In the beginning God created the heavens and the underworld

I've thought quite a bit about Hebrew cosmology. Not as much as some, but probably more than the average Jane or Joe. But Scott Noegel just published an essay in Hebrew Studies that seemingly states the obvious ("God of Heaven and Sheol," HS 58 (2017):119-44), but hadn't even crossed my mind until Noegel made the case.

It's well known that the Hebrew word ארץ (eretz) has several meanings, including the entire habitable earth, a tract of land, and the underworld, among others. In Hebrew cosmology, the heavens are the height of the cosmos, and the underworld represents its lowest extremity. This concept is evident in a number of poetic passages in the Hebrew Bible, including, for example, Ps 139:8

If I ascend to heaven, you are there; if I make my bed in Sheol, you are there. (NRSV)

Most interpreters agree that the theological assertion in Gen 1:1 is that God created everything, not just heaven and earth. This idea of an expression representing a totality is called a merism, a rather common feature in the Bible and in ancient Near Eastern texts. 

Noegel suggests that the merism in Gen. 1:1 makes more sense if we understand eretz as the underworld, rather than the entire habitable earth. In other words, God created the heavens and the underworld, from the height of the cosmos to its depth.

He admits he doesn't expect to see any changes in Bible translations anytime soon. But, as more evidence from the ANE comes to light we need to be prepared to adjust traditional readings accordingly, as we have already done with many, many way.

Genesis 1-11 (Review)

Earlier this summer John Hobbins generously offered to send me a copy of his book (co-authored with Samuel L. Bray), Genesis 1-11: A New Old Translation for Readers, Scholars, and Translators (Glossahouse, 2017). I am under no obligation to offer a review of the book, but I am more than happy to do so.


Bray and Hobbins have divided the book into three sections: Before the Translation, The Translation, and After the Translation. While this is a helpful organizational structure, the bulk of the book's content is comprised of (1) Translation (pp. 19-38); (2) Notes "to the persistent reader" (41-64); and (3) Translation "notes" (65-200). The book contains many helpful resources, including "Dramatis Personae," glossary, abbreviations, works cited, and five indices: subjects, ancient sources, translations, authors, and stories & genealogies.

1. Translation
Bray and Hobbins affirm a strict commitment to the Masoretic Text (MT) as preserved in Codex Leningradensis (Codex L). This is not to say that they ignore ancient sources or blindly ignore textual challenges within the MT. However, they it is also true that they don't immediately appeal to other textual witnesses whenever a difficulty arises. Their modus operandi is to make as much sense of the MT as possible, but utilize the versions where necessary for clarity.

Adhering to Codex L also means that Genesis 1-11 does not actually end at 11:32. Following the section breaks of Codex L, Bray and Hobbins conclude their translation at 12:9.

The translation itself takes great pains to be faithful to the original text, not just in meaning, but also according to Hebrew literary techniques (puns, assonance, alliteration) and diachrony. Genesis 1-11 is replete with etymological word-plays, particularly with names. The authors helped readers make the link by use of italics. 

"Now the man knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain, saying, 'I have gained a man through the Lord'." (Gen. 4:1). 

Diachrony, the use of archaic spellings in Hebrew, is cleverly demonstrated by archaic spellings in English, such as "Aethiopia," "beastes" and "brynge."

Often, Bray and Hobbins "default" to traditional translations, but not without considering the alternatives, which are discussed under "Notes." However, even when traditional translations are favored, the authors often add their own twist on well-established verses by providing an alternative vocabulary word or change in word order.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was void and desolate, and darkness was over the face of the waters... (Gen 1:1-2).

At other times, they completely break from any tradition, giving the text an awkward freshness.

"And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Urartu" (Gen. 8:4). 

2. To the Persistent Reader

Following the translation, the authors give some insights into some of the methodological decisions they made. Some readers may have wished for these notes to precede the translation, but I understand the authors' rationale for its placement as many of their explanations only make sense after the fact. 

3. Notes

This section serves two functions. First, it affords the authors the opportunity to explain their interpretive decisions. Second, it allows them to pull insights (etymological, linguistic, intertextual, and other) from the text that might otherwise be missed.

Most commentaries due well to engage with the ancient textual sources, and as I said above, Bray and Hobbins do not neglect these sources. But none that I have encountered engage the vast array of modern translations as Bray and Hobbins do, from Robert Altar to the Zurich Bible, as well as every conceivable English translation. This survey of modern translations is extremely helpful in tracing some of the translational traditions we are now stuck with. See for example, their discussion on Gen. 4:6-7:

For Hebrew robetz traditional renderings include "lieth" (KJV), coucheth (RV), and "is couching" (RSV). In the middle of the twentieth century, English translations moved en masse from "couching" to an orthographically similar but unrelated word "crouching." (p. 130).

Review

In short, Genesis 1-11 is a great resource for students, teachers, and translators of the so-called Primeval History. Hebraists will likely take exception with decisions here or there. In fact, I had a few disagreements myself (e.g. I would have translated yom echad as "one day," rather than "a first day;" but I was very happy that days 2-5 were translated as "a second day," etc; I prefer "sea creatures" for tanninim, instead of "whales"). As a whole, however, the book is a pleasure to read, demands that the reader pay close attention to the text, and offers many a useful (at times profound) insight into the biblical text.

Adam and the Genome (Review)

The question of human origins and its implications for biblical interpretation has caused much consternation for well over a century. Charles Darwin did not invent the idea of evolution by natural selection. Just read his introduction to On the Origin of Species and you'll see that his ideas were not particularly novel. What Darwin did, though, was provide an elegant and detailed explanation for the process. Some within the church immediately balked at Darwin's theory. Others were so compelled by his work that they had to reconsider their own interpretations of Genesis 1-2 in light of it. 

The theory of evolution is not going anywhere. In fact, rather than becoming less stable as a hypothesis, it is now firmly entrenched in the scientific community as "theory," which in the sciences is about as close to a knowable reality there is without it being "law." Jamie Tanner, professor of biology at Marlboro College explains scientific theory this way:

Most people use the word 'theory' to mean an idea or hunch that someone has, but in science, the word 'theory' refers to the way we interpret facts...For example, we have ample evidence of traits in populations becoming more or less common over time (evolution), so evolution is a fact but the overarching theories about evolution, the way that we think all of the facts go together might change as new observations of evolution are made.

Rather than casting doubt on evolutionary theory, new fossil discoveries and most importantly, the mapping of the human genome, only make the theory more compelling.

In Adam and the Genome: Reading Scripture after Genetic Science, Dennis Venema and Scot McKnight have done the church and the scientific community a great service. Venema is professor of biology at Trinity Western University and wrote the first four chapters looking at the biological, fossil, and genetic evidence that overwhelmingly supports human descent by evolution. McKnight, professor of New Testament at Northern Seminary, tackles the theological implications in the final four chapters.

For Venema, human descent through evolution is without dispute. He patiently walks the reader through the world of biology and genetics (with some paleontology thrown in for good measure) and demonstrates how and why biologists make the claims they make. He shows how evolution not only explains certain biological phenomena, but predicts certain outcomes. Venema also takes issue with the Intelligent Design movement, arguing that ID simply ignores too many data. Venema concludes with this:

[A]s I reflected on what Scripture says about creation, I came to view ID as counter to its witness. In Romans 1 Paul declares that observing creation bespeaks a creator...Creation reveals the Creator, and we are without excuse. Learning more about how that  creation works only deepens our wonder. To paraphrase Bonhoeffer, Paul calls us to see God in what we know, not in what we don't know--and as science reveals ever more about creation, we know more and more about how God chose to bring his creation into being (pp. 90-91).

McKnight's chief goal is remove the shackles of culture and tradition from the biblical text so that we might read the Bible on its own terms. After taking the readers on a journey through the world of the Ancient Near East, McKnight shows how the literary Adam (and Eve; he's always careful to remind us that Eve is generally forgotten to later interpreters of Genesis) is treated in the Jewish interpretive tradition. This tradition can be summarized as follows:

Adam is the paradigm or prototype or archetype of the choice between the path of obedience and that of disobedience, the path of Torah observance and that of breaking the commandments, the path of Wisdom and Mind and Logos and the path of sensory perceptions and pleasure and bodily desires. The Adam of the Jewish tradition is depicted very much as the moral Adam...In some of these interpretive traditions Adam comes off more positively than in others, but in each of them Adam is not just the first human being (the literary-genealogical Adam) but also the first sinner, whose sin had an impact on those who followed him (p. 169)

McKnight concludes with an assessment of the "historical" Adam in chapter eight. Through careful analysis of Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:21-22, 45-49, McKnight concludes that the Adam of Paul is not a "historical" Adam, at least not in the sense that Paul would have thought that Adam (and Eve) have a biological relationship to all humanity by shared DNA. 

Perhaps most important in McKnight's discussion, however, is challenging the Augustinian view (via Jerome's mistranslation of Rom. 5:12) that we are all sinners because Adam sinned. Rather, McKnight argues, we are all sinners because we all sin: "each human being stands condemned before God as a sinner because each human being sins as did Adam (and Eve)" (p. 187).

In summary, Adam and the Genome provides a great entry into the theological implications of genetic science. As a non-scientists, I was able to follow most of what Venema had to say about genetics, and McKnight's chapters were equally accessible for the lay theologian. 

The Old Testament is Dying

While a student at Asbury Theological Seminary in the late 1990s, I had the privilege of working as Brent Strawn's research assistant. At the time, he was ABD at Princeton Theological Seminary, so I was tracking down every conceivable lion reference in primary and secondary sources. What I know about research I owe in large measure to those two semesters under Strawn's tutelage.

In the nearly 2 decades since, Strawn has written on a wide array of biblical and theological topics, has gained tenure and earned full professorship at Candler School of Theology at Emory University, and is a frequent guest on CNN as an expert on religious topics.

As a professor (associate level) of Old Testament, myself, I was eager to read Strawn's latest book, The Old Testament is Dying: A Diagnosis and Recommended Treatment. Using the analogy of language adaptation and language death, Strawn demonstrates that the Old Testament is in danger of becoming a dead language. In fact, earlier this week, Christianity Today published a story that seemingly confirms Strawn's thesis: even Christian theologians vastly ignore the content of the Old Testament!

Strawn tackles the topic in three parts. Borrowing from his patient healthcare analogy, Part One is composed of the battery of tests run on the patient called the Old Testament. These tests include inclusion of the OT in sermons, hymns, and the Revised Common Lectionary. According to Strawn, the results have come back positive, meaning the patient appears to be terminally ill. In Part Two, Dr. Strawn confirms the lab results with the patient's symptoms, manifest most prominently in New Atheism, Neo-Marcionism, and what he calls "Happyiologists" (purveyors of the prosperity gospel). In Part Three, the good doctor offers a course of treatment that, if properly administered, could save the dying patient. In short, although the OT is in critical condition, the patient can make a full recovery.

No doubt, The Old Testament is Dying will (or, should) receive plenty of publicity, so I won't attempt to offer a full, detailed review here. Instead, let me briefly say why it's well worth your time.

First, Strawn lays out a clear-cut case for loss of the OT language in (particularly) Western Christianity. His analogy with pidgin languages and creoles is impressively effective at driving this point home. Too often people think they speak OT, but they only know some vocabulary, but not its syntax; or their vocabulary and syntax is syncretized with the vocabulary and syntax of another religious language. For the OT to remain a living and distinct language, it needs to retain its syntax and most of its vocabulary.

Second, living languages are not stagnant languages. They adapt to new environs and adopt loan-words from contact langauges. English from the 16th century is not the same as English from the 21st century, but they are both English. By demonstrating through multiple examples how the OT was appropriated variously in different circumstances in later biblical texts, Strawn demonstrates that the language of the OT is a living, malleable language, but it is still OT language.

Finally, Strawn's treatments in Part Two ("Signs of Morbidity") are worth the price of the book alone. Here he deals with three of the most important theological issues facing OT studies today (and Christian theology, for that matter). Although there have been other, longer attempts at addressing New Atheism, modern iterations of the heresy of Marcion, and the heresy of the Prosperity Gospel, these three chapters (chs. 4, 5, 6) are thorough, precise, and nuanced, yet succinct enough so as not to become burdensome.

In my final evaluation of the book, Strawn has done an exemplary job of demonstrating not just the need for OT literacy, but how to (re-)instill OT language skills on the tongues of our youth. The arguments are straightforward and not overly complicated, and Strawn's style is, on the whole, engaging and interesting. At times the vocabulary might be challenging for undergraduates. As such, instructors at undergraduate institutions interested in using the book for an OT survey course will need to take that into consideration as they contemplate its adoption as a course textbook. It should pose no problems for seminary students.