I
ICXCNIKA
Guest
I am reading a book, The Tree of Life by Roland E. Murphy, in preparation for my diaconate formation weekend. The book explores the Wisdom Literature of the Bible.
Here are a few quotes I have problems with and would appreciate any comments on the quotes and my own comments.
“The Noah of Gen. 6-9 cannot be said to be a historical character” (35). Perhaps not everything, word for word, in Gen. 6-9 is historically accurate, but it seems to me that the above quote casts some doubt on the historicity of Noah himself.
“The artificiality of the struture and events in these chapters [Job 1-2] suggests art more than reality” (35). Or perhaps this is art that is taken from reality. There may be literary devices used to convey the reality of the scenes, but how can we say for sure that Job 1-2 is artificial?
“…the meeting between the Lord and the Satan in the heavenly council [Job 1-2] is imaginative” (35). How does anyone know? How does a scholar determine what is imaginative and what is not, especially when we are talking about heavenly scenes. What else in the Bible is imaginative, then? The transfiguration, the scenes of heaven in Revelation…?
“In this book [Job] Satan is one of the ‘sons of God,’ the members of the heavenly court who do the Lord’s bidding and serve as his counsel. Clearly he is not the ‘devil’ of the New Testament times” (35-36). The RSV translation of Job 1:6 says “Now there was a day when the sons of God came ot present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.” While there is, in later verses, the suggestion that Satan acts as a “prosocuting attorney” (Murphy’s words) there is nothing that suggests Satan is a member of the heavenly court. Verse six says that when the son’s of God came to present themselves to God, Satan came among them. It seems to me that Satan simply came with them, but was not one of them.
Here are a few quotes I have problems with and would appreciate any comments on the quotes and my own comments.
“The Noah of Gen. 6-9 cannot be said to be a historical character” (35). Perhaps not everything, word for word, in Gen. 6-9 is historically accurate, but it seems to me that the above quote casts some doubt on the historicity of Noah himself.
“The artificiality of the struture and events in these chapters [Job 1-2] suggests art more than reality” (35). Or perhaps this is art that is taken from reality. There may be literary devices used to convey the reality of the scenes, but how can we say for sure that Job 1-2 is artificial?
“…the meeting between the Lord and the Satan in the heavenly council [Job 1-2] is imaginative” (35). How does anyone know? How does a scholar determine what is imaginative and what is not, especially when we are talking about heavenly scenes. What else in the Bible is imaginative, then? The transfiguration, the scenes of heaven in Revelation…?
“In this book [Job] Satan is one of the ‘sons of God,’ the members of the heavenly court who do the Lord’s bidding and serve as his counsel. Clearly he is not the ‘devil’ of the New Testament times” (35-36). The RSV translation of Job 1:6 says “Now there was a day when the sons of God came ot present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came among them.” While there is, in later verses, the suggestion that Satan acts as a “prosocuting attorney” (Murphy’s words) there is nothing that suggests Satan is a member of the heavenly court. Verse six says that when the son’s of God came to present themselves to God, Satan came among them. It seems to me that Satan simply came with them, but was not one of them.