Looking at Genesis 28:11-12 again, it's funny how new details become salient each time and things become clearer with one more read. The word normally translated "ladder" (sullam) in that account could be rendered "stairway" or ramp. Moreover, the ladder/stairway could have been made from stone steps.
Another important detail is that Jehovah (YHWH) possibly was at the top of the ladder on which angels ascended and descended (Genesis 28:13) or others understand the text to say YHWH was beside Jacob. The Hebrew allows for different renderings, but I still have my reservations about the idea that Jacob beheld a heavenly sanctuary at the top of the ladder. Of course, he was having a dream/vision, which is another thing to keep in mind.
44 comments:
https://www.patheos.com/blogs/leithart/2015/09/ascending-and-descending/
Brenton LXX 12 and dreamed, and behold a ladder fixed on the earth, whose top reached to heaven, and the angels of God >>ascended and descended<< on it.
https://www.academia.edu/103043412/Going_Up_and_Going_Down_A_Key_to_Interpreting_Jacobs_Dream_Gen_28_1022_?rhid=28970304496&swp=rr-rw-wc-14439344
Does the word really have any theological implications- don’t they all essentially mean the same thing?
Some might find theological significance in the potential meanings, but my concern with these verses is chiefly philological. Of course, there are different shades of meaning between ladder, stairway and ramp--plus some perceive sanctuary overtones and other themes in the account.
Comes back to - what are angels? At least in this instance.
In that this might be making something out of nothing - https://www.logos.com/grow/sons-of-israel-or-sons-of-god-in-deuteronomy-32-8-9/
Duncan, I was more focused on sullam than the angels, but I wouldn't be surprised if the scholarly consensus is that the angels here are spirit creatures. Otherwise, one might have to posit human messengers ascending and descending from above.
See https://www.academia.edu/14025406/A_Narrative_Analysis_of_Genesis_28_10_22?hb-sb-sw=35695175
https://www.sefaria.org/Rashi_on_Genesis.28.12.1?lang=bi
John 1:51
As a philological discussion I would not have thought that GJohn or Rashi have any real bearing on the conclusions.
Also, if we are looking at John 1:51, which doe not really tell us anything on its own, let's not forget John 1:30.
The paragraph on page 5 of that paper basically side steps the issue of ascending coming before descending and is still highly ambiguous as to what "angel" signifies other than to mention god's involvement, that I have no problem with.
I don't really think any discussion on philology has much point if we are just going to say what the current consensus is. Why bother?
Matthew 28:2 don't angels descend first?
John ch.3:30,31NKJV"He must become greater; I must become less.” h
31The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all."
John ch 3:13NKJV"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man. e "
John ch.8:23NKJV"But he continued, “You are from below; I am from above. You are of this world; I am not of this world."
My comment about philology was referring the sullam, which was supposed to be the main focus of this post. I did not put the emphasis on angels.
GJohn 1:51 is probably an allusion to Gen. 28 and Rashi, like many others, thinks the angels in the verse are spirit beings.
Servant, so was John the dipper from heaven too?
Servant, John ch 3:13 - so you think this is taking about time coming from a place called "heaven" as opposed to coming from god.
https://biblehub.com/text/john/18-36.htm
Note that unlike the NIV there is no mention of "place".
Sullam and the ascension to "mount" Zion. Most likely steps or path. Not ladder.
JPS - He had a dream; a stairway *stairway Or “ramp”; others “ladder.” Heb. sullam. was set on the ground and its top reached to the sky, and messengers of God were going up and down on it.
Jesus would not be unique in simply coming from God. All men Come from God. Jesus was talking about something that distinguished him from every other man that has ever lived including the first Adam.
Rashi - עלים וירדים ASCENDING AND DESCENDING — It states first ascending and afterwards descending! Those angels who accompanied him in the land of Israel were not permitted to leave the Land: they ascended to Heaven and angels which were to minister outside the Land descended to accompany him (Genesis Rabbah 68:12).
A little confused but he recognises the problem in the text.
What did John say about himself that would warrant the conclusion that he taught he was from heaven?
Matthew ch.11:11NKJV"“Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he."
A number of interesting points are brought out in this article concerning sullam and angels, including Rashi's perspective: https://www.thetorah.com/article/jacobs-dream-why-do-gods-angels-ascend-and-descend
Servant - "What did John say about himself that would warrant the conclusion that he taught he was from heaven?"
Nothing.
And that is my point when on looks at John 1:30. Coming before John 1:51 and jesus first miracle of note.
The benchmark for coming from heaven/god? - John 10:41
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_of_God#:~:text=Moses%20is%20the%20only%20person,(Leviticus%20Rabbah%201%3A1)
https://global.oup.com/us/companion.websites/0195161238/studentresources/chapter6/#:~:text=Matthew%20uses%20%22fulfillment%20citations%22%20to,give%20the%20(new)%20law.
Search moses.
https://honorscollege.uncg.edu/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/YDG-Final.pdf#page=16
Preexistence and GJohn.
See also https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Jv-AEAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT39&dq=John+1:30+preexistence&ots=gg2o0nxF7u&sig=1JpnVADz9fsgZuoSMODJ0jYmgrc#v=onepage&q=John%201%3A30%20preexistence&f=false
See C. Westermann for some incisive remarks about sullam (Genesis 12-36 in the Continental Commentary). He makes this additional point about "angels" in Genesis 28:11-12:
"It is essential that the stairway linking heaven and earth in Jacob's dream is set (Jl~) in the ground at the place where he is sleeping, thereby making him aware that it is a holy place. The second part, also beginning with :1l:1, says nothing new but explains the function of the stairway more clearly by the vision that Jacob has of the ':JN7~ C':17N going up and down on it. These are heavenly beings, sharply distinct from the singular :1,:1' 'N7~ but like the C':17N 'lJ of Job 1:6; 2: I, who by means of
their ascent and descent underscore the link between heaven and earth already described by the stairway. Heavenly beings are also present in Is. 6 in connection with God enthroned in his sanctuary."
Sorry that the Hebrew characters don't show clearly.
Lol - the red dragon, are you kidding?
It's not even the original Welsh publication.
I see it includes then appeal to Ehrman fallacy (like he is the goto expert).
Is that the only place it could get published?
Contextually this whole John 8:58 argument is no longer tenable as the context shows it to be demonstrably false. John may have a misunderstanding motif but that is for the Jews NOT Jesus.
Let him keep promoting commonality for all of the gospels. More fuel for the mid second century group authorship.
Duncan, I love how you go for the trees instead of the forest. 😁
Plus you totally ignore Westermann.
Last I checked, I did not favor the Trinitarian John 8:58 argument. So we agree there.
Westermann is just another opinion to which I disagree based on the overall context.
John 17:5 - "and now glorify me You Father alongside you to that glory I had before the the world to be alongside you"
You go ahead and keep arguing that John 1:30 is temporal.
http://www.gnosis.org/library/fragh.htm#:~:text=The%20first%20known%20Gospel%20commentary,Biblical%20exegetes%20of%20his%20day.
It could refer to temporal precedence or superiority of position or to both. John evidently means above and again when he uses anothen in chapter 3.
https://www.proquest.com/openview/48f8a22328fd972d4901acb5f88a9e52/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=2026366&diss=y
John 1:51 and Genesis 28:12-doctoral dissertation.
If the second Adam's human origin was his only origin then his origin would not be exceptional . Indeed the first Adam's origin would be the exceptional origin and he would more fittingly be worthy of the title of monogenes, or of descending from heaven if an an exceptional human origin is all that is being alluded to by those terms.
Post a Comment