Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Genesis 1-2 & 4G

Expand Messages
  • Joseph Codsi
    Elaine, Thank you for your explanation of Monday, July 26, 2004 11:46 AM. It is based on an in-depth reading of 4G. It shows a cultural affinity between an old
    Message 1 of 6 , Jul 28, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Elaine,
      Thank you for your explanation of Monday, July 26, 2004 11:46 AM. It is
      based on an in-depth reading of 4G. It shows a cultural affinity between an
      old and a new text.
      I will now ask, if I may, a second question.

      You seem to imply that the second creation story is deliberately put aside,
      as representing another culture and perhaps a more "primitive" one. Going
      back to the text of yours I had mentioned in my first post, I will ask you
      to comment on its second part, which reads as follows:

      <Instead, Jesus sets about correcting the effects of the second
      creation story from Genesis upon his contemporary culture.>

      What is so bad in "his contemporary culture" that needs to be corrected? How
      is this related to the second creation story?

      I see here a clear opposition between the Johannine and the Markan Jesus.
      Speaking of marriage, the latter goes back to the two creation stories, and
      bases his argument in favor of indissolubility on the second story (cf. Mark
      10:5-9).

      Would you say that the argument in favor of the indossolubility of marriage
      is based on a questionable exegesis on the part of the Markan Jesus, or on
      his use of the "primitive" story?

      So long,

      Joseph

      =============
      Joseph Codsi
      P.O.Box 116-2088
      Beirut, Lebanon
      Telephone (961) 1 423-145
      joseph5@...
      Yahoo discussion group: Historical Jesus
      Home: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/historical_jesus
      E-mail: historical_jesus@yahoogroups.com
    • Q Bee
      On 7/28/04 12:42 AM, Joseph Codsi wrote: ... Dear Joseph, In order to understand how the second creation story of Genesis (2C) might be
      Message 2 of 6 , Jul 28, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        On 7/28/04 12:42 AM, "Joseph Codsi" <joseph5@...> wrote:

        Joseph wrote:

        > Going
        > back to the text of yours I had mentioned in my first post, I will ask you
        > to comment on its second part, which reads as follows:
        >
        > <Instead, Jesus sets about correcting the effects of the second
        > creation story from Genesis upon his contemporary culture.>
        >
        > What is so bad in "his contemporary culture" that needs to be corrected? How
        > is this related to the second creation story?
        >
        Dear Joseph,

        In order to understand how the second creation story of Genesis (2C) might
        be bypassed in Jesus' teaching we must first look at the creation myth and
        its possible underlying message. Where the first creation story of Genesis
        (1C) differs will be helpful in the examination of the problems 2C brings to
        the culture.

        In 1C all that God creates is good. Humanity, both male and female are
        created in God's image, apparently simultaneously. In 2C the female is
        created out of the male rather than directly in God's image.

        I propose that 2C represents the establishment (or justification) of
        patriarchy within a herding culture which is diametrically opposed to its
        agrarian counterpart. The egalitarian agrarian culture held that 'woman and
        serpent' (wisdom) were the operative forces in living in harmony upon the
        earth. The herding culture of the Hebrews denigrates the symbols of 'woman
        and serpent'. By assigning blame to woman and the serpent the difficulties
        of life are explained.

        We can imagine that early Hebrew herders were often thrown out of the
        agrarians' gardens as they attempted to pasture their flocks on the ready
        food supply it offered. Obviously, the areas that were suited to
        agriculture were also the best grazing areas. It doesn't take a great deal
        of imagination to understand how the difficulties of nomadic life became
        equated to being 'banished from the garden'.

        A look at the imagery in the story of Cain and Abel explains the dichotomy
        further. Cain's offering of the 'fruits of the soil' is found unacceptable
        while Abel's offering of the 'best firstling of the flock' is found worthy.
        ISTM that Cain's offering is the symbolic offering of the agrarian culture
        who are the nomadic herders' enemy. Of course an agrarian offering must be
        rejected in founding a society that is in direct opposition to it.
        The result of the lack of acceptance of Cain's offering is Cain's resentment
        which, in turn, causes him to kill his brother.

        Now Abel's blood cries out from the earth. It is another symbol in direct
        conflict with the agrarian symbol of the blood of menses making the earth
        fertile. And, even though Cain's act is a terrible thing, he is protected
        by God with a mark upon his head that assures that he will live. So Cain
        goes off to a nearby town and gets him a wife and, by Genesis 4:22, a few
        generations later their descendants are workers of iron and bronze. And
        thus is the nature of the fallen state of humanity explained.

        If we initially look at the portions of John 1-5 that I have already covered
        as paralleling 1C there are signs of correction of 2C in play:

        1. There is at least one unknown disciple who comes to Jesus from JB who may
        be either male or female.
        2. At the Wedding at Cana we are told 'when the wine ran short'. This does
        not necessarily imply that they were running out of wine, but that, as was
        custom, only the officials and immediate family were served wine while the
        rest got plain water or something inferior to 'wine'. Jesus uses the water
        that is designated for ceremonial purification associated to preparation to
        'sin offerings' (animal sacrifice of the firstlings of the flock) and
        converts it into the wine of gladness.
        3. Jesus then cleanses the Temple by removing the means of exchange for sin
        offerings that were established by 2C. He 'raises up' a new temple - his
        own body. In this he also raises up all who follow his teachings as temples
        of the spirit. God is shown to be dwelling within man again as if 2C never
        happened.
        4. In the story of Nicodemus establishes how the new temples will come about
        by explaining that one may be 'born from above'/'born of the Spirit'.
        5. The final witness of JB shows that the system that existed before Jesus'
        ministry of which JB is a part is diminished and passing away as the
        'bridegroom' now has a bride, the people are now espoused to Jesus as the
        Word.
        6. Jesus chooses a Samaritan Woman as his first envoy to convert a whole
        town. Jesus breaks tradition by speaking with her and by using her to
        convey his message, the teaching of a rabbi. The matter of her many
        husbands and whatever the relationship may be called concerning the man she
        is with at that time is dismissed without comment other than that it is so.
        The 'living water' of 1C (spiritual wholeness) begins to spread out beyond
        the borders of the tribe.
        7. The Cure of the Royal Official's Son hints that faith is being spread to
        people who are in league with the Herodians. Even the son of a royal
        official will 'live'.
        8. The Cure on the Sabbath at the Pool of Bethesda (House of Mercy) takes
        place at the Sheep Gate. A man who cannot get down into the water when the
        water is 'stirred up' is made whole by the 'living water' coming from Jesus
        in the form of spiritual impetus to which the crippled man is quickened to
        believe. That it takes place at the Sheep Gate is significant as the man
        becomes a follower of Jesus by his faith that cures him.


        Joseph, I will consider your question concerning opposition between Mark's
        Jesus and the Johannine Jesus. I'm not prepared to comment on it impromptu.

        Do you have questions about what I've offered?

        Peace,

        Elaine
      • kymhsm
        Dear Elaine and others (and Frides) It has been a long time since I have engaged with the list but I have kept an eye on it. However, it is hard for me not to
        Message 3 of 6 , Jul 28, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear Elaine and others (and Frides)

          It has been a long time since I have engaged with the list but I
          have kept an eye on it. However, it is hard for me not to respond
          when a post like "Genesis 1&2 and 4G" comes up. As most
          would know I have always maintained that John (1:1- 20:29) was
          structured around Gen 1&2. It reflects every movement of the
          creation narratives - though my parallels do not match those you
          have suggested, Elaine, and I certainly do not accept your idea
          that Jesus rejected or was correcting the second creation
          narrative. The reason for my silence has been because the time
          involved can be significant and I am trying to rewrite my book on
          the structure of John. Hopefully I am only a few months away
          from completing that task.

          When I have completed it I will also update my website. Until
          then my outdated but still reasonable parallels between John
          and Genesis can be seen at
          http://homepages.picknowl.com.au/sherpub . Follow 'Kym's
          Book' to chapter 6.

          Concerning Frides post on the date of John, I have also argued
          for an early date which, even so, is post-Revelation. That date, I
          believe, is late 68.

          Kym Smith
          Chaplain
          St Andrew's School
          Adelaide
          South Australia
        • Q Bee
          ... (snip) ... Dear Kym, I will read your part 6 references with interest. Thank you for pointing out your work. Peace, Elaine
          Message 4 of 6 , Jul 28, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            On 7/28/04 10:59 PM, "kymhsm" <khs@...> wrote:

            > Dear Elaine and others (and Frides)
            >
            (snip)

            > Elaine, and I certainly do not accept your idea
            > that Jesus rejected or was correcting the second creation
            > narrative. The reason for my silence has been because the time
            > involved can be significant and I am trying to rewrite my book on
            > the structure of John. Hopefully I am only a few months away
            > from completing that task.
            >
            Dear Kym,

            I will read your part 6 references with interest. Thank you for pointing
            out your work.

            Peace,

            Elaine
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.