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.
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.
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.