Genesis Theology

In our Biblical Studies seminar here at St Andrews we heard yesterday from Joel Kaminsky, professor of Hebrew Bible and Jewish Studies at Smith College in Northampton, MA. He spoke on an article that he is writing about the theology of the book of Genesis. This was very timely for me, as I had just taught an Elders’ Quorum class on the Creation the day before. So I was understandably very interested in what he had to say.

While in the LDS Church we have at least four accounts of the Creation to work with, non-LDS biblical scholars have only two major canonical accounts (not counting allusions in the Psalms, etc.): Gen. 1 and Gen. 2 (which most believe to have been written by two different authors following different theologies). It is significant, therefore, to see the extent of the material that scholars can get out of those two chapters in Genesis.

As the work that Prof. Kaminsky presented to us is not yet published, I will not quote from it. But I do want to briefly outline some of the ideas that were discussed in our seminar and present them as a representative example of what some biblical scholars are saying today about the material we read in Genesis.

Read More »

Posted in Doctrinal Issues, Early Judaism, LDS Interest, Religious Scholars, School Journal, Scripture | Leave a comment

This Week: Codex Vaticanus and “Performative Deification”

I have had another very busy week working on my dissertation and following the courses I’m attending.  So, unfortunately, I have not had time to do any research on this week’s OT lesson, “How Can I Do This Great Wickedness” from Genesis 34; 37-39.  And that is unfortunate, because I really love the story of Joseph. However, tomorrow is my wife’s birthday and we have some things planned, so (as my wife is more important, alas, than my blog), it looks like I won’t be able to provide a post on this week’s lesson.

I will mention, briefly, some cool experiences I had this week in attending my courses.  In Kristin de Troyer’s  text criticism class, we went to the library and looked at exact replicas of the Codex Vaticanus and Codex Alexandrinus.  The two books are some of the oldest Christian documents in existence. The Codex Vaticanus, specifically, is the oldest complete copy of the Bible in existence, having been put together in the 4th Century. From what I understood, and I am no expert on the history of the biblical canon, this codex was the first “Bible” ever put together. Before this, there were only diverse, separate manuscripts (at least for the NT). The Codex Vaticanus, as it was explained to me, is what gives us the concept of the Bible as one complete book. This is interesting as someone was just recently talking to me about how the Bible has been complete — one organic whole– since the time of the apostles. Of course I knew that that was not the case, but it was neat to see the book (at least a replica of it) that was the first full Bible (centuries after Christ).

My course with Jim Davila was also eventful. We looked at the Songs of the Sabbath Sacrifice and the Hodayot, which are documents that I am looking at for my dissertation. It was interesting to see the distress on the students’ faces as we discussed issues of “suprahuman priests”, angelified humans, heavenly ascents, and deification (all of which are featured in these writings).  When explaining that these people probably practiced a ritualized heavenly ascent which resulted in their deification, Davila called this notion “performative deification.”

I’ll leave you with that…

Posted in Early Judaism, Heavenly Ascents, School Journal, Scripture | 3 Comments

Next Week’s BYU Studies Symposium

This notice is likely too late for anyone not living in Utah, but I wanted to share this info anyways. Next Friday and Saturday (March 12 & 13), there will be a great symposium at the Hinckley Alumni and Visitor’s Center at Brigham Young University.

This symposium celebrates the 50th anniversary of BYU Studies and will have a very broad range of presenters and topics.  Of special interest (to me, anyways):

Jeffrey Bradshaw will be presenting on Saturday morning at 9:35am (in the N. Assembly room). His paper is called “The Ezekiel Mural at Dura Europos and the Mysteries of Aaron, Moses, and Melchizedek.” I worked with him a bit on this project and I can tell you that it is very exciting material.

Also, in that same session, starting at 9am, John Hall (BYU professor of Classics) will be giving a presentation entitled “The Anointing of the Gods: Sanctification and Authority from Egyptian Pharaohs to Hebrew Priest-Kings and Beyond.” I heard a version of this paper in London at the Temple Studies Group conference and it was awesome.  You can see my notes on it here.

I also recommend Lynn Wilson’s paper at 1:35pm in the same room. Lynn did her PhD in Theology at Marquette University and is a great scholar. I heard her speak at SBL two years ago and she has done some very interesting research.

There are many other papers that look very interesting. I just wish I could be there! If you are planning to attend, it would probably be good to register at their website (registration is free and open to the public). See their website below.

The following is some more specific info regarding the symposium, copied from their official website: http://byustudies.byu.edu/symposium.aspx

Read More »

Posted in LDS Interest, News and Events | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Jewish Legends of Jacob vs. Esau: The Birthright and the Blessing

I have had a crazy week, so all I have to offer on this week’s Old Testament Lesson 10 (“Birthright Blessings; Marriage in the Covenant) is two excerpts from Ginzberg’s Legends of the Jews. Now I realize that this work is not the best resource for reliable or primary-source material, but it is very interesting and entertaining; and it preserves (in an indirect fashion) some important ancient Jewish traditions regarding the biblical texts.

Note especially how the legends seek to defensively portray Isaac’s decision to bless Jacob — Isaac is not deceived, but comes to the inspired realization that Jacob is the correct son to bless. And that conclusion is reached by many other parties as well — not just Rebekah (who is depicted as adding her own blessing), but also Abraham blesses Jacob before his death. The text makes a point to demonstrate that this is all done with the clear approval of God and his angels.  The narrative also plays up the idea that Esau really was a bad guy, more so than is depicted in the biblical story.

Read More »

Posted in Doctrinal Issues, LDS Interest, Priesthood, Scripture | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

“God Will Provide Himself a Lamb” (Old Testament Lesson 9)

The Aqedah (“binding”) of Isaac was an important part of both early Jewish and early Christian understanding of God’s plan for mankind’s salvation. Although the biblical version of the story of Abraham’s sacrifice of Isaac is told in a way in which the similarities to Christ’s atoning sacrifice are only subtle, many ancient traditions, including Jewish ones, present the story in a way that many very clear parallels are easily noticed. The biblical narrative makes this a trial of Abraham’s faith (Gen. 22:1), whereas a number of other ancient traditions make it clear that this was also a trial of Isaac’s faithfulness, and that he went knowingly and willingly to the altar to be offered as a vicarious sacrifice.

In the minds of the Book of Mormon prophets, the story of the Aqedah was clearly related to the atoning sacrifice of the only-begotten Son of God. See Jacob 4:5 (place your mouse pointer over the scripture reference to see text). Where did these people, who left Jerusalem in 600 BC, get this idea that Isaac was supposed to represent the Son of God? There is no such idea expressed in the biblical text as we have it.  All we have is a God who, for some reason, thinks it appropriate to test Abraham by asking him to kill his only son, through whom God had promised Abraham innumerable descendants.  In the biblical story, there is no parallel to be drawn between God and Abraham, and certainly no comparison between Isaac and any “Son” of God.  Any comparison between Isaac and Jesus has traditionally been considered a creation of the post-New Testament Christian imagination.

Even for early Christian exegetes, however, the connection between Isaac and Jesus, if one is reading the Masoretic version of the story, is a bit strained.  First of all, according to our text, Isaac was not sacrificed, but only nearly so. This doesn’t pose much of a problem for us, in hind-site, because we recognize in this God’s compassion by not requiring Abraham to actually kill his son, while God, on the other hand, had to suffer through his Son’s actual death.  However, the absence of the son’s sacrifice and the fact that it was not presented as serving to vicariously atone for the sins of the people to avert destruction disconnects it from the theology of the Day of Atonement, the Suffering Servant, and the events of the death of Jesus Christ.

Read More »

Posted in Doctrinal Issues, Early Christianity, Early Judaism, LDS Interest, Scripture | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment