If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus.
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS 1.1-7.38 --- 8.1-11.47 --- 12.1-16.34--- 17.1-27.34--- NUMBERS 1-10--- 11-19--- 20-36--- DEUTERONOMY 1.1-4.44 --- 4.45-11.32 --- 12.1-29.1--- 29.2-34.12 --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- PSALMS 1-17--- ECCLESIASTES --- ISAIAH 1-5 --- 6-12 --- 13-23 --- 24-27 --- 28-35 --- 36-39 --- 40-48 --- 49-55--- 56-66--- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL 1-7 ---DANIEL 8-12 ---
NAHUM--- HABAKKUK---ZEPHANIAH ---ZECHARIAH --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- 1 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-16 --- 2 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-13 -- -GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- HEBREWS 1-6 --- 7-10 --- 11-13 --- JAMES --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- REVELATION
--- THE GOSPELS
If so please EMail us with your question to jonpartin@tiscali.co.uk and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer. EMailus.
Colophons
It is quite clear from an examination of Genesis that it is made up of a number of ancient records that are put together by a compiler, or by compilers. Obvious examples of these are Genesis 1.1 - 2.4, the creation narrative, which is distinctive in its own right, Genesis 2.4 - 3.24, where there is the distinctive use of ‘Jahweh Elohim’, Genesis 14, whose approach is clearly distinctive from the surrounding material, probably put together by a scribe connected to the court of King Melchizedech incorporating the treaty made between Abraham and Melchizedek, and Genesis 23, which is in the form of a Hittite covenant.
However careful examination of the narrative reveals other indications of early records. In order to understand these we need an understanding of ancient record keeping. Outside Egypt the most ancient records were made mainly on either stone or clay, to be supplemented later by leather. Professor Wiseman describes such clay tablets as follows: ‘The clay tablets on which cuneiform script was inscribed vary in size (about ¼ inch square to 18 x 12 inches) according to the amount of space required for the text. The inscription from left to right ran in lines (rarely ruled) down the obverse (flat) side, along the lower edge, then on down the reverse (convex) side, the upper and left edges. Where more than one tablet was needed to complete a work, each text in the series was linked by a catchline and colophon to indicate its correct place’ (Article ‘Writing’ in The New Bible Dictionary 1st ed.).
Where there was a single tablet, a colophon would be inscribed at the bottom of the page to identify the nature or ownership of the tablet, whereas where there was a series, as described above, there would be a heading which connected with the colophon (practises varied to some extent but the above is a reasonably close description of the general practise).
This serves to explain the phrases in Genesis, which puzzled scholars continually, the phrases commencing ‘these are the generations (toledoth) of --- ’. It is clear from its use that the word ‘toledoth’ can mean ‘history’ or ‘genealogical history’. Examination of the text of Genesis thus suggests that its use reflects colophons saying ‘this is the history of --- ’, placed at the end of records connected with the persons or subjects named. Had these not been very early, or had they been the invention of the writer, it is inconceivable that there would not have been a ‘history of Abraham’, and yet there is not, whereas it is perfectly understandable why he himself would have inscribed a tablet with ‘this is the history of Terah’.
Of further interest are the headings connecting with these colophons, as described by Wiseman (in New Discoveries in Babylonia about Genesis), which serve to confirm the situation. He identifies the following:
Wiseman adds convincing evidence to show similar practices from the written records of the ancient East. These early records in Genesis follow the recognised pattern. Any theory of the origins of Genesis must take this fact into account.
Thus the old theory called The Documentary Theory of the Pentateuch, which sought to see strands in Genesis by three different writers or ‘schools’, can no longer be accepted as reliable (even if it ever could, as it continually ignored evidence which was not convenient) for it totally ignored, or was unaware, of this evidence.
A further fact that backs up the above suggestion is that in Genesis up to the point at which the ‘these are the histories of -- ’ cease, all historic material is built round a covenant saying. It was the practise among the ancients specifically to record covenants in writing, as they were visible proof of the validity of the covenant, and this included the historical background to the covenant.
R K Harrison in his Introduction to the Old Testament follows the above methods and suggests that the whole of the section from Genesis 1.1 to 37.2 are made up of 11 tablets as follows:
He comments ‘there appears to be no event recorded in which the person or persons named could not have written, either from personal knowledge, or from other reliable sources. Furthermore where individuals are mentioned by name in the colophon, the histroy recorded in the various sections isolated above and identified with suggested tablets ceases in all instances prior to the death of the person named at the conclusion of the tablet.
He adds ‘there can be no real question as to the immense antiquity of the source material that is to be found in Genesis. Evidence for this includes the large number of Babylonian words that occur in the earlier part of the book, the topographical references, such as those relating to Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 10.19), and the number of glosses required to bring ancient names up to date (e.g.Genesis 14.2, 3, 7, 8, 15, 17; 16.14; 23.2; 35.19). Primitive geographical expressions such as ‘the south country’ (Genesis 20.1; 24.62) and the ‘east country’ (Genesis 25.6), which were used in the days of Abraham, never recurred in the Old Testament narratives as a description of the countries adjoining the south and east of Palestine, since these regions subsequently acquired familiar and well-defined designations’.
While we are not convinced that the situation is quite as simple as this, we consider that there is unquestionably validity to the main part of the argument, namely the evidence that much of the material is taken from ancient tablets.
If so please EMail us with your question and we will do our best to give you a satisfactory answer.EMailus.
FREE Scholarly verse by verse commentaries on the Bible.
GENESIS ---EXODUS--- LEVITICUS 1.1-7.38 --- 8.1-11.47 --- 12.1-16.34--- 17.1-27.34--- NUMBERS 1-10--- 11-19--- 20-36--- DEUTERONOMY 1.1-4.44 --- 4.45-11.32 --- 12.1-29.1--- 29.2-34.12 --- THE BOOK OF JOSHUA --- THE BOOK OF JUDGES --- PSALMS 1-17--- ECCLESIASTES --- ISAIAH 1-5 --- 6-12 --- 13-23 --- 24-27 --- 28-35 --- 36-39 --- 40-48 --- 49-55--- 56-66--- EZEKIEL --- DANIEL 1-7 ---DANIEL 8-12 ---
NAHUM--- HABAKKUK---ZEPHANIAH ---ZECHARIAH --- THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW ---THE GOSPEL OF MARK--- THE GOSPEL OF LUKE --- THE GOSPEL OF JOHN --- THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES --- 1 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-16 --- 2 CORINTHIANS 1-7 --- 8-13 -- -GALATIANS --- EPHESIANS --- COLOSSIANS --- 1 THESSALONIANS --- 2 THESSALONIANS --- 1 TIMOTHY --- 2 TIMOTHY --- TITUS --- HEBREWS 1-6 --- 7-10 --- 11-13 --- JAMES --- JOHN'S LETTERS --- REVELATION
--- THE GOSPELS