DOCSLIB.ORG

Genesis, Book of 2. E

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

II • 933 GENESIS, BOOK OF Pharaoh's infatuation with Sarai, the defeat of the four Genesis 2:4a in the Greek translation: "This is the book of kings and the promise of descendants. There are a num­ the origins (geneseos) of heaven and earth." The book is ber of events which are added to, or more detailed than, called Genesis in the Septuagint, whence the name came the biblical version: Abram's dream, predicting how Sarai into the Vulgate and eventually into modern usage. In will save his life (and in which he and his wife are symbol­ Jewish tradition the first word of the book serves as its ized by a cedar and a palm tree); a visit by three Egyptians name, thus the book is called BeriPSit. The origin of the (one named Hirkanos) to Abram and their subsequent name is easier to ascertain than most other aspects of the report of Sarai's beauty to Pharaoh; an account of Abram's book, which will be treated under the following headings: prayer, the affliction of the Egyptians, and their subse­ quent healing; and a description of the land to be inher­ A. Text ited by Abram's descendants. Stylistically, the Apocryphon B. Sources may be described as a pseudepigraphon, since events are l. J related in the first person with the patriarchs Lamech, 2. E Noah and Abram in turn acting as narrator, though from 3. p 22.18 (MT 14:21) to the end of the published text (22.34) 4. The Promises Writer the narrative is in the third person. There are also a C. Narrative number of specific details in content which are shared with l. The Framework: Genealogy contemporary literature. Thus, the visit of the Egyptians 2. The Primeval Cycle (when they receive religious instruction from Abram) finds 3. The Abraham Cycle a parallel in Pseudo-Eupolemos. The greatest number of 4. The Jacob Cycle similarities are with jubilees. Both texts, for instance, give 5. The Joseph Narrative the name of Lamech's wife as Bitenosh and specify the D. The Patriarchs and History mountain where Noah's ark came to rest as Lubar. Never­ E. The Religion of the Patriarchs theless, the precise relationship between the two texts has F. Ancient Near Eastern Parallels not yet been determined. The description of Sarai's beauty l. Cognate Parallels is thought to be poetry, an early precursor of the Arabic 2. Typological Parallels wosf (VanderKam 1979). Some of the uon-biblical parts and some of the rephrasing call .to mind the later Jewish A. Text midrashic texts, but any links are tenuous. There are four major textual witnesses to the book of Despite the expansions and the recasting in the first Genesis: the Masoretic text (MT), the Samaritan Penta- · person, the biblical text is still recognizable and has been teuch (SP), the Septuagint (LXX), and the Genesis frag­ identified as "an older Palestinian type" (VanderKam ments from Qumran. The latter group comprises our 1978: 55). Also, as in llQtgJob, there are a number of oldest manuscripts but only covers a small proportion of "double translations." It is possible that the Apocryphon is the book (McCarter 1986: 82-88; Davila 1989). In general, (or had as one of its sources) a Targum of Genesis and the MT is well preserved and reliable, but there are many hence that it may be a forerunner of the Rabbinic Tar­ individual instances where the other versions preserve gumim (Kuiper 1968). However, its closest similarities are superior readings (see e.g., index in Tov 1981; frequent with the Peshitta and not with the medieval Targumim. examples in McCarter 1986; Davila 1989). An important One characteristic of the way in which the text has been category of textual variants is the glosses in the MT. that rewritten is its anticipation of passages which occur later are not attested in other major versions; this category of in the Bible. Thus a number of phrases from the later variants shows how the Hebrew text continued to grow encounter with Abimelech (Genesis 20) are placed in the even in a conservative scribal tradition (e.g., Gen 14:22: narrative of Sarai and Abram in Egypt (Genesis 12). yahweh added to 'el 'elyon [not in LXX or Syr, SP has hii?elohim]; Gen 35:7: 'el added to bet-'el [not in LXX, Vg, Bibliography or Syr]; see Tov 1981: 307-9). Fitzmyer, J. A. I971. The Genesis Apocryphon of Qµmran Cave I: A Commentary. 2d ed. BibOr IBA. Rome. B. Sources Kuiper, G. J. I968. A Study of the Relationship between A Genesis Apocryphon and the Pentateuchal Targumim in Genesis I 4: 1- Since the beginnings of source criticism of the Penta­ 12. Pp. 149-61 in In Memoriam Paul Kahle. Ed. M. Black and teuch in the 17th and 18th centuries there has been much G. Fohrer. BZAW 103. Berlin. controversy over the sources of Genesis. There are several Muraoka, T. 1972. Notes on the Aramaic of the Genesis Apocry­ competing theories today, but the long-established identi­ phon. RevQ 8: 7-51. fication of J (the Yahwist), E (the Elohist), and P (the VanderKam, J. C. 1978. The Textual Affinities of the Biblical Priestly source) still provides the most plausible model for Citations in the Genesis Apocryphon.]BL 97: 45-55. the composition of Genesis (Friedman 1987; see.the over­ --. 1979. The Poetry of IQ Ap Gen XX, 2-8a, RevQ 10: 57- view of Knight 1985). To these three sources some scholars 66. would add the Promises writer, who inserted a series of RICHARDT. WHITE divine promises into the patriarchal stories of J + E (see below, B.4.). Other scholars would explain the growth of Genesis by a series of editorial expansions of a single GENESIS, BOOK OF. Genesis is the first book of the source (Rendtorff 1977; Blum 1984) or as wholly com­ Hebrew Bible. The name of the book is derived from posed by a single author (Whybray 1987), but these theo- GENESIS, BOOK OF 940 • II use of clothing to symbolize the rites de passage in the Joseph Emerton,]. A. 1982. The Origin of the Promises to the Patriarchs narrative (see above, C.5.) and in the Gilgamesh epic in the Older Sources of the Book of Genesis. VT 32: 14-32. (Moran EncRel 5: 559); Jacob's mysterious wrestling en­ --. 1987-88. An Examination of Some Attempts to Defend counter with God in Gen 32:23-33 and Gilgamesh's dream the Unity of the Flood Narrative in Genesis. VT 37: 401-20; of a wrestling encounter with his patron god Shamash in 38: 1-21. the Gilgamesh epic (Hendel l 987b: l 03-9). There are --.1988. The Priestly Writer in Genesis.]TS 39: 381-400. many typological parallels from other cultures for _stories Finnegan, R. 1970. A Note on Oral Tradition and Historical Evi- about tricksters like Jacob (Hendel 1987b: 123, 128-29; dence. History and Theory 9: 195-201. Niditch 1987: 95-118), wise heroes like Joseph (Niditch Fishbane, M. 1979. Text and Texture. New York. 1987: II0-14), heroes who wrestle with gods (de Pury Fokkelman, J.P. 1975. Narrative Art in Genesis. Amsterdam. 1979), primeval floods (Dundes 1988), and many other Frazer, J. 1918. Folk-lore in the Old Testament. 3 vols. London. motifs and themes in Genesis (Frazer 19 l 8; Gaster 1950). Freedman, D. N. 1976. Divine Names and Titles in Early Hebrew There are also typological parallels for the overall struc­ Poetry. Pp. 55-107 in MagnaliaDei: The Mighty Acts of God, ed. ture of the book of Genesis, beginning with myths of F. M. Cross, W. E. Lemke, and P. D. Miller, Jr. Garden City. origins and extending through the lives of the ancestors, Repr. Pp. 77-129 in D. N. Freedman, Pottery, Poetry, and Proph­ e.g., the Mayan Popul Vuh (Pitt-Rivers 1977: 149-50). ecy: Studies in Early Hebrew Poetry. Winona Lake, IN, 1980. --. 1987. "Who Is Like Thee Among the Gods?" The Religion Bibliography of Early Israel. Pp. 315-35 in AIP. Albertz, R. 1978. Personliche Fr0mmigkeit und offizielle Religion: Reli­ Friedman, R. E. 1981. The Exile and Biblical Narrative. HSM 22. gionsinterner Pluralismus in Israel und Babylon. CThM 3. Stutt­ Chico, CA. gart. --. 1986. Deception for Deception~ BRev 2/1: 22-31, 68. Alt, A. 1929.DerGott der Viiter. Stuttgart. Repr. KlSchr 1: 1-78. ET --. 1987. Who ttrote the Bible? New York. pp. 1-100 in Essays on Old Testament History and Religion. Trans. Frymer-Kensky, T 1981. Patriarchal Family Relationships and Near R. A. Wilson. Garden City, NY, 1966. Eastern Law. BA 44: 209-14. Alter, R. 1981. The Art ofBiblical Narrative. New York. Gaster, T H. 1950. Myth, Legend, and Custom in the Old Testament. Barr, J. 1976. Story and History in Biblical Theology.JR 56: 1-17. New York. Repr. pp. 1-17 in The Scope and Authority of the Bible. London, Golka, F. W. 1980. Kein Gnade fiir Kain. Pp. 58-73 in Werden und 1980. Wirken des Alten Testaments, ed. R. Albertz, et al. GOttingen. Blanquart, F., ed. 1987. La Creation dan /'Orient ancien. LD 127. Gunkel, H. 1964. The Legends of Genesis. Trans. W. H. Carruth. New Paris. York. Blenkinsopp, J. 1976. The Structure of P. CBQ 38: 275-92. Hackett, J. 1984. The Balaam Text from Deir <Azlii. HSM 31. Chico, Blum, E. 1984. Die Komposition der Viitergeschichte. WMANT 57. CA. Neukirchener-Vluyn. Hendel, R. S. 1987a. Of Demigods and the Deluge: Toward an Blumenberg, H. 1985. Work on Myth. Trans. R. M. Wallace. Cam­ Intepretation of Genesis 6:1-4.]BL 106: 13-26.
Recommended publications
  • Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin Baker Academic, a Division of Baker Publishing Group, © 2014

    Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin Baker Academic, a Division of Baker Publishing Group, © 2014

    Adam, the Fall, and Original Sin Theological, Biblical, and Scientific Perspectives EDITED BY Hans Madueme and Michael Reeves k Hans Madueme and Michael Reeves, Adam, The Fall, and Original Sin Baker Academic, a division of Baker Publishing Group, © 2014. Used by permission. (Unpublished manuscript—copyright protected Baker Publishing Group) MaduemeReeves_Adam_LC_wo.indd iii 9/17/14 7:47 AM © 2014 by Hans Madueme and Michael Reeves Published by Baker Academic a division of Baker Publishing Group P.O. Box 6287, Grand Rapids, MI 49516-6287 www.bakeracademic.com Printed in the United States of America All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means—for example, electronic, photocopy, recording—without the prior written permission of the publisher. The only exception is brief quotations in printed reviews. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Adam, the fall, and original sin : theological, biblical, and scientific perspectives / Hans Madueme and Michael Reeves, editors. pages cm Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-0-8010-3992-8 (pbk.) 1. Sin, Original. 2. Adam (Biblical figure) 3. Fall of man. I. Madueme, Hans, 1975– editor. BT720.A33 2014 233 .14—dc23 2014021973 Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version® (ESV®), copyright © 2001 by Crossway, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. ESV Text Edition: 2011 Scripture quotations labeled NASB are from the New American Standard Bible®, copyright © 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1975, 1977, 1995 by The Lockman Foundation.
  • Eve's Answer to the Serpent: an Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology

    Eve's Answer to the Serpent: an Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology

    Calvin Theological Journal 33 (1998) : 399-420 Copyright © 1980 by Calvin Theological Seminary. Cited with permission. Scholia et Homiletica Eve's Answer to the Serpent: An Alternative Paradigm for Sin and Some Implications in Theology P. Wayne Townsend The woman said to the serpent, "We may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, `You must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die. "' (Gen. 3:2-3) Can we take these italicized words seriously, or must we dismiss them as the hasty additions of Eve's overactive imagination? Did God say or mean this when he instructed Adam in Genesis 2:16-17? I suggest that, not only did Eve speak accu- rately and insightfully in responding to the serpent but that her words hold a key to reevaluating the doctrine of original sin and especially the puzzles of alien guilt and the imputation of sin. In this article, I seek to reignite discussion on these top- ics by suggesting an alternative paradigm for discussing the doctrine of original sin and by applying that paradigm in a preliminary manner to various themes in the- ology, biblical interpretation, and Christian living. I seek not so much to answer questions as to evoke new ones that will jar us into a more productive path of the- ological explanation. I suggest that Eve's words indicate that the Bible structures the ideas that we recognize as original sin around the concept of uncleanness.
  • Three Versions of Versions of Versions of the Book of Genesis The

    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.
  • Genesis Study Guide the Book of Genesis Is One of the Most Important, Useful, Misunderstood and Misused Books of the Bible

    Genesis Study Guide the Book of Genesis Is One of the Most Important, Useful, Misunderstood and Misused Books of the Bible

    !1 Genesis Study Guide The book of Genesis is one of the most important, useful, misunderstood and misused books of the bible. It is a beautiful picture of the creation of the world and God’s good plans for it, but also a stark mirror that reveals top us the deep depravity of people and the origins of sin and death. Its opening chapters provide a reference point for so much of our understanding of the world, creation, people, and the theology of the New Testament. Yet these opening chapters are barely referenced through out the Old Testament itself. The brief account offered of the creation of the universe seems to our modern viewpoint to leave so much unsaid, and yet it communicates many deep and profound truths about who we are and where we came from. It is a book well worth working our way through slowly. This term we will work through the first three chapters of Genesis, but we will also use it as a spring board into discussing various hot topics and important intersections with our current cultures outlook on the world. In week one and two we’ll look at the two overlapping accounts of creation itself before spending week three looking at Adam and Eve’s decision to sin and God’s response and how that sets up the rest of the story of Scripture. 1 Sudy 1 Genesis 1:1-2:3 Where do we come from? Were we made or are we the product of unplanned mutation over time? Do we have a purpose or a meaning to our existence? These are some of the most basic human questions that a person can ask in our modern context.
  • The Christian Comforter

    The Christian Comforter

    The Christian Comforter Enoch the seventh from Adam In the book of Genesis, there are two Enoch’s; one from the line of Cain, in Genesis 4:17, and one from the line of Seth, who is the Enoch that we are concerned with here. The lineage is Adam — Seth — Enos — Cainan — Mahalaleel — Jared — Enoch. Enoch walked with God, and after 365 years God took him — he did not die. Genesis 5:23-24 And all the days of Enoch were three hundred sixty and five years: And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him. This fact is expanded upon in Hebrews chapter 11 — among those who walked in faith. Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. Enoch is also found in the genealogy of Jesus. Luke 3:37 Which was the son of Mathusala, which was the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan. Note; above the names are spelt differently in the New Testament which was originally written in Greek. In the time of the early church fathers, the book of Enoch was widely accepted as inspired scripture by Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Athenagoras, Tertullian, Origen and Lactantius. They all referenced Enoch in their own writings, probably because of Jude’s reference that it was a prophetic text. Jude 1:14-15 And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.
  • Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec

    Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec

    Israel's Conquest of Canaan: Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 Author(s): Lewis Bayles Paton Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 32, No. 1 (Apr., 1913), pp. 1-53 Published by: The Society of Biblical Literature Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3259319 . Accessed: 09/04/2012 16:53 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The Society of Biblical Literature is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Biblical Literature. http://www.jstor.org JOURNAL OF BIBLICAL LITERATURE Volume XXXII Part I 1913 Israel's Conquest of Canaan Presidential Address at the Annual Meeting, Dec. 27, 1912 LEWIS BAYLES PATON HARTFORD THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY problem of Old Testament history is more fundamental NO than that of the manner in which the conquest of Canaan was effected by the Hebrew tribes. If they came unitedly, there is a possibility that they were united in the desert and in Egypt. If their invasions were separated by wide intervals of time, there is no probability that they were united in their earlier history. Our estimate of the Patriarchal and the Mosaic traditions is thus conditioned upon the answer that we give to this question.
  • An Examination of Scriptural and Archaeological Evidences for the Historicity of Biblical Patriarchs

    An Examination of Scriptural and Archaeological Evidences for the Historicity of Biblical Patriarchs

    Asian Journal of Humanities and Social Studies (ISSN: 2321 – 2799) Volume 03 – Issue 05, October 2015 An Examination of Scriptural and Archaeological Evidences for the Historicity of Biblical Patriarchs Faith O. Adebayo The Nigerian Baptist Theological Seminary, Ogbomoso, Oyo-State, Nigeria Email: ocheniadey [AT] gmail.com _________________________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT---- The term Patriarch is the designation given to the three major ancestors of the Israelites. The ancestors are: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, the twelve sons of Jacob are sometimes refers to as Patriarchs, especially with the significance role played by Joseph for the sustenance of the race. The life and experiences of the Patriarchs are recorded in the book of Genesis. The stories of these Patriarchs were traditional tales which were handed down through many generations before the Old Testament writers collected them in the book of Genesis. The historicity of the Old Testament narratives about the Patriarchs has been a major debate among biblical critics, while archaeological finds has also tends to shed light on some of the events and customs attributed to the Patriarchs in the narratives. Hence, the writer in this paper will present the scriptural positions on the three Patriarchs, the archaeological discoveries that have aid the historicity of the Patriarchal narratives, and hence considered the consonance and the dissonance between the scriptural positions and archaeological discoveries that has shed light on the historicity of the Patriarchs. Keywords--- Patriarch, Archaeology, Customs, Religion, Narratives _________________________________________________________________________________________________ 1. INTRODUCTION The term Patriarch is the designation given to the three major ancestors of the Israelites. The ancestors are: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
  • Wordplay in Genesis 2:25-3:1 and He

    Wordplay in Genesis 2:25-3:1 and He

    Vol. 42:1 (165) January – March 2014 WORDPLAY IN GENESIS 2:25-3:1 AND HE CALLED BY THE NAME OF THE LORD QUEEN ATHALIAH: THE DAUGHTER OF AHAB OR OMRI? YAH: A NAME OF GOD THE TRIAL OF JEREMIAH AND THE KILLING OF URIAH THE PROPHET SHEPHERDING AS A METAPHOR SAUL AND GENOCIDE SERAH BAT ASHER IN RABBINIC LITERATURE PROOFTEXT THAT ELKANAH RATHER THAN HANNAH CONSECRATED SAMUEL AS A NAZIRITE BOOK REVIEW: ONKELOS ON THE TORAH: UNDERSTANDING THE BIBLE BOOK REVIEW: JPS BIBLE COMMENTARY: JONAH LETTER TO THE EDITOR www.jewishbible.org THE JEWISH BIBLE QUARTERLY In cooperation with THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE JEWISH AGENCY AIMS AND SCOPE The Jewish Bible Quarterly provides timely, authoritative studies on biblical themes. As the only Jewish-sponsored English-language journal devoted exclusively to the Bible, it is an essential source of information for anyone working in Bible studies. The Journal pub- lishes original articles, book reviews, a triennial calendar of Bible reading and correspond- ence. Publishers and authors: if you would like to propose a book for review, please send two review copies to BOOK REVIEW EDITOR, POB 29002, Jerusalem, Israel. Books will be reviewed at the discretion of the editorial staff. Review copies will not be returned. The Jewish Bible Quarterly (ISSN 0792-3910) is published in January, April, July and October by the Jewish Bible Association , POB 29002, Jerusalem, Israel, a registered Israe- li nonprofit association (#58-019-398-5). All subscriptions prepaid for complete volume year only. The subscription price for 2014 (volume 42) is $60. Our email address: [email protected] and our website: www.jewishbible.org .
  • Canonical Reading of the Old Testament in the Context of Critical Scholarship

    Canonical Reading of the Old Testament in the Context of Critical Scholarship

    CANONICAL READING OF THE OLD TESTAMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF CRITICAL SCHOLARSHIP - -■11111.44.0411,■.--- ROLF RENDTORFF In the early seventies of this century a new term appeared in biblical scholarship: Canonical Criticism. It was James Sanders who explicitly introduced this term in his essay Torah and Canon (1972). The discussion on this program was from its very beginning also closely linked to work of Brevard Childs. In the meantime this term and its manifold implications are widely used and debated. Let me first of all say something about terminology. The word 'canon' has been used, of course, much earlier in Bible scholarship, but under a different aspect. We can now distinguish between two main aspects of canon studies. I quote the categorization by one well-known expert in this field: Sid Leiman in the foreword to the second edi- tion of his book, The Canonization of Hebrew Scripture (1991), speaks about two related but distinct categories, not to be confused with each other. The one category may be termed 'canonization studies.' Its focus is on the history of the formation of the biblical canon from its inception to its closing. The other category has been termed 'canonical criticism.' Its focus is primarily on the function of the biblical canon throughout the reli- gious history of a particular faith community. For the latter Leiman mentions explicitly Childs and Sanders, "among the founders and major proponents." In my eyes the first category is very important, not only from a historical point of view but also to understand under what circumstances and religious conditions the canon of the Bible, as we now have it, came into being.
  • God of the Fathers”

    God of the Fathers”

    THE NABATAEAN “GOD OF THE FATHERS” John F. Healey In 1929 Albrecht Alt, in his ground-shifting essay on “Der Gott der Väter”,1 invoked the epigraphic evidence provided by the Nabataean inscriptions to support his argument that the Hebrew patriarchal narratives showed traces of earlier nomadic religious tradition. This approach combined the nineteenth/early twentieth-century interest in casting light from Arabia on the patriarchal narratives with the early twentieth-century form-critical effort to get back to the earliest forms and elements of the texts. Subsequent scholarship has thrown doubt on many of the basic theses and conclusions of Alt and his followers, such as the assumption that the family unit formed the basis of the origins of Israelite religion2 and even his minimal confidence over the recovery of history from the texts.3 The Ugaritic texts were published soon after Alt wrote his essay and patriarchal religion could then be seen in the new light of El-worship.4 In the context of these develop- ments the Nabataean evidence was marginalized on the grounds that it is very late in date. It receives scant attention in later discussions. I cannot contribute usefully to the discussion of the nomadic or other origins of Israelite religion or the traditions of the Book of Genesis, but it is noteworthy that the patriarchs are presented in the Pentateuch as settling nomads, whether this is historically authentic information or not. This concept certainly became part of the Israelite self-under- standing: “A wandering Aramaean was my father” (Deut. 26:5). Several of Alt’s fundamental points remain valid: in the narratives available 1 A.
  • Bliss – Analysis of Sacred Chronology.Pdf

    Bliss – Analysis of Sacred Chronology.Pdf

    Analysis of Sacred Chronology Sylvester Bliss With the Elements of Chronology; and the Numbers of the Hebrew Text Vindicated TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................3 CHRONOLOGY .............................................5 SACRED CHRONOLOGY .....................................42 APPENDIX .............................................227 INDEX ................................................229 PREFACE If Chronology is "the soul of history," it is equally so of prophecy. Without it, the Scriptures would lose much of their harmony and beauty. It is carefully interwoven into the sacred text, and gives the order and dependence of the several parts on each other. The chronology of the Bible is as important in its place as any other subject of revelation. When disregarded, sad errors have been made in locating the historical and prophetical Scriptures. The elements of Chronology, and the numerous scriptural synchronisms, have only been given in works too voluminous, diffusive and expensive for ordinary use. To place before those not having access to the larger works, the simple evidences by which scriptural events are located, is the design of the following pages. An original feature of this analysis of Scripture Chronology is the presenting in full, and in chronological order, the words of inspiration, which have a bearing on the time of the events and predictions therein recorded. The reader will thus be enabled to obtain a concise and clear, as well as a correct, understanding of the reasons which govern in the adoption of the several dates. The works of Prideaux, Hales, Usher, 4 Clark, Jackson, Blair, the Duke of Manchester, and others, have been freely consulted, in this compilation. To Dr. Hales in particular the author is much indebted for many valuable suggestions.
  • Genesis 4:1-26! the Story of Cain and His Heinous Sin; Yet , God Remembered and Cared for Cain! the Book of Genesis Is One Big S

    Genesis 4:1-26! the Story of Cain and His Heinous Sin; Yet , God Remembered and Cared for Cain! the Book of Genesis Is One Big S

    Genesis 4:1-26! The story of Cain and his heinous sin; yet, God remembered and cared for Cain! The book of Genesis is one big story book! It was written by Moses in order to serve as an introduction toward helping his ancient readers and modern readers alike, understand and appreciate the call of God to Israel to be His special covenant people. It is a foundational book! By calling it a foundational book, I am asserting that this seemingly benign book of “nice stories” contains key ideas regarding God, God’s relationship to Israel as a people, and God’s purposes for Israel and humanity. This sometimes neglected chapter is not any different. It is not only conveys to the reader a wonderfully told story; but the complete story (main story plus supplements) offers key insights into God and how He relates to fallen sinners like Cain and to sinner s like you and me that needs to be heeded and not forgotten. Chapter 4 picks up the story regarding the devastating failure of the first pair of humanity. Recall, the first couple’s failure to listen to, trust the LORD, and obey Him in the garden. Recall, how chapter 3 concluded our epic tale to this point with the lingering impression that this first couple -Adam and Eve- have been kicked out of the garden. However, even though they have been kicked out of the garden, they are still in Eden. Furthermore, God has not abandoned them. They are still under his mandate to work the ground and fulfill the purposes for which God created them.