Biblical Hebrew Forum

["Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>]

Kevin:

Even your characteristic that physical 
references are allegorical is a concession to 
Greek philosophical thinking, one that I am not 
willing to make.

For example, what do we know about God? He is 
the one who created the universe (Genesis 1,
historical reference), who encountered Abraham, 
Isaac and Jacob (historical references), who 
acted to cause Israel to leave Egypt 
(historical reference), and on and on where 
each historical reference references an action 
that God has done. Even his communications are 
actions. In other words, what is known about 
God is defined by his actions into history, not 
logical arguments as in Greek philosophy.

Along the same lines are the anthropomorphisms 
for God. An English equivalent would be the 
statement "He walked into that situation with 
open eyes" which all but the most obtuse would 
recognize that the person in question did 
something fully recognizing what he was getting 
into; the closest to being an allegory being 
that it is a pictorial reference to actions, 
but not true allegory as in Plato's famous cave 
with the shadows. I think it is more accurate 
to call these figures of speech instead of 
allegories. I see no reason to say that ancient 
Hebrews did not recognize these as figures of 
speech.

Karl W. Randolph. 

----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Graham" <kevlds AT hotmail.com>
> 
> 
> Hi Karl,
> 
> I think what you describe fits the allegorical method of interpretation 
> best.
> 
> 
> “The Jewish Hellenist Aristobulus was interrogated by his King 
> about certain passages in the Bible, in which the hands, arms, 
> face, legs, walking and resting of God are mentioned.”(A. 
> Marmorstein, “Anthropomorphisms in the Earliest Haggada of the 
> Diaspora,” in The Doctrine of Merits in Old Rabbinical Literature 
> and The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God, p.3) Aristobulus (160 B.C.), 
> was the first Jew to use this allegorical method of interpretation. 
> For Aristobulus, “the story of God's appearance on Mt. Sinai,” 
> reveals the truth in allegory, as it represents “the coming into 
> the world of the divine power which pervades the universe and 
> proclaims the inaccessible light. The enormous multitude and the 
> size of the encampment about Sinai indicate that God's presence is 
> not confined to one locality, for he is everywhere.”(Robert P. 
> Casey, “Clement of Alexandria and the Beginnings of Christian 
> Platonism,” Harvard Theological Review 18 (1925): 87)
> 
> Of course, none of this apologetic has anything to do with Moses or 
> the Ancient view according to Judaism.
> 
> 
> > From: "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
> >
> > I have read a third option, with which I
> > agree, which states that often the
> > references to body parts refer not to the
> > physical objects, but to actions. An
> > "upraised arm" is one that is involved with
> > ction, such as work or warring. "Open eyes"
> > are looking. A reference to "feet" points to
> > mAccording to Casey, ovement. And so forth.
> >
> > I wonder if metaphor is a sufficient term to
> > apply to such thinking? In a society where
> > action seems to have been the basis of
> > thought (contrast to most Western philosophy
> > where form, hence also physical, forms the
> > basis of consideration), would not much that
> > we would take as descriptions of form be
> > references to actions? It seems so to me.
> >
> > Karl W. Randolph.

-- 
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm