In case anyone has missed it, Steve Hays has been doing some commentary work on Genesis. Much of what he writes here at Triablogue is of a nature of looking at what’s going on in the world (often the world of Biblical scholarship). But in this series, Steve outlines his positive view of the Scriptures, here beginning in Genesis 1-12.
Here are the articles he’s written so far:
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Introduction to Genesis:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/introduction-to-genesis.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: From first day to fourth day:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/from-first-day-to-fourth-day.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Very good:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/very-good.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: East of Eden:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/east-of-eden.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: The Fall:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-fall.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Cain & Abel:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/cain-abel.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Genesis and Genealogies:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/genesis-and-genealogies.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: The Nephilim:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-nephilim.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Introduction to the flood:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/introduction-to-flood.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Noah's flood:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/noahs-flood.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: The curse of Ham:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-curse-of-ham.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: The tower of Babel:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-tower-of-babel.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: The call of Abraham:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-call-of-abraham.html
Triablogue: Steve Hays on Genesis: Abraham in Egypt:
http://butthesethingsarewritten.blogspot.com/2013/09/abraham-in-egypt.html
Steve, what are your thoughts on Futato's synoptic/resumption-expansion explanation for the day 1,4 dischronology (which he also applies to Adam in ch2 for v8 and 15)?
ReplyDeletei) I agree with him that synoptic/resumption-expansion is one of the narrative techniques of Biblical historians. And I think we see that in the relationship between Gen 1 and Gen 2.
Deleteii) I don't synchronize Gen 1 with Gen 2 because I think they operate at different levels. Gen 1 is global and theocentric whereas Gen 2 is local and more anthropocentric.
Also, if one or both of them are nonsequential, then we wouldn't expect them to be mutually synchronous.
iii) I think a better explanation for the day 1,4 dischronology is spatial rather than temporal. I think day 4 involves the use of an architectural metaphor, where the sky is figuratively analogous to the roof or ceiling of a shrine. Sunlight already existed, but now we have skylights.
Not only does that foreshadow the tabernacle, but it also foreshadow's architectural elements of Noah's ark.
Of what use then are the seven days? Clearly at one level they set a pattern for Israel to follow in their workweek. It seems that Levenson, Walton, and Beal see a connection between the use of 7 in Genesis 1 (and specifically the Sabbath) and temple construction/indwelling. Do you think that is a legitimate inference?
ReplyDeleteBrett
ReplyDelete"It seems that Levenson, Walton, and Beal see a connection between the use of 7 in Genesis 1 (and specifically the Sabbath) and temple construction/indwelling. Do you think that is a legitimate inference?"
The connections they discern are based on several lines of evidence, not just septunarian parallels.
"Of what use then are the seven days? Clearly at one level they set a pattern for Israel to follow in their workweek."
i) Let's assume (ex hypothesi) that the seven-day schema is purely symbolic, On the face of it, there's nothing inherently temporal about cardinal numbering. Our use of cardinal numbering is hardly confined to temporal relationships.
One rhetorical function of cardinal numbering might be to arrange material in order of ascending importance. Build up to a climactic denouement. Saving the best for the last.
A standard argument for chronological sequence is the progressive character of Gen 1. Not just linear, but progressive.
But that would be consistent with a topical arrangement that stages events to culminate in a grand climax. Cardinal numbering would be a way of highlighting that progression, even if the sequence is symbolic.
ii) However, the fact that the fourth day is a deliberate anachronism doesn't ipso facto mean Gen 1 is nonsequential in toto. For instance, the tower of Babel incident (Gen 11) is actually earlier than the Table of Nations (Gen 10), yet that doesn't obviate the *general* linearity of the narrative ark in Gen 1-11.
iii) In addition, unless creation was actually instantaneous (which I deny), then if it phased in over time, even a short time, some things have to happen before other things can happen. For instance, air-breathing animals require oxygen. Oxygen requires trees. Trees require land, water, and sunlight (for warmth in the short term and photosynthesis in the longer term). So there's a certain inner logic to much of the ordering in Gen 1, even if it's not entirely chronological.
iv) Units of 7 are common in the Pentateuch and Historical Books (e.g. Gen 7:2-4,11; 8:4,10,12,14; Exod 12:15; 23:15; Lev 16:14; 23:3,27,34; 25:8-9; Deut 16:9; Josh 6:4; 1 Kgs 6:38,65; 2 Kgs 7:9). Likewise, you have the emphatic 7th position in some genealogies. So we could also ask what's the use of the seven-unit pattern in these cases.
v) Apropos (iv), once a number like 7 acquires theological significance, the occurrence of that number can function as a subtle coded signal for divine involvement. Take the flood account. The fact that septunarian intervals keep popping up is a coded coincidence. Too coincidental to be purely coincidental. So that cues the reader to God's unseen providential guidance. That's encouraging. God is present, even when he seems to be absent. He drops occasional clues.
vi) We must also consider the significance of day/night, light/darkness in Scripture. I've discussed that elsewhere. For instance:
http://triablogue.blogspot.com/2013/05/fiat-lux.html