LittleToe....Source criticism of the Pentateuch does not blindly divide sources merely according to the distribution of divine names, for there are exceptions. In this case bny-h-'lhym "sons of God" occurs as a fixed phrase referring to the lesser divine beings (cf. Deuteronomy 32:8, Job 1:6; compare bny-'lym in Psalms 29:1, a genuinely ancient Yahwistic poem, kwkb-'l "stars of El" in Ezekiel 14:13, and "sons of El" in Ugaritic literature), and not to Yahweh or Elohim directly; moreover, "sons of Yahweh" is not attested anywhere as a "Yahwistic" equivalent of the phrase. Almost every critic I've read who subscribes to a form of JEPD analysis treats the passage in v. 1-8 as a unity except for the redactional harmonizing gloss in v. 4
Genesis 6:1-2
by Dansk 46 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
LittleToe
Didier:
How do the sentences breakdown, in that part of the chapter?
Also, what determines the breakdown?- And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose.
- And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.
- There were giants {Nephilim / brutes} in the earth in those days;
- And also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.
- And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.
- And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
- And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.
- But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Leo:
Yeah, but I'm having fun exploring a subject which I've only recently started to engage. Gen.6 is fairly safe as I have no particular axe to grind one way or another.Are you saying that 'Chapter 5' and chapter six from verse 9 are "E" texts, with this passage of "J" sandwiched in the middle?
-
Narkissos
Ross:
I think most recent translations correctly analyse the sentence distribution. Here is the NRSV:
When people began to multiply on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that they were fair; and they took wives for themselves of all that they chose. Then the LORD said, "My spirit shall not abide in mortals forever, for they are flesh; their days shall be one hundred twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days--and also afterward--when the sons of God went in to the daughters of humans, who bore children to them. These were the heroes that were of old, warriors of renown. The LORD saw that the wickedness of humankind was great in the earth, and that every inclination of the thoughts of their hearts was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that he had made humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. So the LORD said, "I will blot out from the earth the human beings I have created--people together with animals and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." But Noah found favor in the sight of the LORD.
The Masoretic accent system provides a kind of traditional ponctuation reflecting the Jewish reading in the Middle-Ages, but even if one disregards it the syntax of the unaccented text leaves little doubt as to the distribution of sentences (as you could in most cases reconstruct the missing ponctuation, with little room for hesitation, in an English text).
There are cases of doubt, however, especially in poorly transmitted texts (e.g. Hosea, Job); one formal clue is available in poetic sections where the meter of some verses suddenly breaks the general pattern. In such cases you have to conjecturally reconstruct an original distribution of sentences. This implies dropping the Masoretic accentuation, and revocalizing some words. But this is hardly the case in prosaic sections of Genesis.
Btw Genesis 5 and 6:9ff are "P", not "E". The existence of a written "E" document is one of the most questioned aspects of the traditional JEPD documentary theory.
-
LittleToe
Didier:
Btw Genesis 5 and 6:9ff are "P", not "E". The existence of a written "E" document is one of the most questioned aspects of the traditional JEPD documentary theory.
Oh, that's helpful. My primer was "Who Wrote the Bible?", so I confess I have a looong way to go in this field.
-
Dansk
I only entered this thread for amusement
Well, I'm glad you did, Ross, as there have been some truly sterling posts - which you have helped come about!
Didier and Leo, fantastic! I'm out of my depth and look on in awe. This is great stuff. I just hope lurking JWs are taking note.
Thanks!!
Ian
-
LittleToe
Ian:It's nice to have an opportunity to stir Leo and Didier up a bit, for a change.
It gives them an opportunity to show some of the reasoning behind things, rather than just present information. I think we're the all the richer for having posters like them and Pete here.I'm out of my depth and look on in awe. This is great stuff.
Me, too, but I'm slowly but surely learning the doggie-paddle.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained...(the sheep is for Gumby, so he knows we lurves him, too )
-
Dansk
Oh, yes, dear Gumby!
I'm still trying to get over what I saw in the mirror when I bent over!