too much coffee? or too little? dunno.
j
> From: Jeffrey Fisher <jfisher at igc.org>
> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:16:27 -0500
> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
> Subject: Re: Tee Vee
>
>
>
>> From: Kenneth MacKendrick <kenneth.mackendrick at utoronto.ca>
>> Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 11:04:48 -0700
>> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>> Subject: Re: Tee Vee
>>
>> At 01:53 AM 10/10/01 -0700, you wrote:
>>
>>> 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?
>
>
> wait til you get to deuteronomy and leviticus, nevermind, say, jerome. now
> that i think about it, i'm a little bit surprised that we haven't seen
> invocations of job in the context of 9/11, but then traditional
> interpretations of job would not gibe with war fever . . .
>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>
> the epic of gilgamesh is the place to go, here.
>
>>
>> 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.
>
> nb: elohim is a plural noun, el being almost generic as a term for (a) god.
> thus, iirc (and i'm quite rusty at the moment) you would have el-shaddai
> (god of the mountain shaddai), etc. it's worth noting (and ken gestures
> toward this) that ancient judaism was really more "henotheistic" than
> "monotheistic." that is, they didn't believe there was only one god. they
> believed their god was most powerful and lined up on his side, so to speak.
> thus you see in any number of the books of the prophets, competitions with
> other people's gods, which yahweh wins, natch. there's one particularly
> well-known episode, but it's slippping my mind, at the moment.
>
>>
>> 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
>
> yeah, these things are often cheap second hand.
>
>>
>>
>> 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.
>>
>
> i'm not sure it encourages laziness, but i think it is the sort of thing
> that is more useful for scholars (or for devout prooftexting) than for the
> average reader.
>
> in grad school, i took (and taught) a couple of classes at the div school.
> there was one great patristics/anglican theology professor there, an
> anglican priest with a great sense of perspective and of humor. in the
> several classes in which i worked with him, i discovered that he had a
> handful of lines that he pulled out for every course. one of these was:
>
> "You can prove anything you want from the Bible. Two thousand years of
> church history have proven that."
>
> jeff
>