I wanted to share some comments on Psalm 18. I have been studying the psalms lately and have been especially impressed by their rich theological content. I have been most specifically looking at the so-called “Royal Psalms”, which scholars have designated as such because of their association with Israelite kingship. Psalm 18 is one of these, being generally considered to be a song of thanksgiving sung by the Davidic king to thank Yahweh for saving him in his hour of need. The psalm gives a dramatic and powerful portrayal of the coming of Yahweh as the Divine Warrior to save his servant, the king. The king is given power to overcome his enemies, and is exalted above them as the vice-regent of God. For us, the psalm speaks of a God who hears and answers prayers, and who comes to deliver us individually as our personal Savior.
While my comments will draw from some of the studies I have done recently and commentaries read, the purpose of this post is not to give an in-depth or full commentary on the psalm, but to explore it just a bit and share what thoughts come to mind -- just some "musings."
First of all, this psalm seems to follow on a similar theme that we find in a large number of psalms — salvation from near death at the hands of a numerous and terrifying enemy. The previous psalm (Ps. 17), demonstrates this same theme.
Psalm 17:6-9 (RSV)
6 I call upon thee, for thou wilt answer me, O God; incline thy ear to me, hear my words. 7 Wondrously show thy steadfast love, O savior of those who seek refuge from their adversaries at thy right hand. 8 Keep me as the apple of the eye; hide me in the shadow of thy wings, 9 from the wicked who despoil me, my deadly enemies who surround me.
The psalmist calls to God, confident that he will be heard and that his Savior will keep him safe. While this is speculation on my part, it seems to me that the setting for this plea is in the Temple. The language of God giving refuge at his right hand, to me, is imagery of the Holy of Holies in the Temple — the ultimate place of refuge, and where the king was enthroned at Yahweh’s right hand (Ps. 110:1). I’m not sure what to make of the “apple of the eye” expression, besides what we use it for today, but it must have had some (perhaps similar) significance in that time. ”Hide me in the shadow of thy wings”, although it likely became a cliche, signifies to me again a setting in the Holy of Holies, where the Throne of God was overshadowed by the enormous wings of the larger cherubim that stood there. Anyone who sat near (or on) the throne in the Holy of Holies would have been overshadowed by those great wings. Of course this would have later taken on a more symbolic/metaphorical sense and would have been used without any explicit association with the holy sanctuary.
After a description of the terrible nature and intents of his enemies, the psalmist makes a more urgent plea for God’s intervention.
Psalm 17:13-14
13 Arise, O LORD! confront them, overthrow them! Deliver my life from the wicked by thy sword, 14 from men by thy hand, O LORD, from men whose portion in life is of the world… 15 As for me, I shall behold thy face in righteousness; when I awake, I shall be satisfied with beholding thy form.
The speaker calls upon the Lord to “arise” and fight this overwhelming battle for him. Verse 15 is very interesting — the speaker appears to fully expect to see the face of the Lord in this process of deliverance. Apparently, he is planning to go to sleep and when he awakes, he will see the “form” of the Lord. It is hard for us to reconstruct what was going on here, but this imagery must have some relation to the known ancient practice of “dream incubation.” Dream incubation was a popular ancient practice of going into the sanctuary, praying for something needed (usually healing), and then sleeping there in the temple. The expected result of this practice is that during sleep, the god (whose temple the person was in) would appear to the person in a dream and grant their petition. If this is the case or not, the psalmist expects to somehow see God in this process.
In Psalm 18, we get a similar (if somewhat more dramatic) plea for aid to that of Ps. 17, but in this psalm we see the Lord’s response to the psalmist’s prayer. If these two psalms were not originally connected, it seems that a later editor noted the similar themes and placed them together. It almost seems that Psalm 18 is recording the thanksgiving of the psalmist for the Lord’s deliverance, explaining to us what it was that Yahweh did to answer his petition. Also, the end of this psalm makes it clear that the speaker of this psalm is a Davidic king, the Lord’s anointed.
The psalm starts off in the general tone of Ps. 17, but this seems to be in the aftermath — the king is recounting how the Lord heard him and what he did to deliver him from his enemies. This retelling of the story is done with great relief, thanksgiving, and glorifying. He begins by telling of the terrible situation he was in — so drastic that he felt as if he were being brought down to the very depths of the Underworld.
Psalm 18:4-6
4 The cords of death encompassed me, the torrents of perdition assailed me; 5 the cords of Sheol entangled me, the snares of death confronted me. 6 In my distress I called upon the LORD; to my God I cried for help. From his temple he heard my voice, and my cry to him reached his ears.
The water imagery (torrents) is related to Hell/Sheol because the ancient world believed that the realm of the dead was below the great sea — so in death one would be dragged down through the waters that were around and under the earth to the pit of Sheol down below.
The king cries to the Lord for help, for deliverance from Death and Hell and informs us that indeed Yahweh hears him from his temple. The account that follows of the incomparable power of God’s salvation is one of the most poignant in all of Scripture. Yahweh is presented as the Divine Warrior coming in his wrath to save his humble servant, using his absolute power over the forces of nature to vanquish all foes of the king and restore him to health and safety. It really is impressive!
Psalm 18:7-17
7 Then the earth reeled and rocked; the foundations also of the mountains trembled and quaked, because he was angry. 8 Smoke went up from his nostrils, and devouring fire from his mouth; glowing coals flamed forth from him. 9 He bowed the heavens, and came down; thick darkness was under his feet. 10 He rode on a cherub, and flew; he came swiftly upon the wings of the wind. 11 He made darkness his covering around him, his canopy thick clouds dark with water. 12 Out of the brightness before him there broke through his clouds hailstones and coals of fire. 13 The LORD also thundered in the heavens, and the Most High uttered his voice, hailstones and coals of fire. 14 And he sent out his arrows, and scattered them; he flashed forth lightnings, and routed them. 15 Then the channels of the sea were seen, and the foundations of the world were laid bare, at thy rebuke, O LORD, at the blast of the breath of thy nostrils. 16 He reached from on high, he took me, he drew me out of many waters. 17 He delivered me from my strong enemy, and from those who hated me; for they were too mighty for me.
One could write a whole post on just these verses alone! The imagery is just incredible. These are very ancient themes (the anthropomorphisms, Yahweh riding on the cherub/clouds, wielding lightning, etc.) that are generally not a part of the theology of Biblical books that were composed at later dates.
We note that the king by this point has basically descended to the Underworld, as the “channels of the sea” and the “foundations of the world” were already visible. Yahweh reaches down from on high and pulls the king up out of the chaotic waters and up to safety. It appears that the king was nearly killed at the hands of a “strong enemy” that he could not defeat alone.
Psalm 18:19-24
19 He brought me forth into a broad place; he delivered me, because he delighted in me. 20 The LORD rewarded me according to my righteousness; according to the cleanness of my hands he recompensed me. 21 For I have kept the ways of the LORD, and have not wickedly departed from my God. 22 For all his ordinances were before me, and his statutes I did not put away from me. 23 I was blameless before him, and I kept myself from guilt. 24 Therefore the LORD has recompensed me according to my righteousness, according to the cleanness of my hands in his sight.
The king was saved from (near?) death and brought forth into a “broad place.” I can’t be sure, but this seems to refer to the temple, or at least the temple grounds. It is important to note that the king humbly recognizes that it is the Lord who saved him, and it was because of his faith and loyalty to the Lord. Because the king was obedient and followed God’s commandments, he was deemed worthy of this salvation.
Although the king had nearly lost his life to them in battle, after the Lord came to deliver him the king was miraculously strengthened and given the power to overcome his previously insurmountable enemies. The king rejoices in God as he recounts this remarkable change of events. The king’s new-found vitality includes enormous power, as if he had been endowed with God’s own strength.
Psalm 18:28-40
28 Yea, thou dost light my lamp; the LORD my God lightens my darkness. 29 Yea, by thee I can crush a troop; and by my God I can leap over a wall. 30 This God — his way is perfect; the promise of the LORD proves true; he is a shield for all those who take refuge in him. 31 For who is God, but the LORD? And who is a rock, except our God? — 32 the God who girded me with strength, and made my way safe. 33 He made my feet like hinds’ feet, and set me secure on the heights. 34 He trains my hands for war, so that my arms can bend a bow of bronze. 35 Thou hast given me the shield of thy salvation, and thy right hand supported me, and thy help made me great. 36 Thou didst give a wide place for my steps under me, and my feet did not slip. 37 I pursued my enemies and overtook them; and did not turn back till they were consumed. 38 I thrust them through, so that they were not able to rise; they fell under my feet. 39 For thou didst gird me with strength for the battle; thou didst make my assailants sink under me. 40 Thou didst make my enemies turn their backs to me, and those who hated me I destroyed.
The Israelite king’s new power is so great that he subdues all nations and foreign peoples come to him in submission because of their great fear of Israel’s king and God.
Psalm 18:43-50
43 Thou didst deliver me from strife with the peoples; thou didst make me the head of the nations; people whom I had not known served me. 44 As soon as they heard of me they obeyed me; foreigners came cringing to me. 45 Foreigners lost heart, and came trembling out of their fastnesses. 46 The LORD lives; and blessed be my rock, and exalted be the God of my salvation, 47 the God who gave me vengeance and subdued peoples under me; 48 who delivered me from my enemies; yea, thou didst exalt me above my adversaries; thou didst deliver me from men of violence. 49 For this I will extol thee, O LORD, among the nations, and sing praises to thy name. 50 Great triumphs he gives to his king, and shows steadfast love to his anointed, to David and his descendants for ever.
These images are very powerful, and, frankly, they end up being unbelievable. What Israelite king was ever the “head of the nations” and ruled over foreigners that he “had not known”? Perhaps this could refer to Solomon in the days of his glory, but his kingdom was never quite large enough to fully merit this type of talk. In some psalms (see esp. 72:11, 17), it is specified that all nations should bow before the king of Israel! It should be noted that this was common talk in the ancient world for kings — in Egypt, Mesopotamia, and elsewhere — the king was seen as the ruler of the whole Earth. The language presented in the Hebrew psalter is no different. But I believe that there was a reason for this. There was an ideology for the office of kingship that was greater than the man himself. The king was the Lord’s anointed — the Messiah — and was understood to be the beloved son of God (Pss. 2; 108:6; 2 Sam. 7:14). As we read in this psalm, the king counts himself as “blameless” before God and “free of guilt.” However, the kings were definitely mortal men — not sinless and virtually omnipotent as portrayed. I believe that we should see this very idealistic picture of kingship not as the arrogance of the king, but as an ideal. The kings were playing a role here — there was an ideal King (and not just God in Heaven, but an ideal earthly King) who they expected to fulfill this imagery to its fullest extent.
In fact, despite the heading of this psalm declaring that the historical setting of this psalm is the day of David’s victory over Saul, many scholars have concluded that the most likely “life setting” of this psalm was that of a ritual performed at the enthronement festival of the king. If this psalm were describing any real battle, it is quite clear that the author idealized the battle beyond recognition!
Commenting on Psalm 18, British scholar John Eaton affirms:
To sum up: the psalm is best taken to describe a liturgical (ritual) salvation, if other psalms also indicate the existence of such rites. The psalm expresses the confirmation of the king as Yahweh’s vice-regent and so was probably connected with the enthronement or renewal rites. There is evidence also of its integration in the annual liturgy asserting the Creator-kingship of Yahweh.
(John H. Eaton, Kingship and the Psalms, (London: SCM Press, 1976), p. 116)
Aubrey R. Johnson, in his book Sacral Kingship in Ancient Israel, makes this psalm part of his reconstruction of a series of rituals that involved the king at the annual New Year Festival. In a ritualized battle (played by actors), the king is almost defeated by the forces of evil until, at dawn, Yahweh intervenes to save the king in answer to his pleas. The humiliation/defeat of the king may have involved his being lowered into the waters of Gihon (symbolizing the Waters of Chaos leading to Death) in a baptismal-like ritual. The king emerges from the waters and is anointed — resulting in new life and power from God. He defeats his enemies and is carried triumphant up the sacred hill to the temple, where he is (re)enthroned in glory, ruler over all nations.
It is my opinion that this ritual served to remember both the primordial victory and enthronement of Yahweh, establish the authority of the current Davidic king as God’s anointed, and look forward to a future Davidic King who would be the beloved Son of God (and Yahweh incarnated on Earth) and who would fulfill the grandeur of all this ideology. It emphasized the idea of the “Suffering Servant” that we read about in Isaiah, one who would suffer, be humiliated, and even die — but then be raised from death by God. He would then be seated on the Throne of God to rule over the whole Earth.
DearScriptures.com
12 Comments
“The humiliation/defeat of the king may have involved his being lowered into the waters of Gihon (symbolizing the Waters of Chaos leading to Death) in a baptismal-like ritual. The king emerges from the waters and is anointed -- resulting in new life and power from God. He defeats his enemies and is carried triumphant up the sacred hill to the temple, where he is (re)enthroned in glory, ruler over all nations.”
Do you think baptisms in Christ’s time still to an extent carried this meaning? Or had it changed completely?
It seems to me that the connection baptism has with resurrection and rebirth certainly would relate to ancient enthronement ideals, especially with Christ’s baptism being the event in which He was recognized as the Messiah. Thoughts?
I ask because I find Margaret Barker’s views of resurrection and baptism to be interesting, especially since covenant-making, enthronement, and resurrection were all related anciently. She claims that Christ understood baptism to be a mystical ascent to God’s throne; an ascension that led to one being deified:
“In the conversation with Nicodemus, John’s Jesus explains that only those who are born anew, or from above, can see the kingdom of God…It is birth by water and spirit which enables a person to enter the kingdom of God. This implies that ‘entering’ the kingdom was part of the primitive teaching, perhaps going back to Jesus himself…This kingdom of God which is entered by baptism is a place which one sees and enters to learn of heavenly things (John 3:1-15)…The most natural context for material such as this would be the mystical ascent; the kingdom of God is the place of God’s throne, the place of the Glory and those who see the vision are transformed by it, resurrected, reborn.” (Margaret Barker, The Risen Lord, 1996)
“The high priest was believed to be resurrected, by which was meant that he was an angel figure, a son of God. Jesus himself understood that resurrection was the process by which one became a son of God, an angel; ‘…they cannot die any more because they are equal to the angels and are sons of God, being sons of the resurrection’ (Luke 20.36).” (Margaret Barker, The Revelation of Jesus Christ, 2000)
I find an interesting connection to Nephi’s teachings:
“Wherefore, my beloved brethren, I know that if ye shall follow the Son, with full purpose of heart, acting no hypocrisy and no deception before God, but with real intent, repenting of your sins, witnessing unto the Father that ye are willing to take upon you the name of Christ, by baptism--yea, by following your Lord and your Savior down into the water, according to his word, behold, then shall ye receive the Holy Ghost; yea, then cometh the baptism of fire and of the Holy Ghost; and then can ye speak with the tongue of angels, and shout praises unto the Holy One of Israel.” (2 Ne. 31:13)
Notice that after baptism (of both water and spirit) we are able to speak with “a new tongue, yea, even with the tongue of angels” (vs. 14). He later says, “Angels speak by the power of the Holy Ghost; wherefore, they speak the words of Christ. Wherefore, I said unto you, feast upon the words of Christ; for behold, the words of Christ will tell you all things what ye should do.” (2 Ne. 32:3) By this rebirth, we are able to speak the very words of Christ i.e. God. In ancient times, God was understood to head a heavenly court, “just as an earthly king is supported by a body of courtiers...Originally, these were gods, but as monotheism became absolute, so these were demoted to the status of angels.” (John Day, Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan, 2002) As Daniel C. Peterson pointed out, this heavenly court or divine council was “a kind of corporate deity, in which a number of gods functioned as if they were, in fact, one god." (Peterson, “Ye are Gods: Psalm 82 and John 10 as Witnesses to the Divine Nature of Humankind,” The Disciple as a Scholar: Essays on Scripture and the Ancient World in Honor of Richard Lloyd Anderson, 2000)
It seems that baptism truly is the gateway by which we become members of the divine council, even in mortality. (see your own post “Christmas Reading”)
Thoughts?
Walker,
Sorry for the delayed response. Your thoughts on this are excellent! Thanks for taking the time to put together these comments.
I have thought about this idea of baptism being related to resurrection for some time. I had traditionally been fixated on the aspect of the term resurrection that described the reuniting of body and spirit after death, but have since expanded my view, based on my readings of sources such as those you’ve cited.
You can see some of my earlier wrestling to come to terms with these notions in this post from Aug. 2008: http://www.heavenlyascents.com/2008/08/25/an-expanded-view-of-the-resurrection/
I had reviewed Margaret Barker’s ideas on baptism and resurrection in her book “Temple Themes in Christian Worship” in this series of posts:
http://www.heavenlyascents.com/2008/06/29/baptism-or-temple-initiation/
http://www.heavenlyascents.com/2008/07/02/baptism-or-temple-initiation-part-ii/
http://www.heavenlyascents.com/2008/07/03/baptism-or-temple-initiation-part-iii/
From these and other studies that I’ve done, I do believe that there is a connection between baptism, resurrection, becoming a Son of God and part of the Heavenly Council, and deification. I believe that the early Christians saw baptism as being born again spiritually as a son/daughter of Christ, which was (at least symbolically) equal to an angelic status.
There is also a connection between the ordinance of baptism and the initiatory rites of the Temple. I am still struggling, however, to understand exactly what the nature of that connection is. In some orthodox Christian rites, baptism and anointing are done together and are quite surprisingly similar in form to what we know as the washing and anointing of the Temple. But why do we separate baptism and our temple initiation?
John Tvedtnes had the following to say about the merging of these ordinances early on:
What do you think of this statement? Tvedtnes seems to believe that baptism and washing/anointing were anciently meant to be separate. I have seen some evidence that baptism as a cleansing from sin is an ancient (pre-Christian) idea. However, the New Testament, while it attributes this function to baptism, also links it to the death and resurrection theme.
But there is also that curious association of the baptism of Jesus to the ancient enthronement rites, as you mention. In response to some comments on the above posts, I expressed my feelings regarding the value of Margaret Barker’s ideas on this:
My current thoughts on this topic are that there must be a link between baptism and the washing/anointing of the temple. I have not come to a conclusion on exactly what is the nature of this association. I believe that what Jesus did and what early Christians practiced was essentially the same as what the Davidic kings (also priests and likely others) went through during the rites of enthronement. What I can’t decide is if there was more than one “washing” in ancient Israel. There is evidence that the kings were washed in Gihon and some consider this to be a baptismal rite — some suggesting that it symbolized the king’s death and resurrection. But then there was also the Bronze Sea just outside the temple, where there were washings done. The basin was certainly big enough for someone to fully immerse themselves in it. The biblical record is so scanty on these details that it is very difficult to get a full picture of what went on. The king’s ascension/enthronement rites seemed to start at Gihon and then continued in procession up to the temple courts. Was there a washing and anointing at Gihon and then another at the temple? If so, perhaps we can see a parallel between our separation of baptism and temple initiation.
Then again, perhaps our modern LDS separation of the two initiations is artificial and purely for practical purposes — due to the fact that we baptize individuals at 8 years old but do not let them enter the temple until much later. Perhaps the temple initiation is but a symbolic repetition of what was supposed to be accomplished at the baptism. It doesn’t seem that that’s right, but I’m not sure.
Anyways, this is just my speculation, but I have no firm conclusions on this matter as of now.
If you (or anyone else) has further insights on this question, I would love to hear them!
Thanks,
David
Thanks for the links to your older posts. Excellent stuff. I agree with baptism being a much more ancient rite than just a copy of a Jewish purification ritual. However, I do believe the Jewish ritual maintained significant aspects that Christ adhered to and expanded on. A good article on the subject is Ron Moseley "The Jewish Background of Christian Baptism." Sherwood, Arkansas: Arkansas Institute of Holy Land Studies, 2002. Database on-line. Available from http://www.Haydid.org.html. Moseley (according to the American Institute Faculty page) is the president of the American Institute for Advanced Biblical Studies in North Little Rock, Arkansas, and has a Master of Divinity, a Master of Jewish Studies, a Ph.D. in Second Temple History, a D.Phil. in Religion and Society, and a D.Litt. in Research. He has been awarded both the status of Fellow and Scholar by the Oxford Society of Scholars.
It seems that Christ restored the original intent of the ritual, as He did with just about everything He taught.
As for the separation between baptism and temple rituals, I have always taught that they should not be viewed as separate. We of course do not know the full intention of these rites. Nonetheless, it does seem to become more and more specific in nature as the ordinances progress.
Sorry about the bad link. Here you go: http://www.haydid.org/ronimmer.htm
Not to be self-promoting, but I would like your thoughts on a blog entry I wrote entitled ‘Taking on the Name: The Creation of Creators.’ Seeing that temple themes fall into your area of expertise, I would just like your views or any insights you could provide. Even corrections if necessary. I would greatly appreciate it.
The link is here: http://walkstar.blogspot.com/2009/11/taking-on-name-creation-of-creators.html
Another great example of baptism as an ascent:
“…and [Adam] was caught away by the Spirit of the Lord, and was carried down into the water, and was laid under the water, and was brought forth out of the water. And thus he was baptized, and the Spirit of God descended upon him, and thus he was born of the Spirit, and became quickened in the inner man. And he heard a voice out of heaven, saying: Thou art baptized with fire, and with the Holy Ghost. This is the record of the Father, and the Son, from henceforth and forever; And thou art after the order of him who was without beginning of days or end of years, from all eternity to all eternity. Behold, thou art one in me, a son of God; and thus may all become my sons. Amen.” (Moses 6:64-68)
Had a question about Moses 6:
“That by reason of transgression cometh the fall, which fall bringeth death, and inasmuch as ye were born into the world by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul, even so ye must be born again into the kingdom of heaven, of water, and of the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten; that ye might be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in this world, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory; For by the water ye keep the commandment; by the Spirit ye are justified, and by the blood ye are sanctified.” (Moses 6:59-60)
Notice that it says we were born of water, blood, and spirit and therefore “became of dust a living soul.” What exactly does that mean? If I take the position of the article I sent you before, it means that by water, blood, and spirit we are brought out of obscurity to become a living soul. I am intrigued by water, blood, and spirit. When it comes to creation, is water a reference to the waters of chaos? And what about spirit and blood? Check this out: In Mesopotamian creation mythology, the council of gods decides on the creation of the human race. “To animate this new creation and make it capable of fulfilling work previously performed by gods, it is deemed necessary to infuse it with divine element. This necessary ingredient, it is proposed, will come from a slain god…[the god] We is selected…because he is both divine (ilu) and possessed of a spirit (temu).” (Terryl Givens, When Souls Had Wings: Pre-Mortal Existence in Western Thought, 2009) He points to the Akkadian word for “human being” ((a)welu or awilu) as being a combination of We and the divine nature (ilu), while the Akkadian for “ghost” ((w)etem(m)u) appears to be We and spirit (temu) combined (The temu can mean “personality, inspiration, intelligence, or rationality-whatever it is that constitutes the essence of divine beings”). While noting it as a possible “folk etymology”, Givens nevertheless finds that “myth and etymology alike…confirm that primal humans consist of an element traceable to the divine.” The actual “conception” of the human, “says Atrahasis, occurs as a “deposit” of an already existing divine substance, taken from the god, into the “matrices” of the clay “prototype.” Sharing the very blood of the gods, the human is both kin and threat. And the deposit that inaugurates life and guarantees immortality precedes that life, having its origin in the heavens among the gods themselves.”
I wonder if this Near Eastern imagery is somewhere within Moses 6’s description of creation. The blood of the slain god prior to the earth’s creation is very similar to “the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.” (Rev. 13:8)
Thoughts? I really want to figure out what water, blood, and spirit has to do with coming from the dust.
Walker,
I apologize for being so bad at responding to your comments here. This last month has been pretty crazy for me. I am sincerely still meaning to check out your blog and comment on your temple post.
What you have said and asked here is very interesting and also bears no small significance to what I am studying now. I definitely think you’re on to something here, and when you figure it out, please let me know.
It is interesting how similar the passage you quote from Moses (6:64-68) is to certain themes from Psalms 18, 2 and 110 (among others). Margaret Barker says that the baptism of Jesus narrative corresponds well to the ancient enthronement rites of the kings, and it is apparent that those parallels extend in many directions.
Your question about “from dust to a living soul” is very interesting. I suspect that the imagery runs much deeper than simply referring to man’s creation from the clay of the earth, as you have noted. As noted in the Brueggeman article that you sent, the dust-to-exalted reference was used as part of the Israelite kingship ideology. It plays out in the psalms quite frequently, as the psalmist cries out to be lifted out of the dust (see Pss. 7:5; 22:15; 30:9; 89:39; and others), which appears to be equivalent to Death and/or Hell. It is also a frequent theme in the Dead Sea Scrolls’ Thanksgiving Hymns (Hodayot). It would seem, on the one hand, to refer literally to a non-living state, and on the other hand, to refer perhaps to the fallen moral/spiritual state (spiritual death).
I like your identification of the “water” with the waters of chaos. Both the Red Sea (where Israel is said to have been baptized) and the Brazen Sea of the temple (where kings/priests were baptized?) are connected with the primeval chaos waters. These waters are also a frequent image in the type of psalm I just mentioned, and seem to be parallel to the dust and Sheol imagery.
I also think you’re right on with the blood and spirit imagery. The idea that mankind was created from the blood of the slain god(s) is quite common. Even religious literature as late as the Qur’an has man being created out a blood clot (Sura 96:1-2). Interestingly, the Qur’an also has God making man out of water (Sura 25:54); out of clay (15:26); and out of dust (30:20).
So I can agree with your idea that Near Eastern imagery regarding a slain god prior to the creation is related to what we’re seeing in Moses. I believe that while it is not expressed clearly, we may have similar ideas in the psalms, where the king’s (near) death, resurrection, victory, and exaltation seem to be linked to Yahweh’s own experiences, including the battle for victory over chaos.
I don’t think I can really answer your question regarding what water, blood, and spirit have to do with coming from the dust, besides the idea that these elements are related to the giving of life. If the dust represents death (or non-living), then you are brought out of the dust by a divine infusion of these elements. The significance of these three is related to natural birth as aided by God, and in the spiritual rebirth these elements are employed again following the experiences of Yahweh/Jesus, which was represented in the kingship rituals.
I would love to have more time to get into this, and I will, but I will have to end here for now.
Thanks for all your great comments and questions!
David
This is from the original manuscript. It reads a little differently:
“…inasmuch as ye were born into the world by the fall, which bringeth death by water, and blood, and the spirit, which I have made, and so became of dust a living soul,even so ye must be born again of water, andof the Spirit, and be cleansed by blood, even the blood of mine Only Begotten into the mysteries of the kingdom of Heaven; that yemight be sanctified from all sin, and enjoy the words of eternal life in thisworld, and eternal life in the world to come, even immortal glory.”
Daniel McClellan also offered a couple comments:
“I would point out that water, blood, and spirit are all indicated in the Hebrew Bible as givers of life. YHWH is seen as a storm deity in the earliest imagery. Genesis 2 presents a Syro-Palestinian view of creation. Rather than absolute creation, the storm deity gives life through the abundance of water. For Israel, there were no large rivers providing even semi-reliable flooding for irrigation. Rain was what made life possible, and that is the sense in which YHWH brought life to early Israel. It’s not until the intersection with Assyro-Babylonian cosmogony that Genesis 1’s creation account is prefixed.
Temple sacrifice brings a new perspective. The life is in the blood (Gen 9:4-5; Lev 17:11, 14; Deut 12:23). Still later, the spirit is seen as the life giving force (Job 27:3; 33:4). Thus God created man by breathing into him his spirit (or “breath” – Gen 2:7).
One might point to all three as the elements that bring life to a lifeless body. Dust can be metaphorical, but it can also be read literally. Adam’s body is constituted of the elements of the earth.”
A note on the expanded view of ‘resurrection’ as being an ascent to God’s throne:
“For behold, he surely must die that salvation may come; yea, it behooveth him and becometh expedient that he dieth, to bring to pass the resurrection of the dead, that thereby men may be brought into the presence of the Lord.” (Hel. 14:15)
Here, resurrection is directly associated with being brought into the presence of God.
Also, check out the following article:
Charles A. Gieschen, “Baptismal Praxis and Mystical Experience in the Book of Revelation,” Paradise Now: Essays on Early Jewish and Christian Mysticism (SBL: 2006)
Thanks, Walker, these are good points.
I am familiar with Dr. Gieschen’s article and agree that it is a good one to look at on this topic.
Thanks!