Biblical Hebrew Forum

[K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com>]

Petr:

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:09 PM, Petr Tomasek <tomasek AT etf.cuni.cz> wrote:

> > >
> > > Tob טוב in Genesis 1 could be understood as morally neutral, as it was
> in a
> > context where there was no immorality. That came later. Therefore, when
> God
> > mentioned that everything he had made was exceedingly pleasing, he
> referred
> > to the functional aspect.
>
> That's totally nonsense, Karl, the Genesis 1 (BTW, I don't know if
> cheechen ask just about the first chapter!) is a "preamble" to the
> Torah and as such it reinteprets old babylonian myths in legalistic
> (halakhic) terms. So your pseudohistorical reading of it is totally
> unapropriate.
>
> > Karl W. Randolph.
>
> --
> Petr Tomasek 
> <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek<http://www.etf.cuni.cz/%7Etomasek>
> >
> Jabber: butrus AT jabbim.cz
> SIP: butrus AT ekiga.net


The title of this thread specifically referenced Genesis chapter one. That’s
what I followed up on.

«Tanakh lists the six day creation as the beginning of history, referenced
in other areas of Tanakh as well, such as in Exodus 20. Further, there is
indication that Genesis was compiled of written documents that were handed
down from before the Flood through Jacob and Joseph. That would make the
Babylonian myths but garbled memories of the events at best. It is your
claim that is pseudohistorical and inappropriate for this list.»

The above paragraph is not my official position on this list (though it is
accepted as true history by many on this list, excepting the final
sentence), rather it is written in the manner that your response was
written. The reason history is off limits for this list is precisely because
history is so garbled that we can ruin this list with arguing which one has
the correct view of history. Most of us have agreed to disagree on this list
for reasons of comity, so we can work together on areas where we do agree.

As for my answer to Chee Chen, it was in reference to the literature and
context of the text. In the context of Genesis 1, the picture is given of a
universe prior to its becoming corrupted. That is the story. Whether it is
historically accurate or not is irrelevant to the answer I gave.

Likewise, historicity is irrelevant to the answer to a follow up second
question, namely the use of tob in Genesis 2: the use of tob in relation to
the tree of knowledge in the center of the garden is the same word,
referring to the same action, but this time in a moral context instead of a
functional context.

Karl W. Randolph.