Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Liz Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Rea [mailto:cctr114 AT it.canterbury.ac.nz]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 5:28 PM
> To: Biblical Hebrew
> Subject: Re: Who named Ichabod? 1 Sam. 4:19-22
>
>
> Liz wrote:-
>
> >What is also interesting about these verses is the
> >writer's understanding of what the Glory is.
> >The Glory went out of Israel when the Ark was taken,
> >the Glory was the Ark! The Ark was the idol, the hypostasis,
> >of YHWH, or indeed, YHWH himself.
>
> I know your stated interpretation method is to take things literally,
You're right! I often don't realize this myself, but that's true!
My default approach is to take things literally.

> but this doesn't agree with what we know about other idol worship.
> People who worship idols know that the physical object is not the
> real god, or at least that's the impression I get from everything
> I've read about religion in surrounding countries, particularly Egypt.
> If all the other people realised this, I don't see how we can claim
> that the Israelites were the only people who thought YHWH was the
> physical Ark.

The idol is the place where the god can be depended upon to be.
That is the purpose of the mouth-opening ceremony, to let the god enter his
idol.
The idol is where an epiphany can be guaranteed, the idol is the hypostasis,
the emergence
of the divine into the profane. When the idol/god is captured from a town,
the
people go into mourning, they don't just make themselves another one.

>
> >From the other descriptions we have of the Ark, the presence of YHWH
> was above it, not a part of it. If we are to believe your case, then
> how do you explain all the sacrifices to YHWH which took place on
> the high places?

Ah, funny you should ask. I'm in the process of rewriting a paper which has
been accepted for publication in JAOS. It is entitled "The High Places
(Bamot) and the Reforms of Hezekiah and Josiah."
I think the massevot were aniconic representations of YHWH. They seem to
have been
present in the temples and sanctuaries that dotted Judah and Israel -- for
example
Arad.

However, we're mixing up reality and story. I think that the story of
Ichabod was
written by the Deuteronomist after centralization. For him, the god was the
ark, or
associated with it. Not only the ark, but the other vessels too. Isaiah 52
says that
the return of the vessels to the temple is the return of YHWH to it.

I wonder more about Ezekiel. Did he believe the god visited him in Babylon
because the Ark had been taken already, and was then in Babylon too?
Or was the Ark not captured yet?

Best,
Liz

Lisbeth S. Fried
Visiting Scholar
University of Michigan
Department of Near Eastern Studies
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
lizfried AT umich.edu

Spem successus alit.

>