genre

...now browsing by tag

 
Adele Berlin Aramaic Archeology Bible transltion biblical studies Biblioblog Top 50 books Boston University Classes ESV exegesis Genesis 1 genre Harvard Hebrew Bible inerrancy Israelite Religions Job 5.2-7 Johns Hopkins Lady Wisdom lament lamentations learning languages McCarter Michael Fox N.T. Wright NELC programs NIV PhD programs Proverbs Proverbs 1-9 Proverbs 8 Psalm 15 sbl Structure systematic theology Targumic Aramaic Textual Criticism The Book of Job translation Ugaritic upgrading Verses out of Context word order wordpress
 

Genesis 1 and Proverbs 8 – Part 2

Thursday, September 2nd, 2010

In a previous post I attempted to briefly contrast Genesis 1 and Proverbs 8 as a way of illustrating the importance of of genre in Biblical interpretation. In this post I continue those thoughts with specific attention to how evangelical Christians–my own particular segment of Christianity, you might say–interpret Proverbs 8 vis-à-vis Genesis 1.

Why do most conservative evangelical Christians not even discuss Proverbs 8 in regards to the “creation wars?” The answer is simple. They instinctively understand that Proverbs 8 is not meant to be taken literally. Proverbs 8 is poetry, and like the rest of the Book of Proverbs it is filled with metaphor, simile, hyperbole and a plethora of other literary devices. We read Proverbs 8 and easily discern that its genre is not historical narrative. Because of this we understand that we cannot expect it to behave as a piece of historical narrative might behave. Yet, when we read Genesis 1 we often jump to the conclusion that it ought to be understood literally. Conservative evangelical Christians often jump to the further conclusion that this literal understanding is a kind of polemic against evolution. Yet neither conclusions are necessarily correct. Why should Genesis 1 be understood as historical narrative? I am, personally, unaware of any convincing argument for why its genre must be historical narrative, and not a whole host of other possibilities.

Where does this leave us? Certainly not hopelessly adrift, as some might suggest. It does reveal that understanding the Bible is not an easy thing all the time. It often takes hard work and study to understand the Bible, as it takes hard work and study to understand any piece of ancient near eastern literature. That shouldn’t dissuade anyone from studying the Bible, it ought to encourage everyone that it is a book worth studying.

It also ought to make it clear that genre is a key link in determining the purpose of a text. As I already mentioned, we instinctively understand that Proverbs 8 is poetry, specifically poetry meant to teach. It falls in the broader section of Proverbs 1-9 which is clearly addressed to young men as a means of starting them on the wise path in life. Proverbs 8 is part of this. In my opinion, Genesis 1 is a (possibly liturgical) polemic that shows how God is fundamentally different from the other gods (there are other ways to understand the genre and purpose of Genesis 1 that do not see it as historical narrative). The use of metaphorical and other non-literal language in either passage in no way takes away from what they are trying to do. Quite the opposite, the metaphorical and non-literal language in both passages adds to what they are trying to accomplish.

In the end, genre is vitally important to determining the meaning of a text. How one understands the genre of a text irrevocably impacts how how understands that text–whether as polemic, temple cosmology, ancient near eastern creation motif, chiastic hymn, or historical narrative. My own hope is that one day evangelical Christians may begin to understand that studying genre–and by extension other ancient near eastern literature which helps to flesh out a genre–is an important part of studying the Bible. In addition, I hope that one day we as Christians will understand that a disagreement over the genre and purpose of a text is normally not cause for throwing someone out of a church.

Posted in Ancient Near East, Hebrew Bible, Posts by Calvin, Wisdom Literature | 2 Responses »
Tags: , , ,

Genesis 1 and Proverbs 8 – Part 1

Wednesday, September 1st, 2010

When an average layperson thinks about creation stories and the Bible, he normally only thinks of a single story–Genesis 1. This is perfectly understandable since anyone who has ever attempted to read the Bible has likely begun with this chapter. It is also, obviously, about creation. When scholars talk about creation and the Bible, however, they often discuss passages beyond Genesis 1. Some may mention certain Psalms, or passages in the prophets. Others might comment on various sections of the Book of Job. Still others talk about Proverbs 8.

Proverbs 8 is a poem in which the speaker, Lady Wisdom, discusses how she was with God when he created the world. Indeed, one even gets the impression that Lady Wisdom assisted God in his creative activity. Below, I include the relevant verses from Proverbs 8. I assume that everyone already knows Genesis 1.

22 “The Lord possessed me at the beginning of his work,
the first of his acts of old.
23 Ages ago I was set up,
at the first, before the beginning of the earth.
24 When there were no depths I was brought forth,
when there were no springs abounding with water.
25 Before the mountains had been shaped,
before the hills, I was brought forth,
26 before he had made the earth with its fields,
or the first of the dust of the world.
27 When he established the heavens, I was there;
when he drew a circle on the face of the deep,
28 when he made firm the skies above,
when he established the fountains of the deep,
29 when he assigned to the sea its limit,
so that the waters might not transgress his command,
when he marked out the foundations of the earth,
30 then I was beside him, like a master workman,
and I was daily his delight,
rejoicing before him always,
31 rejoicing in his inhabited world
and delighting in the children of man. (ESV)

Recently, I’ve discussed genre and it’s importance in understanding the Bible. To illustrate this importance, I thought we might look at Genesis 1 and Proverbs 8. Both of these passages discuss what we might call the creation of the world, but they do so in widely disparate terms.

Genesis 1 is, of course, familiar to us. Proverbs 8, however, may be less so. Here Lady Wisdom explains how she was at the creation of the world. Before the world began God created Lady Wisdom. But she also gives us some hints about how God created the world. In this passage there is no hint of creation via divine fiat (i.e., God does not command things to be, and they are). Rather, God shapes the mountains. When God makes the sky firm (!) Wisdom is with him. Lady Wisdom explains that God set a limit on the sea, and made foundations for the earth.

There are quite obviously difficulties in reconciling a literal reading of this passage with a literal reading of Genesis 1. For instance, why is Lady Wisdom not mentioned in Genesis 1? Why does God shape the mountains here, but in Genesis he simply commands them to be? What is all of this about firm skies? In some ways, if one understands the background that both of these passages are set against (an ancient near eastern understanding of the universe, e.g., a solid/firm sky, the earth sitting on pillars, etc), they actually make some sense side by side. Nevertheless, if we were to accept the plain, literal reading of Proverbs 8 we come away with a rather different view of the creation than we do if we accept a plain, literal reading of Genesis 1.

Posted in Hebrew Bible, Posts by Calvin, Wisdom Literature | 4 Responses »
Tags: , , ,

Biologos, Al Mohler and Genre

Monday, August 30th, 2010

You are no doubt aware of the debate that has been going back and forth between Al Mohler and the Biologos foundation. Al Mohler’s latest can be found here. The most recent response from Karl Giberson of the Biologos Foundation can be found here. My purpose here is not to solve the debate because there is no resolution. Both parties are talking past each other. Giberson is a scientist, not a theologian or biblical scholar (though, in fairness, Biologos has several well known biblical scholars who contribute to the conversation there). Mohler is a theologian with a particular understanding of how to read the Bible. I’m not even sure that the debate makes sense. Dr. Mohler is obviously not going to change Giberson’s mind and Biologos is never going to convince Mohler that one ought to consult the ancient near eastern evidence when one reads the Bible.

Ultimately, I think Joseph Kelly is right when he says that this debate is really about worldview. But, I think that we can narrow things down a bit more. Certainly worldview plays a huge part in this debate, but I think that a more specific issue is also at play. I’ve mentioned genre and its importance in biblical interpretation several times recently. This, I’m afraid, is another example. Mohler understands Genesis 1 as an historical narrative. I’m not certain why he sees it as such. I had a discussion with someone who agrees with Mohler recently, and his reasoning for Genesis 1 being understood as historical narrative is that such an understanding was “the plain meaning” of the text. This kind of thinking has obvious problems (e.g., “the plain meaning of the text” presupposes an understanding of genre, thereby determining how the plain meaning is arrived at. Plain meaning in poetry is quite different from plain meaning in a royal annul, which is quite different from plain meaning in a law code, etc, etc). I would assume that Mohler has more robust reasons, but I am not aware of them.

So, Mohler understands Genesis 1 as some kind of historical narrative, because of this he believes that Genesis 1 is supposed to convey a more or less literal “this is the way it happened,” view of creation. But Bible scholars, some of them quite conservative, have proposed a wide variety of ways to understand Genesis 1. For instance, some think it is a liturgical hymn. Others think that it is a functional chiasm, the first several days creating abstract things and the later days creating the concrete containers (cf., Kline, Kingdom Prologue). Still others see Genesis 1 as speaking of the world not in literal terms, but in temple imagery (e.g., John Walton). I say all of this to say that I believe that Mohler, in making his understanding of Genesis 1 a requirement for being a Christian, has in fact made his understanding of the genre of Genesis 1 a requirement for being a Christian. As far as I am aware, the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy is entirely compatible with any of the views I mention above. That makes Mohler a conservative among conservatives.

It is probably obvious that I find some very large flaws in Mohler’s interpretation of the Bible. I think he has failed to take into account a plethora of cognate literature. Most disappointingly, I have not–as of yet–seen him discuss the ancient near eastern literature that has a bearing on Genesis 1. Even more disappointingly, I have not seen him discuss his own understanding of why Genesis 1′s genre ought to be understood as a literal narrative explaining creation in detail as opposed to a polemic against other nations’ understanding of creation, or as opposed to temple imagery, or as opposed to any other number of options.

I’ll be dealing with Genesis 1 and genre again in the next few days, this time with reference to Proverbs 8. Stay tuned.

Posted in Hebrew Bible, Posts by Calvin, Theology | 6 Responses »
Tags: , , ,

On Maps and Genre

Saturday, August 28th, 2010

Charles Halton has a nice little post up about Mappae Mundi and biblical genres. I’ve been doing a little bit of thinking about genre recently, and Charles’ post really resonated with some of my own thoughts. Somewhat ironically, when I looked at his first map image my initial thought was, “Well, that’s not very accurate.” This caused me to reflect a bit on what I see as one of the major problems when it comes to genre and the Bible; namely that readers of the Bible–especially conservative evangelicals with whom I have the most experience–are taught to expect certain things from the Bible.

Let me give an example. A conservative evangelical Christian might read any number of prophecies in the Hebrew Bible and automatically apply that prophecy to Jesus Christ, because she has been predisposed to do so. Whether formally or not, she has been taught to read biblical prophecy in a certain way. Similar things take place when a reader fails to understand when metaphor is being used and when it is not. Conservative evangelicals are regularly taught that the Bible is a history book. As a result, they expect it to conform to the norms of modern history books–much like I automatically expected Charles’ map image to conform to my modern idea of what a map is for.

One could look at this from another direction. I have often heard pastors declare that the Bible is God’s love letter to each individual in a congregation. Pastors often mean well when they say this, but I think that it again leads to a misunderstanding of exactly what the Bible is. This in turn leads to a misreading of the text because the reader expects one thing but encounters something that is, in actuality, something quite different. This is, of course, at the heart of the evangelical debates about inerrancy, creationism, etc. Charles points out that looking at cognate texts can help us understand the Bible. He’s absolutely right. Looking at other ancient near eastern texts helps the modern reader to approach the Bible in the proper light so that when it does not conform to a modern ideal of a love letter, or history book, or whatever else, we are able to understand why and interpret it properly.

As it turns out, the map that Charles displayed wasn’t inaccurate at all. My expectations of it were what was inaccurate.

Posted in Hebrew Bible, Posts by Calvin, Responses | 1 Response »
Tags: ,

Lament Forms in Lamentations 2: Part I

Monday, July 13th, 2009

My next two posts on Lamentations will focus on identifying the form of Lamentations 2 (though it applies generally to Lamentations as a whole as well). Keep in mind that this is a very broad overview of the issues as part of a larger paper, so there is obviously a lot here that could be treated much more in depth. Once again, enjoy, and comments are always welcome!

The genre of Lamentations seems almost laughably obvious, as it is reflected in the English title. Lamentations is part of the broad category of lament literature, a genre which at its core is “a cry uttered when life falls apart.”1 The book is composed of five separate “laments.” Chapter two is one of these laments, and verses 18-22 are one part of the lament of chapter two. Identifying the type of lament in chapter two, and the laments of Lamentations as a whole, is more complex.

The most well known biblical laments are, of course, the psalmic laments, which are in and of themselves broken down into two types: the individual and the community lament. Other forms of lament are the dirge (funeral lament) and the city lament. The problem with Lamentations, especially chapters one, two, and four, is that it does not fit neatly into any of the lament forms named above. That is to say, it is not just that the lament is missing parts of a typical community lament, for instance, but rather that it appears to be a mixture of several types of laments. Chapter two is one of these “hybrid” forms.

The first type of lament that has similarities to the chapter in question is the community lament. The community lament generally consists of the following parts:2

  1. Address to God
  2. Complaint (against God, themselves, and/or the enemy)
  3. Review of God’s past acts
  4. Petition
  5. Divine response3
  6. Vow to praise

In the community lament, the community cries out to God because of a disaster by which the whole people are affected. The community lament seeks to prompt God to action to help and deliver his people. In many ways, chapter two has similarities with the community lament. A “disaster par excellence” was at hand, and the community cries out to God in the hopes that he will act, or in the case of chapter two, have mercy after all.4 However, unlike the community (or individual) lament, the chapter consists entirely of the complaint and petition portions of the lament. There is no summary of God’s past gracious acts and no hint of a response from God. Chapter two, especially, is entirely consumed by reviewing not the gracious acts of God but the recent destructive acts of God (vs. 1-18; complaint against God) and a demand for God to act (vs. 19-22; petition). Certainly, there is no vow of praise (or an expression of confidence, as in the related individual lament). One might then ask, can chapter two really be called a community lament in form, when it is missing so many of the crucial pieces of the lament?

Another possibility that may have had influence on Lamentations chapter two is the funeral dirge, or qinah form. Examples of actual dirges in the Bible are limited, but the prophets make use of the dirge form metaphorically in many instances.5 Elements of a dirge may include any of the following:6

  1. Announcement that a death has occurred
  2. Summons to mourn
  3. Thematic statement of finality
  4. Contrast motif
  5. Reference to the impact of the demise upon immediate bystanders
  6. Description of a general state of distress

The opening איכה of Lamentations 2 might be said to have similarities to a dirge. Additionally, there is a clear “summons to mourn” and certainly a description of suffering. Nevertheless, a true qinah was used for mourning over the death of an individual; any similarities to the dirge in Lamentations 2 are purely metaphorical in nature. Adele Berlin notes the similarities of the poems in Lamentations to both a community lament and a dirge, and suggests a new form for the laments that is part community lament, part dirge, with a little bit of uniqueness thrown in: the Jerusalem lament.7

The final type of lament that has been compared extensively to the laments of Lamentations is the Mesopotamian city lament. These laments, which “describe the destruction of particular cities and their important shrines,” date to the 2nd millennium BCE.8 The features of a city lament are as follows:9

  1. A somber and mournful mood
  2. Specific literary techniques: interchange of speakers, contrast and reversal, focus on a deity, kirugu form, lists
  3. Divine abandonment
  4. Assignment of responsibility to divine council
  5. Divine agent of destruction
  6. Destruction of the city, sanctuary, people, and their customs
  7. A weeping goddess
  8. Lamentation
  9. Restoration of the city and return of the gods

F. W. Dobbs-Allsop has compared and contrasted each of these elements with the poems in Lamentations and comes to the conclusion that they have many features in common. However, he notes that ultimately the author of Lamentations does not copy exactly the city lament, but molds it to Israelite customs and beliefs.10 Most scholars now admit at least some similarities between Lamentations and the Mesopotamian city lament genre, though not all agree that the city lament is the most important influence on Lamentations.11

  1. Longman, Jeremiah, Lamentations, 330. ↩
  2. The list to follow is taken from Westermann, The Psalms, 35-43. ↩
  3. This part is perhaps negligible, since even Westermann admits that it is only barely hinted at in a few community laments. Westermann, The Psalms, 42-43. ↩
  4. Gottwald, Studies, 34. ↩
  5. Westermann, Lamentations, 1-2 identifies only two actual recorded dirges, but several artistic imitations of dirges, most notably David’s lament over Saul and Jonathan in 2 Sam. 1:19-27, and “prophetic announcements of judgment clothed in the language of a dirge,” p. 2. ↩
  6. List taken from Westermann, Lamentations, 2. ↩
  7. Berlin, Lamentations, 25. ↩
  8. F.W. Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, 13. ↩
  9. The following list is summarized from Dobbs-Allsopp, Weep, 30-96. ↩
  10. Ibid., 95-96. ↩
  11. Berlin, Lamentations, 26-30 sees the community lament as the most important influence, and raises some objections and major differences between Lamentations and the city laments. ↩

Posted in Hebrew, Hebrew Bible, Posts by Mandy | No Responses »
Tags: , , , , , , ,