Granted, the Bible as we know it was not complete even in the 5th century BCE, but the Jews still possessed, wrote, and collated holy writings before then. I've also tried going back as far as possible in the history of scriptural interpretation. Whether it is the DSS or LXX, writers consistently understand bara at Gen. 1:1 as "create" although other meanings might be affixed to different verses.
Maimonides, Rashi, Philo, and Nahmanides could only work backward, but these men--particularly the rabbis--were doing interpretation within a protracted stream of thought: they were interpreting in accord with received tradition.
29 comments:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9358/320b4090e999325e4793e027d705e2ce0322.pdf
http://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section5/tr532.htm
See https://www3.nd.edu/~jneyrey1/days.html
Ancient Jews and Christians thought God brought matter into existence: matter was not thought to be eternal. Only the uncreated God existed from eternity to eternity (olam).
Whether Judaism or Christianity explicitly formulated creatio ex nihilo is beside the point. The more relevant issue pertains to how early Jews or Christians read Gen. 1:1.
Josephus and Gen. 1: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0146%3Abook%3D1%3Asection%3D27
For Psalm 102:25-27 compare Ecclesiastes 1:4
"That in >>just six days<< the world, and all that is therein, was made. And that the seventh day was a rest" - So did Josephus believe in 24hr days?
I am interested in ancient vocabularies & whether anyone had a word that held the concept of creation from nothing? Was that something that developed later?
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=3YLdFztNK9QC&pg=PA240&lpg=PA240&dq=the+statue+of+Aion+at+Eleusis+beginning+end&source=bl&ots=34mtlcr8LZ&sig=ACfU3U34jNTpErW4rwkoMqdIp4694XFqSA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-ldCyqMPkAhXUi1wKHRaTC4IQ6AEwCXoECAcQAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20statue%20of%20Aion%20at%20Eleusis%20beginning%20end&f=false
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=spJyDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA283&lpg=PA283&dq=the+statue+of+Aion+at+Eleusis+beginning+end&source=bl&ots=w0QML_euFa&sig=ACfU3U14gO1EQ_vDHLBX3zQPBmbQBMYGNw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi-ldCyqMPkAhXUi1wKHRaTC4IQ6AEwC3oECAYQAQ#v=onepage&q=the%20statue%20of%20Aion%20at%20Eleusis%20beginning%20end&f=false
http://www.hellenicgods.org/inscription-aion-from-eleusis
For more on Josephus, see https://sites.google.com/site/aquinasstudybible/home/genesis/josephus-on-genesis
I've often read that the earliest possible (explicit) reference to creatio ex nihilo is 2 Macc 7:28.
To see a contrast with the Judaic view, see Plato's work, Timaeus. It's difficult for me to see how someone makes a genuine comparison between the biblical God and Hellenistic or Roman deities.
Ah yes, we touched on it here:- https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2018/11/edward-p-arbez-and-john-p-weisengoff.html
I agree that comparisons between gods are problematic to say the least. What interests me here is the turn of phrase that clearly is not talking about someone literally from eternity to eternity, so the the meaning must be something else. It is also being used in a relevant time frame.
I'm claiming that to identify Zeus as first and last is not like calling YHWH the first and last. The utterances originate in divergent cultures/contexts, and they apply to different deities.
Zeus was born from another god; YHWH was not.
The expression, "from eternity to eternity" appears in Ps. 90:2. What other god is described this way?
Here are observations from W. Brueggemann and W.H. Bellinger about Ps. 90:
"Even before there was a world, there was God, and so God’s view is the view of the creator, in which a thousand years is only a day or a night (v. 4). In contrast to all that stability and permanence is the brevity of human life."
See Psalms, page 392.
I do not believe that the inscription I sited is referring to a god at all.
See this book by Mark Smith for more on Ps. 90:2, etc:
https://books.google.com/books?id=afkRDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA101&lpg=PA101&dq=ibn+ezra+psalm+90:2&source=bl&ots=mZyefHuyH6&sig=ACfU3U1B3ice42T7aT7Yz2bwSnKf46WKTA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjRzqL0n8fkAhXCnuAKHRVcAXEQ6AEwBXoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=ibn%20ezra%20psalm%2090%3A2&f=false
I was referring to the Neyrey material you cited.
My Firefox browser did not like your Eleusis link, but I was able to access other sites with like material. See the discussion of the Aion transcription here: https://books.google.com/books?id=mO9MAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA51&lpg=PA51&dq=inscription+aion+from+eleusis&source=bl&ots=CgsETV5YdR&sig=ACfU3U2gkRJ4rNHUZdz7XCMWHNXxsyjXTw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi9xZ-p5MfkAhWEUt8KHQNVAe0Q6AEwAnoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=inscription%20aion%20from%20eleusis&f=false
Aion most certainly was thought to be divine. However, I'm not sure how this concerns creatio ex nihilo. Sorry if I like to know why I'm discussing a subject. :)
Note what this page relates about Aion, etc: https://www.cais-soas.com/CAIS/Religions/iranian/Mithraism/m_m/pt6.htm
Sorry, I am losing track of blog entries, I was back to the Hebrews chapter 1 thoughts.
This came up yesterday Hebrews 9:26 for then he would have had to suffer again and again since the foundation of the world. But as it is, he has appeared once for all at the end of the age to remove sin by the sacrifice of himself.
Foundation of the world is the focus.
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4WR7DwAAQBAJ&pg=PA202&lpg=PA202&dq=aionion+roman+empire+everlasting+rule&source=bl&ots=VKewA63D4g&sig=ACfU3U0yU3jGamHaSpw9Ye0CxjvJ7n7NJw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjUttnGr8jkAhWFnVwKHVVSDg4Q6AEwEnoECAkQAQ#v=snippet&q=apotheosis&f=false
I found this useful:-
https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:064ad3c7-bd9e-4a8b-a818-0572b738fc46/download_file?safe_filename=THESIS01&file_format=application%2Fpdf&type_of_work=Thesis
Αἰών and χρόνος. Their semantic development in the Greek poets and philosophers
down to 400 BC
Sandra Šćepanović, Jesus College
DPhil in Classical Languages in Literature
Michaelmas Term 2011
As per the paper I sent you on ancient greek ecology. There is no reason to think that all people saw a deity as opposed to a concept.
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2009/2009-02-16.html
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/classical-review/article/eternity-ramelli-i-konstan-dterms-for-eternity-aionios-and-aidios-in-classical-and-christian-texts-pp-viii-257-piscataway-nj-gorgias-press-2007-cased-us103-isbn-9781593336943/E6C908FE842E173C639D17DE991E3103
Just a thought from this - did Philo read Hebrew as well as Greek. Is he working with LXX interpretations only?
http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/novatell/v24n2/0185-3058-novatell-24-02-21.pdf
Under Presocratic Cosmology and Philosophy on page 123 there is something quite striking when compared with Luke 18:16.
Hebrews 4:3 mentions the world's foundation too, associating it with God's completed works.
I wouldn't say that all people viewed Aion as a deity: the concept also developed over time which led to Aion's recognized divine status. Aion's recognition as divine seems to have been prevalent enough.
McDonough provides plenty of evidence to support the claim that Aion was usually considered a deity. Compare https://www.theoi.com/Protogenos/Khronos.html
For Philo, see John Dillon. I believe he contends that Philo did not know/read Hebrew.
Isn't Hebrews 9:26 from the fall onward which is after?
See LSJ for different uses of aion.: https://lsj.gr/wiki/%CE%B1%E1%BC%B0%CF%8E%CE%BD#English_.28LSJ.29
Liike other matters, not everyone understands "founding/foundation of the world" in the same way. For example, see https://fosterheologicalreflections.blogspot.com/2015/01/hebrews-43-what-some-commentators-say.html
Post a Comment