Freethought & Rationalism Archive

angelo · 10-19-2007, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinJay

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

Erm... I think he was talking about the Ark of the Covenant, not Noah's Ark...

I'd venture to say that there are a fair number of folks out there who don't know the difference...

regards,

NinJay

I quoted a letter to the editor of a loony magazine, titled Creation. It even has an image of the N/ark in front of an image of the Beagle.
see post 990.

Lucretius · 10-22-2007, 04:32 AM

Well I see that once again having had his arguments completely destroyed (this time regarding the DH versus the Tablet Theory) Dave has disappeared from view .
Doubtless to return in the near future claiming to have "won" this one to add to his long list of "victories".

Just in case this thread does disappear into the mists of time I would like to thank Dean and everyone else who has done so much good work on the DH
I was aware of it previously but in nowhere near the detail that has been shown to us here,I have learned a lot myself and think any lurkers here will have done so as well
So thanks guys

-Jay- · 10-22-2007, 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucretius

Well I see that once again having had his arguments completely destroyed (this time regarding the DH versus the Tablet Theory) Dave has disappeared from view .
Doubtless to return in the near future claiming to have "won" this one to add to his long list of "victories".

Just in case this thread does disappear into the mists of time I would like to thank Dean and everyone else who has done so much good work on the DH
I was aware of it previously but in nowhere near the detail that has been shown to us here,I have learned a lot myself and think any lurkers here will have done so as well
So thanks guys

I've saved the major posts from Dean in this thread. With his consent, I'd be happy to edit them together into a single post that could be stickied. I think a digest of this thread would be excellent introductory reading for folks.

regards,

NinJay

gregor · 10-22-2007, 05:04 AM

NinJay
That's a capital idea.

And Silent Dave needs to add to his web-site an entry about AFDave with the Friedman/Meyers false quote that Dave will not address. In case anyone wants to visit, it's

http://www.dastardlydave.info/?p=3

-Jay- · 10-22-2007, 05:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregor

NinJay
That's a capital idea.

And Silent Dave needs to add to his web-site an entry about AFDave with the Friedman/Meyers false quote that Dave will not address. In case anyone wants to visit, it's

http://www.dastardlydave.info/?p=3

I'll edit on the assumption that Dean won't mind, then figure out how to get a sticky thread established.

Dean - issues?

regards,

NinJay

spin · 10-22-2007, 05:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

To sum up:

P1) If the DH were correct, we would expect to see chiasms in the two split texts that match the chiasm in the combined text.

P2) If the DH were incorrect, we would expect to see no chiasms in the split texts, and only a chiasm in the combined text.

P3) We see chiasms in the split texts which match the chiasm in the combined text.

C4) In other words, Dave's "Chiasm" argument - which he claims is evidence of single authorship - is actually very strong evidence against single authorship and for the DH.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the chiastic structure was provided by the redactor who put the two traditions together or else the redactor left out more items items towards the end. Here is a breakdown of the basic Jahwist/Priestly materials:

-- 1 Noah and his family, and destruction of man
Jahwist

A1 wickedness of man 6:5-6
A2 resolution to destroy man 6:7
A3 Adam is righteous 6:8

Priestly

A3 Adam is righteous 6:9-10
A1 wickedness of man 6:11-12
A2 resolution to destroy man 6:13

(description of the ark 6:14-16)
(necessity for the flood 6:17)

-- 2 Instruction to enter the ark
Priestly
B1 Noah's family to go into the ark 6:18

B2 animals 2x2 to go into the ark 6:19-20

B3 Noah did as god commanded him 6:21-22

Jahwist
B1 Noah's family to go into the ark 7:1

B2 animals 2x2 & 7x7 to go into the ark 7:2-3
(To rain for 40 days and 40 nights 7:4)

B3 Noah did as god commanded him 7:5

-- 3 Entry and floods
Jahwist
C1 Noah 600 when floods came 7:6

C2 They entered the ark 7:7-9a

C3 They went in with Noah 7:9b

(And the floods came 7:10)

Priestly
C1 In Noah's 600th year floods came 7:11-12

C2 They entered the ark 7:13-14

C3 They went in with Noah 7:15

(All did as god commanded 7:16a)
(Jahwist: the LORD shut the door 7:16b)

-- 4 Floods rise and everything dies
Priestly
D1 Flood swells for 40 days and nights 7:17-20

D2 Everything dies 7:21a

D3 Every dying thing specified 7:21b

Jahwist
D2 Everything dies 7:22

D3 Every dying thing specified 7:23

D1 Flood swells for 150 days 7:24

-- 5 And god remembered Noah 8:1
-- 4' The waters are stopped
Priestly
E1 The waters below and the waters above stopped 8:1b-2a

Jahwist
E1 The waters below and the waters above stopped 8:2b-3a

(Waters receded for 150 days 8:3a-5)
(Priestly: Noah opens window after 40 days 8:6)

[Birds
Priestly
F1 Noah sends out raven which doesn't come back 8:7

Jahwist
F1 Noah sends out dove, it comes back, he sends one out again until it doesn't come back 8:8-12]

-- 3' Earth dries up
Priestly
G1 After eleven months the water has dried up 8:13a

Jahwist
G1 Noah pulls back the cover of the ark and the earth has dried up 8:13b

Priestly
G2 After twelve months the earth has dried up 8:14

-- 2' They leave the ark
Priestly
H1 Noah and his family plus the animals leave the ark 8:15-19

-- 1' YHWH says no more floods
Jahwist

I1 Noah offers sacrifice to which YHWH guarantees no more floods 8:20-22

Priestly

I1 Gods covenant with Noah in which he guarantees no more floods. 9:1-17

A few notes:

The second last element is not represented by both traditions, suggesting that the original texts didn't have a chiastic structure.
There is no accommodation in the chiastic structure for the birds, yet it's not a late addition because both traditions have it.
Beside the second last element, each element has a Yahwistic and a priestly part.

Whether there was originally a chiasm or not, there are clearly at least two traditions throughout the flood story.

spin

Malachi151 · 10-22-2007, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dean Anderson

To sum up:

P1) If the DH were correct, we would expect to see chiasms in the two split texts that match the chiasm in the combined text.

P2) If the DH were incorrect, we would expect to see no chiasms in the split texts, and only a chiasm in the combined text.

P3) We see chiasms in the split texts which match the chiasm in the combined text.

C4) In other words, Dave's "Chiasm" argument - which he claims is evidence of single authorship - is actually very strong evidence against single authorship and for the DH.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the chiastic structure was provided by the redactor who put the two traditions together or else the redactor left out more items items towards the end. Here is a breakdown of the basic Jahwist/Priestly materials:

-- 1 Noah and his family, and destruction of man
Jahwist

A1 wickedness of man 6:5-6
A2 resolution to destroy man 6:7
A3 Adam is righteous 6:8

Priestly

A3 Adam is righteous 6:9-10
A1 wickedness of man 6:11-12
A2 resolution to destroy man 6:13

(description of the ark 6:14-16)
(necessity for the flood 6:17)

-- 2 Instruction to enter the ark
Priestly
B1 Noah's family to go into the ark 6:18

B2 animals 2x2 to go into the ark 6:19-20

B3 Noah did as god commanded him 6:21-22

Jahwist
B1 Noah's family to go into the ark 7:1

B2 animals 2x2 & 7x7 to go into the ark 7:2-3
(To rain for 40 days and 40 nights 7:4)

B3 Noah did as god commanded him 7:5

-- 3 Entry and floods
Jahwist
C1 Noah 600 when floods came 7:6

C2 They entered the ark 7:7-9a

C3 They went in with Noah 7:9b

(And the floods came 7:10)

Priestly
C1 In Noah's 600th year floods came 7:11-12

C2 They entered the ark 7:13-14

C3 They went in with Noah 7:15

(All did as god commanded 7:16a)
(Jahwist: the LORD shut the door 7:16b)

-- 4 Floods rise and everything dies
Priestly
D1 Flood swells for 40 days and nights 7:17-20

D2 Everything dies 7:21a

D3 Every dying thing specified 7:21b

Jahwist
D2 Everything dies 7:22

D3 Every dying thing specified 7:23

D1 Flood swells for 150 days 7:24

-- 5 And god remembered Noah 8:1
-- 4' The waters are stopped
Priestly
E1 The waters below and the waters above stopped 8:1b-2a

Jahwist
E1 The waters below and the waters above stopped 8:2b-3a

(Waters receded for 150 days 8:3a-5)
(Priestly: Noah opens window after 40 days 8:6)

[Birds
Priestly
F1 Noah sends out raven which doesn't come back 8:7

Jahwist
F1 Noah sends out dove, it comes back, he sends one out again until it doesn't come back 8:8-12]

-- 3' Earth dries up
Priestly
G1 After eleven months the water has dried up 8:13a

Jahwist
G1 Noah pulls back the cover of the ark and the earth has dried up 8:13b

Priestly
G2 After twelve months the earth has dried up 8:14

-- 2' They leave the ark
Priestly
H1 Noah and his family plus the animals leave the ark 8:15-19

-- 1' Noah's sacrifice: YHWH says no more floods
Jahwist

I1 Noah offers sacrifice 8:20-22

A few notes:

The last few elements are not represented by both traditions, suggesting that the original texts didn't have a chiastic structure.
There is no accommodation in the chiastic structure for the birds, yet it's not a late addition because both traditions have it.
Beside the last two elements, each element has a Yahwistic and a priestly part.

Whether there was originally a chiasm or not, there are clearly at least two traditions throughout the flood story.

spin

Yes, but this ignores the other versions of the story, namely the Epic of Gilgamesh version, which I think strongly supports the idea that at least parts of Genesis (if not all of it) are based on earlier written accounts.

Likewise, the story fo Eden seems to be based on an earlier Sumerian story as well.

spin · 10-22-2007, 06:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Malachi151

Yes, but this ignores the other versions of the story, namely the Epic of Gilgamesh version, which I think strongly supports the idea that at least parts of Genesis (if not all of it) are based on earlier written accounts.

No shit, Malachi151? We are looking at the text for its construction, not for its sources, which are irrelevant to the discussion of the structure of Genesis.

spin

Malachi151 · 10-22-2007, 06:31 AM

Wouldn't one want to look at all of the sources in order to understand the construction? I mean, which version most closely resembles the EoG version?...

Dean Anderson · 10-22-2007, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spin

A few notes:

The last few elements are not represented by both traditions, suggesting that the original texts didn't have a chiastic structure.
There is no accommodation in the chiastic structure for the birds, yet it's not a late addition because both traditions have it.
Beside the last two elements, each element has a Yahwistic and a priestly part.

I think that to a large extent it depends on exactly how you define each chiastic "element" and what text is or is not considered to fit it.

For example, you have said here that there is no Priestly version of the "No more floods" promise - but it seems to me that Genesis 9:8-19 is this very promise (but without the "sacrifice" bit because the P author was very touchy about sacrifice issues).

Quote:

Whether there was originally a chiasm or not, there are clearly at least two traditions throughout the flood story.

Undoubtedly.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-22-2007, 04:32 AM	#992
Lucretius Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: . Posts: 1,014	Well I see that once again having had his arguments completely destroyed (this time regarding the DH versus the Tablet Theory) Dave has disappeared from view . Doubtless to return in the near future claiming to have "won" this one to add to his long list of "victories". Just in case this thread does disappear into the mists of time I would like to thank Dean and everyone else who has done so much good work on the DH I was aware of it previously but in nowhere near the detail that has been shown to us here,I have learned a lot myself and think any lurkers here will have done so as well So thanks guys

10-22-2007, 05:04 AM	#994
gregor Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 932	NinJay That's a capital idea. And Silent Dave needs to add to his web-site an entry about AFDave with the Friedman/Meyers false quote that Dave will not address. In case anyone wants to visit, it's http://www.dastardlydave.info/?p=3

10-22-2007, 06:31 AM	#999
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	Wouldn't one want to look at all of the sources in order to understand the construction? I mean, which version most closely resembles the EoG version?...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.