Archaeologica.org

so, before 4k bc, god was doing what?

Genesis Veracity wrote:The universe is matter, so there was no previous universe.

QED.

j

ps. doc, you may now re-enter the fray.

Genesis Veracity wrote:"In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth."

WRONG!

Why is it that "literalists" never seem to actually read their texts?

Nevertheless . . . noblesse oblige . . .

Since the individual quotes the P Creation Myth--based on, of all things, an Eygptian prayer via a Psalm--I gather he assumes that is the Creation Myth to believe. The other authors might just disagree on that point.

At the time when Elohim created/separated the skies and the earth when the earth had been shapeless and formless, and darkness was on the surface of the deep, and the spirit of Elohim was hovering on the face of the water. . . .

Gen 1:1-2

"Creation myth" is a bit of a misnomer. Gods do not so much create as reorder to their devices. Hence the pre-existing "waters of the deep." Where was Elohim hanging about prior to his work?! The primary action in earlier creation myths is the physical separation of earth from the skies. After reviewing these, Westermann notes:

This background makes it worthwhile considering the thesis that the Hebrew word for creation by God [Cannot render Hebrew Font: Aleph-Resh-Bet--Ed.], has the original basic meaning of "divide" or "separate," E. Dantinne, "Creation et Séparation," Le Muséon, 74 (1961). He begins with the passages Josh 17:15, 18; Ezek 23:47 . . . where the verb means "cut off" or "cut in pieces."

On earlier sources and this "deep," Day notes that:

. . . the Priestly creation account in Genesis 1, where it has often been thought that tehom 'deep' in Gen. 1.2 is a reminiscence of the name of Tiamat. . . . However, in general, since the discovery of the Ugaritic [Canaanite texts from Ugarit.--Ed.] texts from 1929 onwards, it has become generally accepted that the Old Testament's references to a divine conflict with a dragon and the sea are an echo of Canaanite rather than Babylonian mythology.

Thus, there was already a "universe" as in tehom that the Earth rested on when Elohim separated the sky from it. As Friedman notes, in theP Creation Myth a firmament separates waters above and below it. "The universe in that story is thus a habitable bubble surrounded by water. This same conception is assumed in the P flood story, in which the 'apertures of the skies' and the 'fountains of the great deep' are broken up so that the waters flow in" (Friedman, TBwSR).

It has become accepted that this P Creation Myth is dependent on Psalm 104 (Day), which is in turn based on the 14th century BCE Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenaten's Hymn to the Sun (Day). Day notes the form of the word for "beasts" in Gen 1:24--hayeto--occurs elsewhere only in poetry, including Ps 104:11;20. Tehom also appears in Ps 104:6 to denote the primaeval waters (Day). The order of creation in Ps 104 is the same as in the P Creation Myth (Day). Interestingly, Jeremiah--which repudiates much of P--reverses the P Creation Myth in Jer 4:23 (Friedman, TBwSR).

Perhaps, the individual would like to prefer the other main creation myth, that of J. Let us examine this:

In the day that YHWH made the earth and skies--when all produce of the field had not yet been in the earth, and all vegetation of the field had not yet grown. . . .

Gen 2:4b-5a

I remove the Redactor additions of "Elohim"--translated as "god"--to YHWH.

Here you have the locative view of religion--ground HERE, sky ABOVE. No mention of anything beyond that. Certainly no mention of YHWH creating the universe which will include where he exists. Interestingly, the time of this is not so much the "creation" of the Earth but the before "all the vegetation of the field." As with the P myth, J's is not so much creation as in reorganization or even expansion.

I now bring to attention the "Song of the Sea," possibly the oldest composition in the Hebrew Bible (Cross; Friedman, 2003). Preserved in Exod 15:2-18 asks in verse 11, "Who among the gods is like you, YHWH?" This verse assumes the existence of other gods and considers YHWH greater than them. It is preserved in the J text. So, did YHWH create the land of the gods?

One cannot ignore a passage which shows YHWH as subordinate to El. Deuteronomy 32:8-9 describes how when El Elyon--"El the Most High," parceled out the nations between his sons, YHWH received Israel as his portion. Later scribes tried to change this meaning. Day, Smith, and Schmidt note the textual evidence establishes the preferred reading of "sons of God"--more properly "gods": bene elohim rather than the Massoretic text's "sons of Israel"--bene yisra' el. Curiously, Friedman tries to preserve the now discredited reading. Thus:

When El the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance,
When he separated humanity,
He fixed the boundaries of the peoples
According to the number of sons of gods.
For YHWH's portion is his people,
Jacob his allotted heritage.

As, Schmidt notes:

The relevant Septuagint and Qumran readings of Deut 32:8-9 describe how the Most High or the Canaanite high god, El . . . had allotted to each of the nations one of the members of his pantheon or "sons of El" (la ynb). . . . Deut 32:9 also reveals that YHWH was once viewed as an independent, but subordinate, deity to El and was assigned by El to Jacob/Israel. In other words, the tradition suggests that YHWH was once viewed as a deity possessing equal or lower rank and power to that of the astral gods.

Did YHWH create the divine pantheon, or, particularly El to whom he was subordinate? No biblical, or extra-biblical, source supports such a belief. An sherd found in excavations of the Jewish Quarter dated in the 7th century BCE demonstrates the importance of an El deity in Jerusalem: l qn 'rs "El, creator of the earth," (Keel).

I have not even mentioned the other Creation Myths of the Hebrew Bible.

--J.D.

References:

Cross FM. Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic: Essays in the History of the Religion of Israel. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.

Day J. Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan. London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002.

Friedman RE. Who Wrote the Bible?. 2nd Ed. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1997.

Friedman RE. The Bible with Sources Revealed. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2003.

Keel O, Uehlinger C. Gods, Goddesses and Images of God in Ancient Israel. Thomas H. Trapp trans. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1998.

Schmidt BB. "The Aniconic Tradition," The Triumph of Elohim: From Yahwisms to Judaisms. Edelman DV, ed. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1995.

Smith MS. The Early History of God: Yahweh and the Other Deities in Ancient Israel, 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2002.

Westermann C. Genesis: An Introduction. Scullion JJ, trans. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992.

john wrote:

Genesis Veracity wrote:The universe is matter, so there was no previous universe.

QED.

j

ps. doc, you may now re-enter the fray.

I was compiling this--between kicking people and scaring the local children--while you wrote!

--J.D.

Archaeologist, you should learn to read for comprehension.

insults are not the way to go...when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk .

your posts are not only wrong but out of touch with whom God is and if the real Dr. James Kennedy wrote in your book then i will begin to wonder about him as well.

i am curious about what you wrote but not at the cost of $15 plus shipping to korea. yet so far all you have shown me is that you cannot defend your position, nor discuss it rationally like it was given to you via divine revelation and to disagree with you would be wrong in your eyes.

start putting up .

archaeologist wrote:insults are not the way to go...when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk .

Let me introduce you:

your posts are not only wrong but out of touch with whom God is. . . .

which one?

yet so far all you have shown me is that you cannot defend your position, nor discuss it rationally like it was given to you via divine revelation and to disagree with you would be wrong in your eyes.

start putting up .

--J.D.

insults are not the way to go...when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk .

oh did you find the links proving that the Biblical account predates the Gilgamesh one like you claimed two months ago then ?

no didn't think so
what you mean is

when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk but anything that doesn't agree with the KJV is an invalid source

marduk wrote:

insults are not the way to go...when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk .

oh did you find the links proving that the Biblical account predates the Gilgamesh one like you claimed two months ago then ?

no didn't think so
what you mean is

when you post intelligently providing source material, links, references and sources then maybe you have a right to talk but anything that doesn't agree with the KJV is an invalid source

The KJV is heretical and anyone who believes it is a heretic. Any argument based on it is invalid and blasphamous.

How in this day and age anyone could suggest otherwise is really beyond me.

Most of the primary textual witnesses were discovered long after the KJV.

Paging Dr. Tischendorf . . . paging Dr. Tischendorf . . . a codex from the Sinai on line one. . . .

--J.D.

Archaeologist, I'll take D. James Kennedy's endorsement over yours anytime, and if your're wondering why Kennedy did endorse it, just ask him, and then report back.

Hey archaeologist, how long ago do you think was the creation week, and how long ago was Noah's Flood?

How many generations do you think there were from Noah to Abraham, and when do you think Abraham lived?

"Quack! Quack!"

Or . . . in this case . . .



--J.D.

Wow Doctor X, you should produce a comedy show for TV, that stuff is really funny.

Genesis Veracity wrote:Wow Doctor X, you should produce a comedy show for TV, that stuff is really funny.

Your ignorance of 300+ years of scholarship is not.

Your ignorance of the texts is not.

You are a waste of time.

--J.D.

What happened to your amazing sense of humor?