The skinny on the Leviathan and Rahab monsters (page 3)

peacefulpete

This reminds me of the modern remix arrangements of classic rock songs, they often sell even better than the originals.

I remember reading somewhere how the crossing water image had become a mere literary device in some pericopes for a scene change or "new beginings". The Elisha/Elijah transfer of power story (2 Kings 2:8) the end of Babylon's dominance (Is 47:2) is marked by her proverbially "passing over the rivers/waters", all the peole crossing the Jordan on the first day of David's reign as King (2 Sam 19) , numerous crossings of the sea and rivers in the Jesus story etc. Language and legend are interesting animals.

peacefulpete

This reminds me of the modern remix arrangements of classic rock songs, they often sell even better than the originals.

I remember reading somewhere how the crossing water image had become a mere literary device in some pericopes for a scene change or "new beginings". The Elisha/Elijah transfer of power story (2 Kings 2:8) the end of Babylon's dominance (Is 47:2) is marked by her proverbially "passing over the rivers/waters", all the peole crossing the Jordan on the first day of David's reign as King (2 Sam 19) , numerous crossings of the sea and rivers in the Jesus story etc. Language and legend are chameleons.

AlanF

Very interesting reading, Leolaia! One question though:

Near the beginning of your post you quoted Deuteronomy 32:8-9:

"When Elyon (an epithet of El) apportioned the nations, when he divided mankind, he fixed the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of El. Yahweh's portion was with his people, Jacob his share of inheritance."

This translation surprised me greatly, and so I looked up the bolded phrase "sons of El" in various references I have at home. All of them translated it as "sons of Israel" or something close. The sticking point is that your quoted rendering uses "El" whereas the Masoretic text reads "Israel". According to Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Botterweck & Ringgren) the term "Israel" is virtually always a proper name, and certainly can't be translated as a simple "El" since the term "El" is sometimes used alone (cf. Gen. 14:18-20). However, the Septuagint uses the phrase "angels of God" here, which might partially justify your rendering "sons of El".

Now, it struck me that the usual rendering of Deut. 32:8-9 doesn't make much sense. For example, the NASB has:

"When the Most High gave the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of man, He set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For the LORD's portion is His people; Jacob is the allotment of His inheritance."

What doesn't make sense is the way "the Most High" sets "the boundaries of the peoples". I can't see any connection between this and the way given: "according to the number of the sons of Israel." Nor can I see any connection between that portion of the passage and the reason given for it: "For the LORD's (Yahweh's) portion is His people..." Your translation, though, makes complete sense.

Any comments?

AlanF

Leolaia

AlanF....The following link should answer your question to your satisfaction. Basically the MT is a medieval late text and contains corruptions; the far older Dead Sea Scroll copies of Deuteronomy and the LXX have "sons of God", which therefore render the MT reading aberrant:

http://www.thedivinecouncil.com/DT32COOVER.pdf

BTW, it looks like the Heb. should be 'elohim and not 'el which is what I stated -- it is true that 4QDtq has bene 'el, but the linked article points out that a lacuna follows, and 4QDtj has bene 'elohim, so that is probably the correct reading. Bear in mind tho that 'elohim is used with El epithets as well as Yahweh epithets in the OT, and since Deuteronomy 32:8 has Elyon (= El), it is clear that El is meant in this passage, from whom Yahweh is distinguished.

Leolaia

PP.....Reading Isaiah is kinda like watching Moulin Rouge.

jst2laws.... I don't have much on the conflict myth in Sumerian literature, aside from the Huwawa creature in the Gilgamesh Epic.... if you have info, please share!

Narkissos

As for Deuteronomy 32, we've also discussed it in a previous thread:

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/66342/1.ashx

If I had to write it anew (after reading the present thread), I would certainly insist much more on the "Son of God" as a resurgence of the old polytheistic "god-son" character (i.e. Baal-Yhwh in relation to El) within monotheism, Daniel 7 being a turning point in this regard...

AlanF

Fascinating stuff, Leolaia. Thanks for posting that link.

Never having investigated the question of how accurate the Masoretic text is compared to the oldest texts, until now I've thought that it was the defining text. It's a revelation in several ways to know it isn't so. It explains several anomalies that have been rattling around in my mind for some years. For example, why are the oldest LXX texts so different from the Masoretic in so many places? Why would scribes change the texts if they thought they were God's Word?

The thing that most blows me away is that old polytheistic themes still show up in a few passages. It's solid proof of the evolution of Israelite religion during the time the texts were written and redacted, since the OT texts were obviously redacted according to the needs of the religious leaders of the day. This is positive proof that the OT was not handed down to the Jews verbatim by God -- something that biblical fundamentalists should carefully note.

On a lighter note, I printed out the link you provided and gave it to a guy who seems to think that the recent thing about "The Bible Code" has merit. Obviously if the Masoretic text is corrupt, it can't be the God-given document he thinks.

AlanF

toreador

Very fascinating Leolaia! Alan I didnt know you were into this stuff too.

Tor

ikthuce4u

(I'm a Newbie around here folks....and am posting on the interesting threads so I can get them on my Post History list)....

Leolaia

I think I just came across the oldest known version of the conflict myth in a mythological text from third-millenium B.C. Ebla (c. 2200-2000 BC):

"I have bound Habhaby. I have bound his tongue. I have found the barrier of his teeth. I have bound you on a black stone by the double doors and struck the Sea (tihamatim) with a reed. I have bound you by seven mighty contraptions. I have bound you by the zidanu and amana. I have bound you by the tails of the Sun and by the horns of the Moon. Seven youths and seven maidens are exalted, and [...] the Star (kabkabu). The bricklayer will lay the bricks by the double doors of Ellil, father of the gods and the Star has established him as representative to Ellil, father of the gods. Ellil, the father of the gods performs the magic. Spell of the Star. [...] I have bound you on Zazaum, O no-good one. [...] O Sun-god! May you lay the bricks and build the house of Ellil the father of the gods. [...] The Star is appointed as the emissary to Ellil the father of the gods. [...] The earth has confined the serpent (bashanu); O serpent in the sea (ba-tihamat)! [...] So says the magician Dagama [to the serpent]: 'I have smitten thee'. [...] May Hadd fetch the dazzling stone and the triple-garment for the Star [who was appointed to induce Ellil to perform the magic]". (ARET 5).

Very striking is the fact that the storm-god Ellil has his palace built after defeating the sea-serpent (bashanu, the same word that refers to Lotan in Ugaritic myth in KTU 1.5 i 1-5), the use of a word cognate to Hebrew thwm and Akkadian Tiamat, and that while contraptions, a reed, and celestial objects were used to bind and defeat Habhaby, Ellil uses magic through the person of Daguma to defeat the monster. As for the name Habhaby, it occurs in Ugaritic in unduplicated form in KTU 1.114 R 19-20 as the "creeping monster (hby) with horns and tail (b'l qrnm w dnb)" who attacks El after he drank in his palace and "El fell down as though dead, El was like those who go down into the underworld" (Asherah and Anat then cure him). One possibility is that the monster here is a prototype of Western conceptions of Satan, or a satyr-like monster. Pardee and Wyatt suggest that the name derives from Egyptian hpy, the deified Nile River worshipped in the incarnation of the Apis bull. He would thus provide the necessary horns and tail. Note that the description of the moon is consistent with the bull-iconography of Yarih and Sin in Assyrian and Mari/Nuzi texts.

The skinny on the Leviathan and Rahab monsters

Share this