Biblical Hebrew Forum

[dwashbur AT nyx.net]

On 11 Jul 2006 at 11:51, George Athas wrote:

> Yes, Karl Randolph is right. It would be best if we considered how THWM (or,
> Tehom) is used elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible. However, at the same time, we
> must allow each occurrence to have the nuance it has.
>  
> When we do look beyond Gen 1.2, we see that THWM is often used in opposing
> parallelism with $MYM ('heavens'). Since the heavens do no seem to be divine
> in Genesis, or elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible, it's reasonable to propose
> that THWM is not seen as a divine being, but rather is a label to describe
> the depths of the earth/oceans.

Agreed.
  
> At the same time, we must recognise that in Gen 1 we have an ancient
> cosmology. The juxtaposition of this account with other creation accounts
> which do present THWM as divine is quite telling. That is, when Gen 1 is
> contextualised in its own world, things jump out at us. Gen 1 could have
> used the word YaM ('sea'), which is also divinised in other cultures (eg,
> Ugaritic), but the author of Gen 1 chose THWM. This juxtaposes directly with
> the THWM or Tiamat who is slain in a cosmic creative act in other ancient
> creation accounts. There seems to be a deliberate connection. Furthermore,
> since there is no parallelism in Gen 1.2 to oppose THWM with $MYM, it seems
> reasonable to suggest that Gen 1 has deliberately chosen the word THWM to
> present a specifically non-divine THWM which is nothing more than a "depth".
> Thus, one is struck by the very non-conventional (from the point of view of
> the ANE) creation account in which only one deity features. Thus, the THWM
> is not slain, as though it were a living being, but is rather 'separated' as
> a simple physical mass.

Something's wrong here.  I don't see the THWM in Gen 1 being divided or 
separated 
anywhere.  The first "division" that happens is in verse 4, dividing the 
light from the 
darkness.  Finally in verse 6, we have the RFQIA( created to be a "division" 
between waters 
and waters.  No mention of the THWM.  And this division is a side-effect more 
than a direct 
act, an effect of creating the "expanse" or whatever one wants to call it.  
But if we go back to 
verse 2, the only place in the chapter where the THWM is actually mentioned, 
we don't have 
any slaying or dividing or anything else, we have the spirit of God 
"brooding" over it like a 
mother hen guarding her eggs.  That's just the opposite of the whole Tiamat 
thing, which 
suggests to me that there is no connection.  Either that, or the author is 
creating a 
completely different cosmology from the ones his neighbors are into.
  
> We should also mention the astral bodies, whose overt labels are
> deliberately eschewed in Gen 1. They are not referred to as Sun, Moon, and
> the names of the various stars, all of which would have been recognised as
> divinities in various ANE cultures. In Gen 1 they are simply "the larger
> luminary", "the smaller luminary" and the "stars" (Gen 1.16). This
> de-personalisation means their 'rule' or 'domination' of the day and night
> (Gen 1.18) cannot be understood as the act of a deity, but rather the
> automated functions of created masses within a larger cosmos.
>  
> In short, it's as though the other deities which abounded in the other
> creation accounts of the ANE have been deliberately frozen as inanimate in
> the account of Gen 1. As inanimates, they serve as foils to reflect the
> activity, initiative, creativity and sovereignty of a singular ELOHIM
> ("God").

Yes.  A completely different cosmology, one that rejects the deification of 
objects.  I would 
question, though, whether the author even cared about those other deities.  
As you noted, 
he could have spoken of Yam, who figures a lot in Ugaritic stories, but he 
doesn't.  He uses 
MAYIM and other terms, and only mentions THWM in a context totally foreign to 
the Tiamat 
story.  So perhaps there's no connection to other ANE deities, and it's by 
design.

Dave Washburn
Encephaloriasis: That condition generated when the person you are dealing 
with is so 
incredibly stupid, you can actually feel your own brain cells drying up and 
flaking off.