by VorJack
In my last post, I wrote about one of the ways that the ancient Jews interpreted their scriptures: by finding hidden meanings within the text that were relevant to their current situations. This was usually done in the service of some exiting belief, i.e. That a certain person was the messiah or that the end times were upon us. Obviously, when you approach interpretation like that, it is going to have an effect on how you write your own works of holy lore.
Advancing by Looking Backwards
Pullquote: So one part of Genesis has been rewritten to provide comfort and offer the hope of eventual salvation.
What do you do when you’ve found a new interpretation of an existing text and want to pass it on? One way was to actually rewrite and expand on the story that you’re interpreting in such a way as to bring your interpretation out front. This process is sometimes called haggada (though this word also refers to a specific text).
One of the clearest examples of this practice is actually the Book of the Watchers in 1st Enoch, which I wrote about previously. The author of this story has expanded on a small section of Genesis and crafted a story of fallen angels who are making war, intermarrying with the humans and generally corrupting everyone.
The purpose of the story becomes clear when you understand that it was most likely written during or shortly after the period of turbulence following the death of Alexander the Great. Called the Wars of the Diadochi, or “Successors”, the period was roughly forty years in which Alexander’s generals fought for control over the lands he had conquered. During the first twenty years of the wars, Palestine and the surrounding region changed hands seven times.
In the story, the fallen angels are probably an analogy for the foreign invaders who are bringing both violence and Greek culture to the country. But, as the story makes clear, God has already heard the cries of the suffering, and already passed judgment on those that do harm to his chosen people. So one part of Genesis has been rewritten to provide comfort and offer the hope of eventual salvation.
Synthesis
Pullquote: Sometimes a older passage can be rewritten by weaving into another story, producing a synthesis of the two.
By piggybacking on existing scriptures, these rewritings could hope to attain a level of authority. And, in fact, we do find evidence that early Christians accepted some of the writings. Paul mentions the tradition that the Torah was given by angels (Gal. 3:19), which we find in the Book of Jubilees, which rewrites much of Genesis and Exodus. The Epistle of James speaks of the patience of Job (James 5:11), which works a lot better if he were referring to the later Testament of Job rather than the earlier canonical work.
So early Christians were reading these works and presumably accepted some of them, as well as the methods that produced them. This is important, since haggada can go to another level. Sometimes an older passage can be rewritten by weaving into another story, producing a synthesis of the two.
The most famous example of this is the story of the seven brothers found in 2nd Maccabees. The stories concern seven brothers and their mother, who are all ordered to eat pork by the King, Antiochus, who is attempting to forcibly Hellenize the country. The family refuses, and Antiochus has them tortured and killed.
The way that the story is written deliberately evokes the Suffering Servant passages of Isaiah (Isaiah 52-53). Words and phrases are selected from the prophetic text in order to reinterpret Isaiah’s Suffering Servant figure in light of the suffering of the Jews under Antiochus. However, the end result is a sort of hypertext which makes reference to earlier scripture, and as a result is essentially constructed of these references.
Wagging the Dog
Pullquote: And so the “argument from prophecy” is not so much a failure as far too simplistic.
The story in 2nd Maccabees is presumably based broadly on historical events: Antichous had Jews tortured and executed for refusing to follow his orders. However, this specific story is constructed with references to other scriptures in a way that reinterprets the older scriptures.
One could look at 2nd Maccabees and talk about all the prophecies it “fulfills,” but this would miss the point. Parts of Isaiah and Deuteronomy are being deliberately worked into the text by the author in order to tie the story to the older works and make the meaning clear. The events they depict probably never occurred in history.
And so when we look at a section of Christian scripture like the Passion Narrative in Mark, we have to ask, “Is this a historical account of real events that were foretold the Hebrew Testament, or is the author of the Gospel deliberately evoking those passages in order to explain the meaning of Jesus?”
And so the “argument from prophecy” is not so much a failure as far too simplistic. First – as I wrote last time – each individual interpretation is subjective and usually only accepted by those who share the interpreter’s preconceptions. Second, because the events on the story that supposedly fulfill a prophecy may have been written into the narrative specifically to evoke that prophecy.
Vorjack, thanks. Here’s what came to mind after reading your musings on the topic at hand:
1 Peter 1:10&11 says “Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you (Vs11) searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ WHICH WAS IN THEM did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow”.
Your final sentence that reads “because the events on the story that supposedly fulfill a prophecy may have been written into the narrative specifically to evoke that prophecy” seems to allude to the possibility of some vague, multi-generational, numerous men down through the ages prophetic conspiracy of sorts. But Peter, in contrast points to a divine conspiracy in the Godhead Itself who he says was resident in the prophets, ie the “spirit of Christ” within. Now I realize you are a skeptic, atheist, whichever title you have assumed and I respect that, but to me its almost more of a stretch to believe your position of grand (human) conspiracy than it is to believe Peter’s explanation which, if carefully considered is rooted in love, ie grace as Peter claims, mercy, etc.
As I’ve stated previously, I’m convinced after a quarter century of journeying, that one of our biggest problems, the hardest thing for us to believe, that just doesn’t make any “sense” to us in this whole messy world pertains to the love of God for us. And how can it unless we be “graced” to see it, to believe it by Love Himself.
In your previous prophecy post, I mentioned the significance of names in the Hebraic culture. Recently, I found this “coincidence” in Genesis 5, a hidden, prophetic message of sorts in a thread of first sons names that relates to our current discussions:
If you add up the names (and their meanings) in order of the sons listed in the generations of Adam until Noah who “found GRACE in the eyes of the Lord” (Gen 6:8) as they are recorded in Gen Ch 5 and put them all together it reads something like…MAN is APPOINTED MORTAL SORROW but THE BLESSED GOD SHALL COME DOWN TEACHING that HIS DEATH SHALL BRING THE DESPAIRING COMFORT, REST.
Perhaps there is more to this “prophecy” thing than mere “coincidence” or human conspiracy? Maybe, just maybe Peter (or the spirit of Christ in him) has something to say about it that’s at least worth considering? Jesus also said that “in the last days it would be as in the days of Noah”. Noah means grace, comfort, rest, what are we to make of all this, and how is it that this topic (Christ, who he was, is or isn’t) has so “flooded” human history, even atheist websites, etc.
All the best Vorjack, et, al.
Sorry, where’s your point?
As I’ve stated previously, I’m convinced after a quarter century of journeying, that one of our biggest problems, the hardest thing for us to believe, that just doesn’t make any “sense” to us in this whole messy world pertains to the love of God for us. And how can it unless we be “graced” to see it, to believe it by Love Himself.
Link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oKVPoHo-5Ak&feature=related
But that’s nothing of the sort, JC. Remember, the later writers – the newest, as to speak – knew the older writer’s writings. It’s no stretch to imagine someone has written something, and someone else, years later, reading that something, decided “Mm! This looks like this-” and written his own story to fit it – conscious or unconsciously.
Like what JC is doing:
1Pe 1:8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:
“Peter was not writing about what JC’s arguments of certain conspiracies.
Now, who was “peter” writing to?
Which gruop of people was “he” addressing?
He was (and still is since its the eternal, timeless spirit of Christ within him “speaking”, 2 Tim 3:16) to believers, to those “in” Christ and to all who have “ears to hear” what the Spirit (God) is saying.
What’s He saying (unto this day) DarkMatter? Do you know, can you hear?
See vs 13…”for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ”.
Revelation is God given, no man can offer it to you, is a “deep calls unto deep” impartation. But since most of mankind is unaware of the spiritual aspect of his being, is content with his natural life and identity, is “rich” in and of himself as JC put it, he never ventures into the other (glorious) worlds, realms that lie within him. They are lighted, beautiful, breathtaking. There, in that place you can really know.
But to enter, first one must “do the WORK of God”. And what is this mysterious “work of God”? Jesus was asked, tell us, what is the work of God that we may do it? (John 6:28&29) He answered “this is the work of God…that you…believe. Can’t you just see the disappointment on the disciples faces? They wanted to perform , do some legalistic task to gain God’s acceptance. God says, its not that hard, I’m not a cosmic Ogre, but a Lover.
Ah the simplicity of Christ, how it escapes us. (2 Cor 11:2)
“What’s He saying (unto this day) DarkMatter? Do you know, can you hear?
See vs 13…”for the grace that is to be brought unto you at the revelation of Jesus Christ”.”
Oh!, Jesus Christ gives me grace by JC(“Revelation is God given, no man can offer it to you”) … waiting for churches endorsement. don’t forget my name is Shepherd from Normandy, but what species are you JC?
Oh, damn. JC’s off his meds again…
John C “Perhaps there is more to this “prophecy” thing than mere “coincidence” or human conspiracy? Maybe, just maybe Peter (or the spirit of Christ in him) has something to say about it that’s at least worth considering?”
Prophecy is neither conspiracy nor coincidence – it is just, like all religion, based on wishful thinking. Peter, like the rest of the Biblical prophets, has nothing worth saying at all – just a load of vague and untestable mutterings that can easily be interpreted any way you want to – which is the whole point. Prophecy must be vague, and particularly must NEVER, EVER give a timescale. All those end-of-the-world-in-2000 nutters look pretty silly now, and (a testable prophecy from me) all the end-of-the-world-in-2012 nutters will look equally stupid three years from now. Jesus blew the timescale rule badly by saying he would return within the lifetime of his followers (and please don’t give me all the apologetic crap about this – heard it all and it’s as convincing as a poltitician’s promise) which is one of many ways we know he is no more the son of God than my daughter’s pet hamster.
John C “Jesus also said that “in the last days it would be as in the days of Noah”. Noah means grace, comfort, rest, what are we to make of all this, and how is it that this topic (Christ, who he was, is or isn’t) has so “flooded” human history, even atheist websites, etc.”
This is the sort of interpretation that drives me crazy (not, I admit, a long journey at the best of times). Jesus’ meaning is clear – the meaning of ‘Noah’ has FA cubed to do with it.
I still don’t know what you mean John.
I think his point is that the biblical prophecies must be true because they were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and if only we’d allow ourselves to believe we’d see this is obviously true. Or something.
On the other hand he is also saying this:
Mar 4:12 That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.
For he says “Now(now?) I realize you are a skeptic, atheist, whichever title you have assumed..”
This is a mysterious debate. I can’t understand what half the posts are trying to say.
I knew you would say that …
Praise the profit! I mean prophet!
The good old CoE lost another £40mil in a single investment in property in New York … is this why they are so against the “markets”, after all I they lost around £800mil in the last property crash.
At various places in the Gospel{s) the writer(s) make it clear that the event they are writing about fulfill already written prophecies. They are either inventing these stories or Christ himself is manipulating things so that “such and such prophecy can be fulfilled as written in such and such”,
A non-scriptural prophecy that actually affected the course of history … in that those involved in it alternately tried both to force it to come true and to prevent it from coming true … was the “Aima prophecy” during the Komnenos dynasty of the Byzantine Empire.
The truth is that, once it’s written, any prophecy ceases to be useful, since even if it successfully predicts an outcome, it’s possible that those involved could have contrived that outcome.