>That's funny Ken. I am reading Genesis for the first time, and it
>makes sense to me. It sounds like the news, exactly like the news as a
>matter of fact. And, its subtext, which doesn't actually rise to the
>level of moral questions, but remains hovering in a netherworld that
>asks, from whence does the authority of action in the world issue?
There are two stories, the water story and the garden story... I don't know how much you know about this. I did a redaction as an undergrad, I separated the stories out line by line. I received a good mark so I must have been not mad. The thesis goes, there are three sources for the first five books: J (Yahwist), E (Elohist), P (priestly). If one sharpens up on mythology and history of religion, both stories have earlier versions in different traditions. Chapter one is thought to emerge out of captivity, since the narrative has its origin(?) in Babylonian narratives... something about Tiamat and the slaying of the dragon, tossing the carcass up into the sky to form a dome.
For instance, chapter 1, the six days of creation, was thought to be the story of a water-faring people. It makes sense, if you live near the water, then creation comes out of the deep, the formless void. Chapter 2, however, is thought to be a nomadic people, a desert tribe or collective - a story about creation in an oasis. The authors of the text decided to include both, since they likely ended up with a kind of mythological synthesis when they came together. YHWH became synonymous with Elohim, 'God.' The text isn't monotheistic. I should note, some translations don't make apparent the distinction between YHWH and Elohim, there is a difference between 'God' and 'Lord' for instance. I'd have to look it up to clarify this.
If you read the text carefully, really carefully - with some tips from biblical criticism, it is a pretty easy task to separate out the lines and speculate their origins. The lines stick out like thumbs where they don't belong. I used pink, yellow and blue highlighter to specify the difference sources.
>Anyway, as I found out some religious works are cheap so I can afford
>to buy a new revised standard version (NRSV?) used, since I saw one at
>Moe's.
>Chuck Grimes
It's a nice translation... I don't exactly carry it with me, but it is always nearby on the bookshelf, usually beside Anti-Oedipus (which doesn't get much action I'm afraid).
Oh yeah, there is this website, bible-gate I think, all the texts are on-line and 100% searchable. Keyword 'grapes' for instance, it will give you the passage, or surrounding passage, of each and every time the word is used in whatever translation you want. Methinks this encourages laziness... but it is worth looking up and toying around with.
ken