Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Haven't given up
[Sidenote: Work has been intruding on life and I haven't been able to write much lately. However, I have not given up and soon will take some time off work to devote to writing. Returning soon...]
Monday, July 6, 2009
Genesis Chapters 21-25
Summary:
Ch21. In chapter 21 Sarah gives birth to Isaac, Abraham throws Hagar and Ishmael out into the desert, and then Abraham makes a covenant with Abimelech and his descendants to share a well and not bicker over the area around Beer-sheba.
Ch22. In this chapter, Abraham follows Gods command to sacrifice his son Isaac, but an angel appears and stays his hand at the last moment and provides a ram instead and God is pleased with Abraham’s obedience.
Ch23. Chapter 23 tells how Sarah dies and Abrahams buys some land in Hebron and buries her in a cave.
Ch24. This chapter is a very long drawn out tale of how Abraham’s servant journeys back to Mesopotamia to find a wife for Isaac. He returns with Rebekah, who Isaac takes as his wife.
Ch25. Chapter 25 contains the genealogies of Abraham and Isaac interspersed with Abraham’s death at 175 and the birth of Rebehak’s twin Esau and Jacob, who God calls the two nations of Rebekah’s womb.
Textual Criticism:
These five chapters suffer from the same disjointed story-telling of the previous twenty chapters. For instance, the story of the covenant with Abimelech that appears in the last 12 verses of chapter 21. Then again at the end of chapter 22 there is a short bit of genealogy at the end that does flow at all with the story of the sacrifice of Isaac.
Also, there is the contradiction in chapter 25 of Abraham dying at 175 when God had previously limited the lifespan of humans to 120 years (Genesis 6:3).
[Note: Since I don’t read Hebrew, and my knowledge regarding textual criticism is limited, this section may be very short or completely absent from further entries. Much of the general criticism of the text is already covered in previous posts, but I will try to bring up anything that seems new and will also attempt to backfill posts with more details as I study more of the extra-biblical reference material.]
Lessons and Morals:
The moral dilemmas continue in this section, at least when judged by any recent standard. As soon as Isaac is born in, Abraham not only abandons his son Ishmael, but he throws him and his mother Hagar out into the desert with only a bottle of water and some bread (Genesis 21:14). Then in the very next chapter Abraham agrees to sacrifice his one remaining son to God, without even asking why. Only after Isaac has been bound, placed on a pile of wood, and has his father standing over him with a knife does a voice from the sky intervene (the text says it’s an angel of the Lord from heaven, Genesis 22:1-11). Isaac’s feelings or response are never considered. He isn’t even mentioned again for 2 more chapters after the angel intervenes, and in the end it even seems like Abraham leaves Isaac tied up on the mountain (Genesis 22:19). These seem to be frightening examples of bad parenting, which today would result in social and legal actions against Abraham.
It’s nice that Abraham goes through so much trouble to bury his wife properly, and this is probably a behavior finally worthy of emulating. But it is a brief moral respite before Abraham sends his servant away to buy a wife for Isaac (he is sent with riches, which he imparts upon the bride and her family, Genesis 24:53). Then at the very end of chapter 25, Esau is on the verge of death from exhaustion and his own brother Jacob forces him to swear his birthright over to Jacob before he’ll even give him something to eat and drink (Genesis 25:29-34). This one-sided sibling rivalry continues, as we shall see in the next post.
So, from these few chapters we are to learn that if a voice from the heavens tells us to do anything drastic like murder our own children, we should obey without question. And if someone is vulnerable and desperate (even your own kin), cheat them out of everything you can before offering help.
Ch21. In chapter 21 Sarah gives birth to Isaac, Abraham throws Hagar and Ishmael out into the desert, and then Abraham makes a covenant with Abimelech and his descendants to share a well and not bicker over the area around Beer-sheba.
Ch22. In this chapter, Abraham follows Gods command to sacrifice his son Isaac, but an angel appears and stays his hand at the last moment and provides a ram instead and God is pleased with Abraham’s obedience.
Ch23. Chapter 23 tells how Sarah dies and Abrahams buys some land in Hebron and buries her in a cave.
Ch24. This chapter is a very long drawn out tale of how Abraham’s servant journeys back to Mesopotamia to find a wife for Isaac. He returns with Rebekah, who Isaac takes as his wife.
Ch25. Chapter 25 contains the genealogies of Abraham and Isaac interspersed with Abraham’s death at 175 and the birth of Rebehak’s twin Esau and Jacob, who God calls the two nations of Rebekah’s womb.
Textual Criticism:
These five chapters suffer from the same disjointed story-telling of the previous twenty chapters. For instance, the story of the covenant with Abimelech that appears in the last 12 verses of chapter 21. Then again at the end of chapter 22 there is a short bit of genealogy at the end that does flow at all with the story of the sacrifice of Isaac.
Also, there is the contradiction in chapter 25 of Abraham dying at 175 when God had previously limited the lifespan of humans to 120 years (Genesis 6:3).
[Note: Since I don’t read Hebrew, and my knowledge regarding textual criticism is limited, this section may be very short or completely absent from further entries. Much of the general criticism of the text is already covered in previous posts, but I will try to bring up anything that seems new and will also attempt to backfill posts with more details as I study more of the extra-biblical reference material.]
Lessons and Morals:
The moral dilemmas continue in this section, at least when judged by any recent standard. As soon as Isaac is born in, Abraham not only abandons his son Ishmael, but he throws him and his mother Hagar out into the desert with only a bottle of water and some bread (Genesis 21:14). Then in the very next chapter Abraham agrees to sacrifice his one remaining son to God, without even asking why. Only after Isaac has been bound, placed on a pile of wood, and has his father standing over him with a knife does a voice from the sky intervene (the text says it’s an angel of the Lord from heaven, Genesis 22:1-11). Isaac’s feelings or response are never considered. He isn’t even mentioned again for 2 more chapters after the angel intervenes, and in the end it even seems like Abraham leaves Isaac tied up on the mountain (Genesis 22:19). These seem to be frightening examples of bad parenting, which today would result in social and legal actions against Abraham.
It’s nice that Abraham goes through so much trouble to bury his wife properly, and this is probably a behavior finally worthy of emulating. But it is a brief moral respite before Abraham sends his servant away to buy a wife for Isaac (he is sent with riches, which he imparts upon the bride and her family, Genesis 24:53). Then at the very end of chapter 25, Esau is on the verge of death from exhaustion and his own brother Jacob forces him to swear his birthright over to Jacob before he’ll even give him something to eat and drink (Genesis 25:29-34). This one-sided sibling rivalry continues, as we shall see in the next post.
So, from these few chapters we are to learn that if a voice from the heavens tells us to do anything drastic like murder our own children, we should obey without question. And if someone is vulnerable and desperate (even your own kin), cheat them out of everything you can before offering help.
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Genesis chapters 16 - 20
Summary:
Ch16. In Genesis chapter 16, Abram’s wife Sarai fails to bear children, so he sires a child with Sarai’s servant Hagar who gives birth to a son, Ishmael.
Ch17. In this chapter, God repeats his promise to Abram to multiply his seed and give him all the land of Canaan. God renames Abram and Sarai, Abraham and Sarah. God then order Abraham to circumcise himself and all the males of his tribe, which Abraham does.
Ch18. In chapter 18, God appears to Abraham in the form of three men, who tell him that Sarah will have another child and that they are going to go down to Sodom to see if the people are behaving.
Ch19. In this chapter two angels appear at Lot’s house in Sodom and tell him to run, Lot and his family flee the destruction of Sodom, and then Lot’s daughters devise a plan to impregnate themselves.
Ch20. In chapter 20, Abraham and Sarah visit king Abimelech and lie to him again saying Sarah is Abraham’s sister. The king has a nightmare from God and gives Sarah back along with livestock and servants.
Textual Criticism:
The story of Abraham in chapters 16 though 20 flows well, and has no glaring textual contradictions. There are also fewer disjointed transitions in the text, so there is little to criticize here from the layman’s perspective. The one thing that can be said is that the covenant between God and Abraham has been repeated so many times now, one wonders if God, or Abraham or the author(s) of the text aren’t forgetful somehow. Also, the story of Abraham lying about his wife being his sister is almost an exact copy of the story from earlier in chapter 12. Is this some sort of repetitive, story-telling norm in ancient Israel?
[An aside: Another textual problem I’ve been running into throughout the text is the liberal use of pronouns. Sometimes there are so many pronouns in a string of verses that it becomes extremely difficult to understand who is being referred to. I’m not sure if this is a fault of the King James translation or how the original Hebrew was actually written, but it becomes tedious and annoying at times, especially when one is actually attempting a careful reading.]
Lessons and Morals:
Chapter 16 is basically a lesson of what not to do; Abram’s and Sarai’s adulterous behavior and the chastising and driving out of the maidservant, Hagar. The odd thing is there is no context or spiritual analysis from God and no punishment for anyone except the maidservant who is sent out into the desert, pregnant and alone. Hagar is Sarai’s servant when she gives her over to Abram, who then impregnates her, so Hagar didn’t really have a choice in the matter. Furthermore, God seems to curse her fetus by setting every man’s hand against him before he’s even born (Genesis 16:12). Unlike the elegant fables of Aesop, it would be difficult for a child (much less most adults) to discern a positive moral lesson here.
Chapter 17 contains another repetition of God’s promise to Abram (who from then on becomes Abraham). The redundant covenant, and the redundant nature of the stories in general makes me wonder why this couldn’t have all been compressed into a much shorter telling. God seems to ramble on and on, and repeat himself over and over again. Then the commandment to circumcise all the males is just scary. The only reason that God gives for this is that there must be a sign of the covenant between man and God…so I guess that sign must be mutilated genitals? And then Abraham just runs off and starts chopping up all the penises in the tribe that same day. If someone did something even remotely similar today (or even back then in the city plaza of Ur), and then told the local authorities that it was because a deity had appeared and told him to do this, I can’t imagine he would be celebrated and revered as a universal father figure.
Chapter 18 is funny because God appears to Abraham as three men outside his tent, who seem to talk amongst themselves about things. They tell Abraham about the future…Sarah will give birth to a son. This comedy continues at this point when Sarah, who is like 90 years old, starts cracking up inside the tent. The men outside seem a little offended and make a snarky remark to her (“is any thing too hard for the Lord?”), in turn causing her to be afraid (Genesis 18:14-15). The men then tell Abraham they need to visit Sodom to see how well they’re behaving and hint at its destruction. The last ten verses of the chapter are a disturbing bidding war between Abraham and God about how many righteous people need to be inside Sodom in order to preserve it. They seem to settle on 10 and Abraham is quieted. So, if there are only 9 righteous people (whatever “righteous” means) then it’s cool to nuke the whole place.
By chapter 19, I’m beginning to think the Bible is totally twisted. Even if it is an interesting read, it does not seem at all a good book for teaching morals and healthy worldviews. First Lot offers his two daughters to be raped by the townspeople, then God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah with fire from the sky, then God kills Lot’s wife just for looking at the fireworks, and finally Lot’s daughters get him dead drunk in a cave and then rape him and both get pregnant. (The resulting children are supposedly the fathers of all of the Moabites and Ammonites, whoever they are.) Then chapter 20 forgets about all that and starts in immediately with Abraham and Sarah lying and pulling the “she’s my sister” trick again on Abimelech (king of Gerar), and again getting rewarded with a heap of livestock and servants. It’s strange how Abraham had refused proper payment a few chapters back when he smote the enemies of the king of Sodom (Genesis 14:23). But when the payment is derived from lying and giving up his wife to other men, he’s glad to take the spoils and run (twice!).
Ch16. In Genesis chapter 16, Abram’s wife Sarai fails to bear children, so he sires a child with Sarai’s servant Hagar who gives birth to a son, Ishmael.
Ch17. In this chapter, God repeats his promise to Abram to multiply his seed and give him all the land of Canaan. God renames Abram and Sarai, Abraham and Sarah. God then order Abraham to circumcise himself and all the males of his tribe, which Abraham does.
Ch18. In chapter 18, God appears to Abraham in the form of three men, who tell him that Sarah will have another child and that they are going to go down to Sodom to see if the people are behaving.
Ch19. In this chapter two angels appear at Lot’s house in Sodom and tell him to run, Lot and his family flee the destruction of Sodom, and then Lot’s daughters devise a plan to impregnate themselves.
Ch20. In chapter 20, Abraham and Sarah visit king Abimelech and lie to him again saying Sarah is Abraham’s sister. The king has a nightmare from God and gives Sarah back along with livestock and servants.
Textual Criticism:
The story of Abraham in chapters 16 though 20 flows well, and has no glaring textual contradictions. There are also fewer disjointed transitions in the text, so there is little to criticize here from the layman’s perspective. The one thing that can be said is that the covenant between God and Abraham has been repeated so many times now, one wonders if God, or Abraham or the author(s) of the text aren’t forgetful somehow. Also, the story of Abraham lying about his wife being his sister is almost an exact copy of the story from earlier in chapter 12. Is this some sort of repetitive, story-telling norm in ancient Israel?
[An aside: Another textual problem I’ve been running into throughout the text is the liberal use of pronouns. Sometimes there are so many pronouns in a string of verses that it becomes extremely difficult to understand who is being referred to. I’m not sure if this is a fault of the King James translation or how the original Hebrew was actually written, but it becomes tedious and annoying at times, especially when one is actually attempting a careful reading.]
Lessons and Morals:
Chapter 16 is basically a lesson of what not to do; Abram’s and Sarai’s adulterous behavior and the chastising and driving out of the maidservant, Hagar. The odd thing is there is no context or spiritual analysis from God and no punishment for anyone except the maidservant who is sent out into the desert, pregnant and alone. Hagar is Sarai’s servant when she gives her over to Abram, who then impregnates her, so Hagar didn’t really have a choice in the matter. Furthermore, God seems to curse her fetus by setting every man’s hand against him before he’s even born (Genesis 16:12). Unlike the elegant fables of Aesop, it would be difficult for a child (much less most adults) to discern a positive moral lesson here.
Chapter 17 contains another repetition of God’s promise to Abram (who from then on becomes Abraham). The redundant covenant, and the redundant nature of the stories in general makes me wonder why this couldn’t have all been compressed into a much shorter telling. God seems to ramble on and on, and repeat himself over and over again. Then the commandment to circumcise all the males is just scary. The only reason that God gives for this is that there must be a sign of the covenant between man and God…so I guess that sign must be mutilated genitals? And then Abraham just runs off and starts chopping up all the penises in the tribe that same day. If someone did something even remotely similar today (or even back then in the city plaza of Ur), and then told the local authorities that it was because a deity had appeared and told him to do this, I can’t imagine he would be celebrated and revered as a universal father figure.
Chapter 18 is funny because God appears to Abraham as three men outside his tent, who seem to talk amongst themselves about things. They tell Abraham about the future…Sarah will give birth to a son. This comedy continues at this point when Sarah, who is like 90 years old, starts cracking up inside the tent. The men outside seem a little offended and make a snarky remark to her (“is any thing too hard for the Lord?”), in turn causing her to be afraid (Genesis 18:14-15). The men then tell Abraham they need to visit Sodom to see how well they’re behaving and hint at its destruction. The last ten verses of the chapter are a disturbing bidding war between Abraham and God about how many righteous people need to be inside Sodom in order to preserve it. They seem to settle on 10 and Abraham is quieted. So, if there are only 9 righteous people (whatever “righteous” means) then it’s cool to nuke the whole place.
By chapter 19, I’m beginning to think the Bible is totally twisted. Even if it is an interesting read, it does not seem at all a good book for teaching morals and healthy worldviews. First Lot offers his two daughters to be raped by the townspeople, then God destroys Sodom and Gomorrah with fire from the sky, then God kills Lot’s wife just for looking at the fireworks, and finally Lot’s daughters get him dead drunk in a cave and then rape him and both get pregnant. (The resulting children are supposedly the fathers of all of the Moabites and Ammonites, whoever they are.) Then chapter 20 forgets about all that and starts in immediately with Abraham and Sarah lying and pulling the “she’s my sister” trick again on Abimelech (king of Gerar), and again getting rewarded with a heap of livestock and servants. It’s strange how Abraham had refused proper payment a few chapters back when he smote the enemies of the king of Sodom (Genesis 14:23). But when the payment is derived from lying and giving up his wife to other men, he’s glad to take the spoils and run (twice!).
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
[Side Note] Noah's Warning?
After some digging I was finally able to find the Bible verse that supposedly portrays Noah as an evangelist, warning the world of the flood. In Hebrews chapter 11 it says:
Hebrews 11:7, “By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.”
The phrase "by which he condemned the world" seems to summarize the entirety of Noah's evangelical career and warning of the flood in the Bible. Some extra-biblical Jewish sources say that there was a lot of drunken reveling and that Noah actually spoke against it and was mocked, but still don't record any actual words of Noah. So from just the Bible, we're to understand that at some point, everyone in the entire world had a chance to see the Ark as it was being built and understand that somehow it was related to their debauchery? If Noah really was warning people about the flood, it would seem that would be one of the crucial elements of the story and it would be spelled out clearly in the Bible (after all, Genesis lists the mundane details about the dimensions of the ark in cubits, so why not this rather important detail?).
All this seems to directly contradict Jesus's own understanding of the flood in Matthew:
“As the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matthew 24:36–39, NKJV).
This is supposedly directly from the mouth of Jesus who clearly states "they" were eating and drinking and marrying, "and did not know until the flood came". Certainly if Noah was out there condemning all the debauchery they would have known BEFORE the flood came. Oddly, the Answers in Genesis website (where I found this info) uses this verse to introduce an article that talks about Noah being an evangelist, which makes the article contradictory from the very start. It gives only 3 lame reasons why the world was suppose to be warned and fully aware of their fate, which I pasted verbatim below:
1. the fact that Noah was building an Ark.
2. from the warning of God’s Spirit (Genesis 6:3 says, “And the Lord said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’”
3. quite likely, from the words of Noah himself.
The article then goes on to explain how this means that God was offering salvation through the Ark.
The first point is just silly and only has Biblical basis in the passing phrase from Hebrews 11. Did everyone in the whole world see the Ark as it was being built from a distance? If they did, were they all immediately able to comprehend God's will, their own sinfulness, the inevitability of the flood as a consequence of said sin, and the fact that they even had the option to repent and get on board? Did God really think this was fair warning?
The second point is a verse that comes before Noah's story even begins and doesn't even imply that God was directly speaking to all the pre-flood humans as a warning. Even if this was the case, it makes God the bearer of a vague warning, not Noah. Anyway, this 120 year life span limit is quickly contradicted a few chapters after the flood when Abraham dies at 175 years of age.
The third point is a purely made up interpretation of the text, and seems to be the real origin of the myth of Noah's warning. It seems to me that religious minded people just decided to make up the warning and attach it to the story to resolve the theological dilemma that the flood creates when no warning is present.
Hebrews 11:7, “By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.”
The phrase "by which he condemned the world" seems to summarize the entirety of Noah's evangelical career and warning of the flood in the Bible. Some extra-biblical Jewish sources say that there was a lot of drunken reveling and that Noah actually spoke against it and was mocked, but still don't record any actual words of Noah. So from just the Bible, we're to understand that at some point, everyone in the entire world had a chance to see the Ark as it was being built and understand that somehow it was related to their debauchery? If Noah really was warning people about the flood, it would seem that would be one of the crucial elements of the story and it would be spelled out clearly in the Bible (after all, Genesis lists the mundane details about the dimensions of the ark in cubits, so why not this rather important detail?).
All this seems to directly contradict Jesus's own understanding of the flood in Matthew:
“As the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be” (Matthew 24:36–39, NKJV).
This is supposedly directly from the mouth of Jesus who clearly states "they" were eating and drinking and marrying, "and did not know until the flood came". Certainly if Noah was out there condemning all the debauchery they would have known BEFORE the flood came. Oddly, the Answers in Genesis website (where I found this info) uses this verse to introduce an article that talks about Noah being an evangelist, which makes the article contradictory from the very start. It gives only 3 lame reasons why the world was suppose to be warned and fully aware of their fate, which I pasted verbatim below:
1. the fact that Noah was building an Ark.
2. from the warning of God’s Spirit (Genesis 6:3 says, “And the Lord said, ‘My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.’”
3. quite likely, from the words of Noah himself.
The article then goes on to explain how this means that God was offering salvation through the Ark.
The first point is just silly and only has Biblical basis in the passing phrase from Hebrews 11. Did everyone in the whole world see the Ark as it was being built from a distance? If they did, were they all immediately able to comprehend God's will, their own sinfulness, the inevitability of the flood as a consequence of said sin, and the fact that they even had the option to repent and get on board? Did God really think this was fair warning?
The second point is a verse that comes before Noah's story even begins and doesn't even imply that God was directly speaking to all the pre-flood humans as a warning. Even if this was the case, it makes God the bearer of a vague warning, not Noah. Anyway, this 120 year life span limit is quickly contradicted a few chapters after the flood when Abraham dies at 175 years of age.
The third point is a purely made up interpretation of the text, and seems to be the real origin of the myth of Noah's warning. It seems to me that religious minded people just decided to make up the warning and attach it to the story to resolve the theological dilemma that the flood creates when no warning is present.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Genesis chapters 11 - 15
Summary:
Ch11. Chapter 11 begins with the story of the Tower of Babel for the first 9 verses, and then switches to the genealogy of Shem down to Abram. It ends with a couple verses where Abram’s father Terah journeys from Ur to Haran and then dies.
Ch12. Chapter 12 is a short summary of Abram’s journey from Haran to Egypt. At the end he lies to Pharaoh, telling him Sarai is his sister instead of wife. They are found out and driven out of Egypt.
Ch13. In this chapter Abram and his family journey from Egypt back into Canaan. Abram and his grandson Lot start to bicker over grazing resources and decide to go their ways, Lot went to Sodom and Abram stayed in Canaan. At the end of the chapter God promises Abram and all his descendants all the land he can see in every direction.
Ch14. In chapter 14 a war breaks out in which Lot is captured from Sodom and taken toward Dan. Abram finds out and takes an entourage to rescue Lot and kill the captors. The king if Sodom is so pleased he blesses Abram and tries to pay him, which Abram refuses.
Ch15. In chapter 15 Abram has a vision where he talks to God about be childless, God promises him that his seed will number as many as the stars in the sky, there’s an elaborate sacrifice ritual, and then God promises Abram the land of Canaan again.
Textual criticism:
The story of the tower of Babel at the beginning of chapter 11 is strange for two reasons.
First, it’s jarringly out of place in the flow of the genealogies of Noah’s three sons, which began back in chapter 10. Chapter 10 starts with the first two sons of Noah, Japheth and Ham, and at the very end begins talking about Shem. The chapter 11 (Genesis 11:1-9) breaks in with the Tower of Babel story. It says “they” journeyed to a place called Shinar and settled there. It doesn’t say who “they” is, or identify anyone specific throughout the story. Then immediately in verse 10 the genealogy of Noah’s three sons picks back up with Shem and continues to the end of the chapter. Maybe the people that gathered at Shinar (Babel) where all the descendents of Ham and Japheth, but the author doesn’t bother to say so. In the middle of the story (Genesis 11:5) the people at Babel have the vague description “the children of men”. Lastly, there are redundancies in the genealogies at the end of chapter 10 and where it picks back up again in chapter 11, lending to the patched together feeling of the book of Genesis.
The second oddity is a simple contradiction, which also adds to the disorganized feeling of the text. At the end of the chapter 10 it says that the genealogy just relayed was “after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations” (Genesis 10:31). Then two verses later, chapter 11 begins with “the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech” (Genesis 11:1) and then has someone journeying from the east to Shinar (Babel) (Genesis 11:2). I immediately wondered why all the descendents of Noah would forget theirs “tongues” in the space of two verses and all start speaking one language. Also, since chapter 10 had just said Noah’s descendents had all their own lands and nations, I thought it unreasonable to conclude that the people at Babel were descendents of the sons of Noah. They seem to be a mystery people from the east.
The end of the chapter 11 also has one verse (Genesis 11:31) where Abram, his father, and Haran’s son Lot go from Ur to a place called Haran (which is also Lot’s father although they left him behind? did they name a new city after Lot’s father? or was the city called Haran before they got there?). And how are the descendents of Noah’s son Shem all of the sudden in Ur at the end of this chapter? Verse 28 is the first mention of Ur, which is described at the land of Terah’s nativity. It doesn’t say how Noah’s descendents got from the Mt. Ararat area down to Ur. The lands and nations of Noah’s sons in chapter 10 are never given location in the story.
Once the story of Abram begins in chapter 12, the story flows without as much disruption through chapter 15. There are only the odd repetitions of the promise of land from God in variant forms (one as far as the eye can see, one between specific rivers, etc.).
Lessons and Morals:
The tower of Babel story seems to indicate that God doesn’t like human’s cooperating too much. They all had a common language and could work well together. When God sees their innovative tower he seems to become apprehensive of the human’s power to overtake him: “and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.” (Genesis 11:6) Instead of celebrating the ingenuity of his creation, he stifles them be destroying their common language and their ability to work together. They are even scattered abroad across the face of the earth. God again seems to want to keep humans as dumb playthings with the denial of life and knowledge at Eden and now the denial of common language at Babel.
The lessons and morals that already seem confusing become completely backward as soon as the story of Abram begins. The story starts in chapter 12, and there are three glaring moral problems in this chapter, at least from today’s standpoint. First, God promises someone else’s land to Abram and all his seed (Genesis 12:7). God recapitulates this promise again in Genesis 13:15 and again through chapter 15 (where God even tells Abram all the races of people that are going to lose their land in the process). This is hardly fair to the Canaanites who were already there (Genesis 12:6). Next, we have Abram’s wonderful example of how to lie about your wife being your sister so you can sell her to the Pharaoh for a load of livestock and servants (Genesis 12:11-16). (I didn’t make that up.) Then, instead of reprimanding Abram for deceiving the Pharaoh, God plagues the Pharaoh for something he didn’t even realize was happening. Then Abram get away without any consequences along with his wife, and get’s to keep all the loot (Genesis 12:17-20).
In chapter 14 we get our first taste of Biblical war. A few of the local city-kings have joined forces and are attacking another group of city-kings, among them the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot and his family, who are staying in or near Sodom, are captured and marched off toward a city called Dan. So, Abram seems relatively justified in chasing them down and rescuing his relatives. God doesn’t seem involved in this war in any way, as he’s not mentioned. Abram brings all the goods back to Sodom and the king is pleased. Abram does another impressive thing by denying the payment that the kind offers him (although the ulterior motive seems to be that he just doesn’t wanted to be indebted to him in any way in Genesis 14:23). It was already hinted in the previous chapter that Sodom was exceedingly wicked and sinful in the eyes of God (Genesis 13:13). But in chapter 14 Abram seems to be really helping them out be returning all their people and goods (only to have it all firebombed by God a few chapters later).
I remember many of the later war stories from Sunday school (Joshua at Jericho in particular), and these 5 chapters from Genesis really seem to set the stage for the holy war that God orders on Canaan. Not only that they are filled with questionable moral details. In relating the history of Abram, why is it necessary to include those 6 or 7 verses where he trades his wife for livestock? My Christian acquaintances often tell me that I have to read this in the context of the society back then when women were just considered property and not really full people. This is the same excuse offered for the slavery in the Bible. My stomach turns whenever I hear this blithe dismissal of human rights and ignoring of certain verses and ideas in the Bible…especially when many verses from the Bible were, and still are used, in the oppression of woman, justification for racism, and discrimination against gays and lesbians, to name a few. Without explaining these chapters away as simply a product of their times, is their some explanation for why these words should be considered the words of God and something to live by?
Ch11. Chapter 11 begins with the story of the Tower of Babel for the first 9 verses, and then switches to the genealogy of Shem down to Abram. It ends with a couple verses where Abram’s father Terah journeys from Ur to Haran and then dies.
Ch12. Chapter 12 is a short summary of Abram’s journey from Haran to Egypt. At the end he lies to Pharaoh, telling him Sarai is his sister instead of wife. They are found out and driven out of Egypt.
Ch13. In this chapter Abram and his family journey from Egypt back into Canaan. Abram and his grandson Lot start to bicker over grazing resources and decide to go their ways, Lot went to Sodom and Abram stayed in Canaan. At the end of the chapter God promises Abram and all his descendants all the land he can see in every direction.
Ch14. In chapter 14 a war breaks out in which Lot is captured from Sodom and taken toward Dan. Abram finds out and takes an entourage to rescue Lot and kill the captors. The king if Sodom is so pleased he blesses Abram and tries to pay him, which Abram refuses.
Ch15. In chapter 15 Abram has a vision where he talks to God about be childless, God promises him that his seed will number as many as the stars in the sky, there’s an elaborate sacrifice ritual, and then God promises Abram the land of Canaan again.
Textual criticism:
The story of the tower of Babel at the beginning of chapter 11 is strange for two reasons.
First, it’s jarringly out of place in the flow of the genealogies of Noah’s three sons, which began back in chapter 10. Chapter 10 starts with the first two sons of Noah, Japheth and Ham, and at the very end begins talking about Shem. The chapter 11 (Genesis 11:1-9) breaks in with the Tower of Babel story. It says “they” journeyed to a place called Shinar and settled there. It doesn’t say who “they” is, or identify anyone specific throughout the story. Then immediately in verse 10 the genealogy of Noah’s three sons picks back up with Shem and continues to the end of the chapter. Maybe the people that gathered at Shinar (Babel) where all the descendents of Ham and Japheth, but the author doesn’t bother to say so. In the middle of the story (Genesis 11:5) the people at Babel have the vague description “the children of men”. Lastly, there are redundancies in the genealogies at the end of chapter 10 and where it picks back up again in chapter 11, lending to the patched together feeling of the book of Genesis.
The second oddity is a simple contradiction, which also adds to the disorganized feeling of the text. At the end of the chapter 10 it says that the genealogy just relayed was “after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations” (Genesis 10:31). Then two verses later, chapter 11 begins with “the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech” (Genesis 11:1) and then has someone journeying from the east to Shinar (Babel) (Genesis 11:2). I immediately wondered why all the descendents of Noah would forget theirs “tongues” in the space of two verses and all start speaking one language. Also, since chapter 10 had just said Noah’s descendents had all their own lands and nations, I thought it unreasonable to conclude that the people at Babel were descendents of the sons of Noah. They seem to be a mystery people from the east.
The end of the chapter 11 also has one verse (Genesis 11:31) where Abram, his father, and Haran’s son Lot go from Ur to a place called Haran (which is also Lot’s father although they left him behind? did they name a new city after Lot’s father? or was the city called Haran before they got there?). And how are the descendents of Noah’s son Shem all of the sudden in Ur at the end of this chapter? Verse 28 is the first mention of Ur, which is described at the land of Terah’s nativity. It doesn’t say how Noah’s descendents got from the Mt. Ararat area down to Ur. The lands and nations of Noah’s sons in chapter 10 are never given location in the story.
Once the story of Abram begins in chapter 12, the story flows without as much disruption through chapter 15. There are only the odd repetitions of the promise of land from God in variant forms (one as far as the eye can see, one between specific rivers, etc.).
Lessons and Morals:
The tower of Babel story seems to indicate that God doesn’t like human’s cooperating too much. They all had a common language and could work well together. When God sees their innovative tower he seems to become apprehensive of the human’s power to overtake him: “and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.” (Genesis 11:6) Instead of celebrating the ingenuity of his creation, he stifles them be destroying their common language and their ability to work together. They are even scattered abroad across the face of the earth. God again seems to want to keep humans as dumb playthings with the denial of life and knowledge at Eden and now the denial of common language at Babel.
The lessons and morals that already seem confusing become completely backward as soon as the story of Abram begins. The story starts in chapter 12, and there are three glaring moral problems in this chapter, at least from today’s standpoint. First, God promises someone else’s land to Abram and all his seed (Genesis 12:7). God recapitulates this promise again in Genesis 13:15 and again through chapter 15 (where God even tells Abram all the races of people that are going to lose their land in the process). This is hardly fair to the Canaanites who were already there (Genesis 12:6). Next, we have Abram’s wonderful example of how to lie about your wife being your sister so you can sell her to the Pharaoh for a load of livestock and servants (Genesis 12:11-16). (I didn’t make that up.) Then, instead of reprimanding Abram for deceiving the Pharaoh, God plagues the Pharaoh for something he didn’t even realize was happening. Then Abram get away without any consequences along with his wife, and get’s to keep all the loot (Genesis 12:17-20).
In chapter 14 we get our first taste of Biblical war. A few of the local city-kings have joined forces and are attacking another group of city-kings, among them the kings of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot and his family, who are staying in or near Sodom, are captured and marched off toward a city called Dan. So, Abram seems relatively justified in chasing them down and rescuing his relatives. God doesn’t seem involved in this war in any way, as he’s not mentioned. Abram brings all the goods back to Sodom and the king is pleased. Abram does another impressive thing by denying the payment that the kind offers him (although the ulterior motive seems to be that he just doesn’t wanted to be indebted to him in any way in Genesis 14:23). It was already hinted in the previous chapter that Sodom was exceedingly wicked and sinful in the eyes of God (Genesis 13:13). But in chapter 14 Abram seems to be really helping them out be returning all their people and goods (only to have it all firebombed by God a few chapters later).
I remember many of the later war stories from Sunday school (Joshua at Jericho in particular), and these 5 chapters from Genesis really seem to set the stage for the holy war that God orders on Canaan. Not only that they are filled with questionable moral details. In relating the history of Abram, why is it necessary to include those 6 or 7 verses where he trades his wife for livestock? My Christian acquaintances often tell me that I have to read this in the context of the society back then when women were just considered property and not really full people. This is the same excuse offered for the slavery in the Bible. My stomach turns whenever I hear this blithe dismissal of human rights and ignoring of certain verses and ideas in the Bible…especially when many verses from the Bible were, and still are used, in the oppression of woman, justification for racism, and discrimination against gays and lesbians, to name a few. Without explaining these chapters away as simply a product of their times, is their some explanation for why these words should be considered the words of God and something to live by?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
