The Creationist Tradition…………………………………………….33 1. Key Components of the Creationist Tradition……………….33 2. Jewish Heritage………………………………………………36 v 3. Earliest Church……………………………………………….37 4. Earliest Doctrine of Creatio Ex Nihilo ……………………….38 5. Middle Ages………………………………………………….41 6. The Renaissance Forward……………………………………49 7. A Glimpse of the Present…………………………………….58 a. Listening to Some Shifts in Science’s View…………62 b. Addressing Uses of “Chaos” in Science……………..68 C. The Relationship of the Doctrine of Creation to the Presiding Philosophy or Worldview of the Day………………………………..75 1. Dependence…………………………………………………..75 2. Polemical or Reactionary Articulation of the Creationist Tradition……………………………………………………...76 3. Transitions in Conceptualizations of God and God’s Relationship to Creation…………………………………......78 D. The Relationship of Biblical Interpretation and the Doctrine of Creation………………………………………………………………79 E. Common Difficulties within the Creationist Tradition………………85 F. Summary……………………………………………………………..88 III. GROWING DEBATE AROUND “CHAOS” LANGUAGE IN BIBLICAL STUDIES: CONTRASTING POSITIONS BETWEEN JON D. LEVENSON AND DAVID T. TSUMURA …………………………………………………..…. 90 A. Introduction…………………………………………………………..90 B. Jon D. Levenson’s Creation and the Persistence of Evil: the Jewish Drama of Divine Omnipotence………………………………91 1. Levenson’s Reasons for Writing Creation and the Persistence of Evil …….……………………………………...91 vi 2. Levenson’s Presuppositions and Stated Method……….…….92 3. Levenson’s Outline and Claims………………………….…..95 a. Levenson’s Framework for Understanding Creation………………………………………………96 b. Levenson’s Interpretation of Genesis 1……………...99 c. Levenson’s Link Between Creation and Covenant………………………………………...….107 4. An Evaluation and Critique of Levenson……………….…..109 a. Presuppositions in framing the material.…………...109 b. An ANE Combat-as-Creation Myth or Distinct Combat Myths and Creation Myths in the ANE?..........................................................................112 c. Looking Again at the Dynamics in the Narrative of Enuma elish ……..…….…………………………114 d. Framing the Reading of Images…………………….118 i. Choosing an Interpretive Lens…..…..……...118 ii. Looking for the Function of Images in the Context of the Whole Work………...…..124 e. Reading Chaos into the Priestly Cosmography: Genesis 1:1—2:3……………………………….…...128 f. Undesirable Theological
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Religion, Family, and Society in Andrey Zvyagintsev's Leviathan (2014)
    Journal of Religion & Film Volume 24 Issue 2 October 2020 Article 1 October 2020 Corruption as Shared Culpability: Religion, Family, and Society in Andrey Zvyagintsev's Leviathan (2014) Maria Hristova Lewis and Clark College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/jrf Part of the Christianity Commons, European Languages and Societies Commons, and the Other Film and Media Studies Commons Recommended Citation Hristova, Maria (2020) "Corruption as Shared Culpability: Religion, Family, and Society in Andrey Zvyagintsev's Leviathan (2014)," Journal of Religion & Film: Vol. 24 : Iss. 2 , Article 1. DOI: 10.32873/uno.dc.jrf.24.2.001 Available at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/jrf/vol24/iss2/1 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Religion & Film by an authorized editor of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Corruption as Shared Culpability: Religion, Family, and Society in Andrey Zvyagintsev's Leviathan (2014) Abstract This article engages in close analysis of how Andrey Zvyagintsev depicts corruption and its various manifestations: moral, familial, societal, and institutional, in Leviathan (Leviafan, 2014). While other post- Soviet films address the problem of prevalent corruption in Russia, Zvyagintsev’s work is the first ot provoke strong public reactions, not only from government and Russian Orthodox Church officials, but also from Orthodox and political activist groups. The film demonstrates that the instances of legal and moral failings in one aspect of existence are a sign of a much deeper and wider-ranging problem that affects all other spheres of human experience.
    [Show full text]
  • The Words of Job Are Spoken in the Midst of Chaos. Job Has Just Lost His Home, His Farm
    9 September 2018 Job 1:1; 2:1–10; 10:1-9; 38:1-7; 42:1-6 When the world is in chaos First Mennonite Church The words of Job are spoken in the midst of chaos. Job has just lost his home, his farm. All Job's children are dead. Now he has lost his health, his body disfigured with open sores. My days are without hope, he says (7:6). He wishes he were dead. Let the day perish wherein I was born (3:3). Job asks God, why? Why is light given to one in misery? (Job 3:20) I sat down this week and read through the book of Job to get a feel for it. I’ll be honest with you—it’s not an easy book to read, let alone preach on. Anytime anyone attempts to speak about God the Creator and human suffering, there's a good chance that we're going to sound like Job's friends—Eliphaz, Bildad, Zophar, and Elihu. They come, at first as friends to console and comfort Job as he goes through the valley of the shadows. But, in the face of Job's sores, his dead children, how do his "friends" comfort and console him? Here's a sampling: Eliphaz: Now Job, think who that was innocent ever perished (4:7). Are you perishing? Now, let's figure out what you’ve done wrong to deserve this. Bildad: Job, are you suggesting that God is unjust? If you were pure and upright, God would answer you with prosperity (8:3-6).
    [Show full text]
  • Cleansing the Cosmos
    CLEANSING THE COSMOS: A BIBLICAL MODEL FOR CONCEPTUALIZING AND COUNTERACTING EVIL By E. Janet Warren A thesis submitted to The University of Birmingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Theology and Religion College of Arts and Law The University of Birmingham November 14, 2011 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSRACT Understanding evil spiritual forces is essential for Christian theology. Evil has typically been studied either from a philosophical perspective or through the lens of ‘spiritual warfare’. The first seldom considers demonology; the second is flawed by poor methodology. Furthermore, warfare language is problematic, being very dualistic, associated with violence and poorly applicable to ministry. This study addresses these issues by developing a new model for conceptualizing and counteracting evil using ‘non-warfare’ biblical metaphors, and relying on contemporary metaphor theory, which claims that metaphors are cognitive and can depict reality. In developing this model, I examine four biblical themes with respect to alternate metaphors for evil: Creation, Cult, Christ and Church. Insights from anthropology (binary oppositions), theology (dualism, nothingness) and science (chaos-complexity theory) contribute to the construction of the model, and the concepts of profane space, sacred space and sacred actions (divine initiative and human responsibility) guide the investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Three Versions of Versions of Versions of the Book of Genesis The
    Three Versions of the Book of Genesis Below are three versions of the same portion of chapter 1 of Genesis. King James Version: The Creation 1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. http://www.bartleby.com/108/01/1.html#1 Contemporary English VersionVersion:::: 1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
    [Show full text]
  • Ancient Science 3 ASTRO
    THE BIBLE & ANCIENT SCIENCE 3. ANCIENT ASTRONOMY Denis O. Lamoureux DDS PhD PhD St. Joseph’s College, University of Alberta Scientific Concordism Features of the Heavens from an ASSUMPTION: Ancient Phenomenological Perspective • the facts of science align with the Bible. 1. Sun Moves across the Sky Daily • that God revealed scientific facts in the Bible 1000s of years before their discovery by modern science. The sun rises at one end of the heavens and makes its circuit to the other [end]. Ps 19:6 The 3-Tier Universe The sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to . where it rises. Eccl 1:5 2. The Firmament (Heavenly Dome) 2ND DAY OF CREATION: God said, “Let there be a firmament between the waters to separate the water from the water.” So God made a firmament and separated the water under the firmament from the water above the firmament. And it was so. God called the firmament ‘heavens.’ There was evening, & there was morning––The Second Day. Gen 1:6-8 GREEK στερεωμα stereōma firmament, dome of heaven στερεος stereos hard, firm HEBREW rāqîa‘ firmament, dome of heaven Phenomenological Perspectives of Nature rāqa‘ to flatten, stamp down Context of pounding metals: They hammered out [rāqa‘] thin sheets of gold. Ex 39:3 Context of creating the heavens: Can you join God in spreading out [rāqa‘] the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze? Job 37:18 Egyptian 3-Tier Universe (1570-1085 BC) Message-Incident Principle Principle of Accommodation The concept that God descended to the level of ancient Firmament is shaded.
    [Show full text]
  • ESV - 1 - Trek 1: His Story Parent Guide Lesson 1.2: out of Nothing: Creation Week Scripture: Genesis 1:1-31
    Trek 1: His Story Parent Guide Lesson 1.1: Before the Beginning Began Scripture: John 1:1-13 SUMMARY All physical things in the universe — even man-made objects — have a cause. God is the one and only creator of all things and without Him, nothing would exist. Jesus was called “the Word,” and was with God in the beginning when He created all things. Yet even though Jesus is the creator, when He came down to earth to live among us, people did not recognize Him. Just as Jesus is the source of all created matter, so He is also the source of all light. In fact, He is the light which shines in the darkness of the world. John the Baptist came before Jesus and served as a witness to Jesus. All Christians are invited to do likewise, and be a witness for Jesus — the creator of the universe. In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him was not any thing made that was made. KEY VERSEs: (John 1:1-3) KEY THOUGHT: KEY WORD: In Lesson 1.1 we learned that the Word, Jesus, God, Genesis: beginnings, creation or generations is the unmade Maker. Discussion Questions • What is the one key thought that you learned tonight? • What is the difference between man-made things, and things which God Himself created? • Why do you think that in the Bible Jesus is also called “the Word”? (Hint: Remember how God created the universe.) • Why do you think the world did not recognize Jesus when He came down to earth? • How can someone become a child of God? • What did John the Baptist do? • How should Christians be similar to John the Baptist? • How does believing in Jesus as the sole creator of the universe change our lives and how we live? • What should you do with the lesson you learned tonight? What should we do? ESV - 1 - Trek 1: His Story Parent Guide Lesson 1.2: Out of Nothing: Creation Week Scripture: Genesis 1:1-31 SUMMARY All physical things in the universe — even man-made objects — have a cause.
    [Show full text]
  • The Earth and the Waters in Genesis 1 and 2: a Linguistic Investigation, by David Toshio Tsumura
    136 Journal of Biblical Literature The principal shortcoming of this book is that it does not adequately take into account the results of the current Israeli excavations at Shiloh. Schley dismisses "the claimed (emphasis mine) archaeological evidence for a massive destruction of the site during Iron I" without reviewing the evidence, and he takes refuge in the position that "Iron I extends from the end of the thirteenth century BCE to the middle of the tenth, and an Iron I destruction layer theoretically could occur at any time during this period" (p. 196). Unfortunately, the work is marred by numerous typographical errors and several inconsistencies in transliterations. Still, it is a valuable study which merits the careful attention of scholars. Carl D. Evans University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208 The Earth and the Waters in Genesis 1 and 2: A Linguistic Investigation, by David Toshio Tsumura. JSOTSup 83. Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1989. Pp. 201. ?22.50 ($33.50). The first two chapters of Genesis raise innumerable problems for the student of biblical literature. Not the least of these are the basic meaning and etymology of five key words (tohu, bohu, teh6m, 'ed, 'eden), the relationship between these Hebrew concepts and proposed Near Eastern parallels, and the overall issue of earth and waters in the stories of creation. These questions form the basis of David Tsumura'smonograph. As the book's sub- heading suggests, the author is interested mainly in presenting the linguistic evidence relating to these issues. Only after a thorough investigation along these lines, he believes, can biblical scholars then proceed to the larger issues of theology and mythico-religious thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Andrews University SEMINARY S1UDIES
    Andrews University SEMINARY S1UDIES Volume 37 cSpring. 1999 Number 1 Andrews University Press ANDREWS UNIVERSITY SEMINARY STUDIES The Journal of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary of Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan 49104, U.S.A. Editor: NANCY J. VYHMEISTER Associate Editor: JERRY MOON Book Review Editor: JERRY MOON Consulting Editors: ROBERT M. JOHNSTON, JON PAULIEN, RANDALL W. YOLTNKER Copy Editor: LEONA G. RUNNING Book Review Assistant: JOSE E. GUZMAN Circulation Manager: Jost E. GUZMAN Office Manager: KAREN K. ABRAHAMSON Editorial Assistant: KAREN K. ABRAHAMSON Editorial and Circulation Offices: Andrews University Seminary Studies, Seminary Hall, Andrews University Berrien Springs, MI 49104-1500, U.S.A. Phone: (616) 471-6023 Fax: (616) 471-6202 Electronic Mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.andrews.edu/—auss A refereed journal, ANDREWS UNIVERSITY SEMINARY STUDIES provides a scholarly venue, within the context of biblical faith, for the presentation of research in the area of religious and biblical studies. AUSS publishes research articles and brief notes on the following topics: biblical archaeology and history of antiquity; Hebrew Bible; New Testament; church history of all periods; historical, biblical, and systematic theology; ethics; history of religions; and missions. Selected research articles on ministry and Christian education may also be included. The opinions expressed in articles, brief notes, book reviews, etc., are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors nor those of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary. Subscription Information: ANDREWS UNIVERSITY SEMINARY STUDIES is published in the Spring and the Autumn. The subscription rates for 1999 are as follows: U.S.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Melville's Bibles
    © 2008 UC Regents Buy this book University of California Press, one of the most distinguished university presses in the United States, enriches lives around the world by advancing scholarship in the humanities, social sciences, and natural sciences. Its activities are supported by the UC Press Foundation and by philanthropic contributions from individuals and institutions. For more information, visit www.ucpress.edu. University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 2008 by The Regents of the University of California Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Pardes, Ilana. Melville’s Bibles / Ilana Pardes. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-520-25454-1 (cloth : alk. paper) isbn 978-0-520-25455-8 (pbk. : alk. paper) 1. Melville, Herman, 1819–1891. Moby Dick. 2. Melville, Herman, 1819–1891—Religion. 3. Bible—Commentaries. 4. Bible—Hermeneutics. 5. Bible and literature. 6. Religion and culture. 7. Religion and literature—United States—History— 19th century. 8. American fi ction—19th century— History and criticism. I. Title. ps2388.b5p37 2008 813’.3—dc22 2007014870 Manufactured in the United States of America 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 This book is printed on New Leaf EcoBook 50, a 100% recycled fi ber of which 50% is de-inked post- consumer waste, processed chlorine-free. EcoBook 50 is acid-free and meets the minimum requirements of ansi/astm d5634–01 (Permanence of Paper). chapter 1 Playing with Leviathan Job and the Aesthetic Turn in Biblical Exegesis But if, in the face of all this, you still declare that whaling has no aesthetically noble associations connected with it, then am I ready to shiver fi fty lances with you there, and un- horse you with a split helmet every time.
    [Show full text]
  • The Symbolic Structure of Andrew Lytle's the Velvet Horn
    The Kentucky Review Volume 5 | Number 1 Article 3 Fall 1983 The yS mbolic Structure of Andrew Lytle's The Velvet Horn Anne Foata Université des Sciences Humaines, France Follow this and additional works at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kentucky-review Part of the English Language and Literature Commons Click here to let us know how access to this document benefits oy u. Recommended Citation Foata, Anne (1983) "The yS mbolic Structure of Andrew Lytle's The Velvet Horn," The Kentucky Review: Vol. 5 : No. 1 , Article 3. Available at: https://uknowledge.uky.edu/kentucky-review/vol5/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Kentucky Libraries at UKnowledge. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Kentucky Review by an authorized editor of UKnowledge. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Symbolic Structure of Andrew Lytle's The Velvet Horn Anne Foata Implied in the very title of The Velvet Horn and emphasized throughout the narrative by the mythic allusions of its central intelligence, a network of symbolic representations, all bearing upon the central image of edenic wholeness, is intricately interwoven in the narrative structure of Andrew Lytle's noveJ.l Their purpose is to confer the authenticity and immutability of an archetypal experience on the limited events of both the main and the secondary (or "enveloping") actions of the novel (the story of Lucius Cree's initiation into manhood and of his mother and uncle's fall from innocence some twenty years earlier), to draw them out of the human time and endow them with eternal significance.
    [Show full text]
  • THE FIRMAMENT and the WATER ABOVE Part I: the Meaning of Raqiac in Gen 1:6-8
    The Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991) 227-40 Copyright © 1991 by Westminster Theological Seminary, cited with permission. WTJ 53 (1991) 227-240 THE FIRMAMENT AND THE WATER ABOVE Part I: The Meaning of raqiac in Gen 1:6-8 PAUL H. SEELY STANDARD Hebrew lexica and a number of modern biblical scholars c have defined the raqia (fyqr, "firmament") of Gen 1:6-8 as a solid dome over the earth.1 Conservative scholars from Calvin on down to the present, however, have defined it as an atmospheric expanse.2 Some conservatives have taken special pains to reject the concept of a solid dome on the basis that the Bible also refers to the heavens as a tent or curtain and that refer- ences to windows and pillars of heaven are obviously poetic.3 The word raqiac, they say, simply means "expanse." They say the understanding of raqiac as a solid firmament rests on the Vulgate's translation, firmamentum; and that translation rests in turn on the LXX's translation stere<wma, which simply reflected the Greek view of the heavens at the time the trans- lators did their work.4 The raqiac defined as an atmospheric expanse is the historical view according to modern conservatives; and the modern view of the raqiac as a solid dome is simply the result of forcing biblical poetic language into agreement with a concept found in the Babylonian epic Enuma Elish.5 The historical evidence, however, which we will set forth in concrete detail, shows that the raqiac was originally conceived of as being solid and not a merely atmospheric expanse.
    [Show full text]
  • Babylonian Influence on the Bible
    BABYLONIAN INFLUENCE ON THE BIBLE AND POPULAR BELIEFS THE CONFLICT OF MERODACH, THE GOD OF LIGHT, WITH TI.AMAT, THE DRAGON OF CHAOS (see pp. 17, 35). {From tile Or/g·inal in tlie Britislt .lllfuseum} Stubies on :fl3iblical $ubject~. No. I. BABYLONIAN INFLUENCE ON THE BIBLE AND POPULAR BELIEFS: "TEHUM AND TIAMAT," "HADES AND SATAN." A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF GENESIS I. 2. BY A. SMYTHE PALMER, D.D., AUTHOR OF HA MISUNDERSTOOD MIRACLE/' "FOLK-ETYMOLOGY, "THE WORD•HUNTER~S NOTE-HOOK/' ETC. VICAR OF HOLY TRINITY, HEHMON HILL, WANSTEAD. LONDON: DAVID NUTT, 270-271, S'l'RAND. 1897. Printed by BALLANTYNE, HANSON &, Co. At the Ballantyne Press 5. 'IR. 3-n token or sincere respect an~ gratltu~e CONTENTS PAGE THE BABYLONIAN CRADLE-LAND TEHOM AND TIA.MAT 4 THE CREATION 8 THE PRIMEYAL CITAOS 10 CON~'LICT Bl<!TWEEN 'l'IAMAT AND MERODACH 14 THE SERPENT 23 DRAGONS OF THE BIBLE 37 THE SEA A REBELLIOUS POWER 41 THE WATERY HAD1'JS-TARTAROS • 48 THE DEEP AS HELL 55 PUNISHMENT OF THE REBEL HOST 62 THE ABYSS 66 Dl<JSERTS AS THE HAUNTS OF DEVILS 72 THE EUPHRATES AS A SPIRLT RIVER 76 CONCLUSION 80 APPENDIX A. PHENOMENAL DRAGONS 87 B. MERODACH .AND THE THU~DERBOL'l' 98 C. THE SOLAR CONFLICT , I06 D. THE SERPENT ORACULAR I06 E. NEPTUNE SATANIC I09 F. '' TEHOM" ro9 G. THE SPIRIT-DEEP • 109 H. OUR DEBT TO BA.BYLON IJQ TEXTS ILLUSTRATED PAGE PAGE Gen. i. 2 4 8. 24, 66 Jer. v. 22. 43 i. 21 . 33, 41 I. 34 35 Lev.
    [Show full text]