Some questions to Genesis scholars in contemporary Discussion

Those who are familiar with my axioms and stand on biblical issues will appreciate my questions. Those who are not, will be surprised. Let it be.

1.    Daniel Flemming wrote on History in Genesis. History? Wellhausen’s History or biblical History? He wrote it in 2003 for the Westminster Theological Journal 65.

2.    Drew Longacre wrote on “Charting the Textual Waters: Textual Issues in the Chronology of the Genesis Flood Narrative (with Appendix: A Critical Edition of the Hebrew Text of the Genesis Flood Narrative (Genesis 6:5-9:17). Longacre got it upside down. It is not a Critical Edition on the Hebrew Text of Genesis but the Analytical Edition of the Hebrew Text of Genesis and the Critical Edition of the Versions of Genesis. https://www.academia.edu/10335518/Charting_the_Textual_Waters_Textual_Issues_in_the_Chronology_of_the_Genesis_Flood_Narrative_with_Appendix_A_Critical_Edition_of_the_Hebrew_Text_of_the_Genesis_Flood_Narrative_Genesis_6_5_9_17_

3.    Ron Hendel wrote on “The Text of Genesis 1-11: Textual Studies and Critical Edition. It is a wrong header. The Text of the consonantal Hebrew of Genesis is the Standard and the Text measure for all the Versions. Thus, the Critical Edition can only be in the Version not in the Hebrew Text. The Hebrew Text is only Analytical.

4.    Ron Hendel also wrote on the Historical Context of Genesis but again the question is whether it is the Context suggested by Wellhausen, the Atheist Islamist who superimposed Homer Greek Redaction Criticism over the book of Genesis. That will make the real history very late, 10^th century BC or 8^th century BC or 6^th century BC or even others who put it in the time of the Maccabeans.

5.    Alice Mandell wrote on Genesis and Its Ancient Literary Analogues. Analogues? As long as she is not warming up Herman Gunkel’s Babylonian parallelomania to us. Enuma Elish is the source for Genesis! Enuma Elish was composed at Niniveh Library in the days of Ahsurbanipal in 650 BC. Moses wrote Genesis in 1460 BC if one remains truthful to the consonantal text of the Hebrew Form as startingpoint. Hello.

6.    Eahr Joan wrote on “1200-500, Biblical Narratives of Genesis and the Hebrew Bible”. Who told her to start the Bible in 1200 BC? Some confused ones who takes the Septuagint byzantine text (400 AD) as the source for the history of the narratives of Genesis. Cart before the horse case. The biblical Chronology of Genesis in the consonantal text of the Hebrew force us to move 1654 years before 2692 BC (Flood Year) for the days of Adam and Eve. 4346 BC. But deniers of that text and substituting the Versions in the place of the Hebrew, ends in 1200 BC.

7.    Jean Louis Ska wrote in 2012 on “The Study of the Book of Genesis: The Beginning of Critical Reading”, in The Book of Genesis: Composition, Reception, and Interpretation (eds. C. A. Evans – J.N. Lohr – D. L. Petersen) in VTS 152, Leiden Brill, pages 3-26. Critical Reading? Critical of what and who? Analytical would have been a better option. Critical is only the Versions and their variants. Analytical is the Consonantal text of the Hebrew.

8.    Juan Carlos Jimenez Romero wrote on “Statistical Analysis of Genesis Sources”. Sources? I know of three sources that served Moses the author as help in composing selectively from these sources: Book of Adam Genesis 5:1; Book of Noah (Genesis 6:1) and Book of Abraham. If it is the Versional Variants that were statistically counted, then on is not dealing with the Hebrew text but with the Variants in the Translations of it. It is not important for the narrative itself but for the textual history and narratives of the translators in later periods and their contextual burdens. The word sources does not appear anywhere in Genesis.

9.    Andrew E. Steinmann did a comparison of the consonantal Hebrew text, the Samaritan Pentateuch and Septuagint in parts of Genesis. My question to him is, which text did he regard as the Word of God or original. It is very important. Eclecticism is normless. That is a problem for evaluation and decision. It ends in nihilism. It puts the norm in the brain of the one who reads. From Revelation the Word of God ends in the Brain of a Human who pick and choose his own “word of God”.

10. William Austin wrote on Hebrew Chronology from Noah and Moses. Nice topic. I hope he looked carefully at my Devotional Short Notes on Genesis online. It will solve many problems. If he does not end in 2692 BC utilizing only the consonantal text of the Hebrew, then he needs to go back to the drawing board. He has homework to do. My hint is that Galatians 3:17-19 is the key needed to unlock the real time of Joseph [seed], not Abraham.  This is where scholars are making mistakes and ended up with a Hammurabi time Abraham!

11. David Toshio Tsumura wrote in 1994 on the “Genesis and Ancient Near Eastern Stories of Creation and Flood: An Introduction.” Ancient Near Eastern Literary and Linguistic Approaches to Genesis 1-11. Eisenbrauns pp. 27-57. My question to Tsumura is very clear. Comparing what with what? Enuma Elish and the Gilgamesh Epos was composed in the Library of Niniveh during the times of Ashurbanipal 650 BC. Moses wrote Genesis according to the text of the consonantal Hebrew in 1460 BC in the desert of Midiam. Is Tsumura guilty of Gunkel’s Bible-Babel paralellomania? Of Ugarit paralellomania? Of Egyptomania?

12. A very good friend of us is Bernard White. He wrote on “Revisiting Genesis 5 and 11: a Closer look at the Chronogenealogies”. Sometimes people find discrepancies or gaps they cannot answer. There are some rules we need to lay out when dealing with these two chapters: 1. The Versions will not solve the issue. Why? They are not the Word of God. Only the consonantal text of the Hebrew is the original form and Word of God. Anything else are derivatives or approximations. 2. A father can be a grandfather. 3. Sometimes elements are left out as we have also in the SKL the Sumerian King List. 4. There is a possibility that Genesis 5 is from the Book of Adam and Genesis 11 is from the Book of Noah. Thus two different scribe composed it originally.

13. Joel D. Ruark wrote about “A Methodological Study of Genesis 1-11”. My question to him is whether he is influenced with the myth allocations of Rudolph Bultmann. And Karl Barth. He was against myth allocations of the Word of God but ironically he fell victim of calling Genesis 3 a myth and Satan as non-existent. It is better to work with the consonantal text of the Hebrew as the original Revelation of God as true history in all it says unless it tells you it is just an allegory or parable. We cannot allocate things to the level of metaphoric. Or Figurative. We cannot make symbolical what is described as actual. Chronology. How did he suggest should we deal with that? Approximations? Real?

14. Dennis Linscomb ran into Babelmania and made it parallelomania and walked to the Bible and superimposed it as inspiration on the biblical writers. “The Ancient Near Eastern Context of the Genesis Creation and Flood Stories and Its Impact on Biblical Inspiration”.