User:Grahamcrackered/sandbox
This is a user sandbox of Grahamcrackered. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. |
This is my sandbox!
{{course assignment | course = User:ProfGray/Religions of the Hebrew Bible | term = Spring 2015 }}
For Abraham's family tree:
[edit]The Genealogy of Abraham appears in Genesis 5, Genesis 10:1-7, 20, 22-23, 31-32, and Genesis 11. These genealogies are provided by P. [1]
- ^ Coogan, Michael D. (2014). The Old Testament: A Historical and Literary Introduction to Hebrew Scriptures. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 62-64. ISBN 978-0-I9-994661-7
Grahamcrackered (talk) 19:23, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Sister-wife narratives edit
[edit]Each of these three stories seem to mirror one another, however each of them emphasize a different point and only share a motif. Genesis 10:12-20 emphasizes the unforgiving wrath upon the adulterer without considering the possibility that Abram was at fault. In Genesis 20:1-6, Yahweh tackles the issue of of inconsideration when He enters Abimelech's dreams and doesn't allow the adultery to occur. In Genesis 26:1-33, the emphasis is behind the argument that the nations may bring peace or famine upon themselves depending on their relations with Israel, since Israel is the holy nation.
Grahamcrackered (talk) 19:08, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
I'm afraid that I can't see your proposed edit on here, but your citation looks good! Slfirme (talk) 17:54, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Mendenhall Outline
[edit]1. The Breakdown of the Covenant Form
- a. The fall of Shiloh to the Philistines
- i. Caused the reorganization of the Israelite tribes, which then led to the production of
an Israelite monarchy.
- b. The establishment of a monarchy
- i. Religious traditions
- 1. An asset in the unity that they produced between the citizens
- 2. A liability in the independence and autonomy under Yahweh which they fostered
- 3. “The monarchy had to maintain the continuity of Israelite religious traditions, and
at the same time suppress, ignore, or alter certain characteristics most closely associated with them.”
ii. King David
- 1. Worked out a modus vivendi
- a. An agreement allowing conflicting parties to coexist peacefully
- 2. Considered as the Golden Age
- 3. “The political demands and needs of the new state had to take precedence over the
felt religious obligations of the individual, clan, and village. This in turn meant that the state had to have powerful religious backing.”
- 4. A covenant relation
- a. The king was made king by covenant
- i. Israel was to obey the king with Yahweh as witness
- b. The Davidic line was to maintain the throne per the covenant and the fulfillment of
prophecy
- i. This was accepted in the South, but not in the North
- 2. The Rediscovery of Moses
- a. In Egypt and Babylonia, the people made attempts to recreate the Golden Age based
on prophetic writings
- b. The “book of the law” was discovered in the Temple at Jerusalem in the 18th
year of King Josiah’s reign
- i. Now known as Deuteronomy
- ii. Josiah and his people entered into covenant with Yahweh as witness to keep the
commandments of the Lord.
- c. The covenant of Moses had to be harmonized with the covenant of Abraham
- i. In Deuteronomy:
- 1. Moses speaks in first person instead of Yahweh
- 2. Moses becomes a sort of king to whom Yahweh has entrusted legislative matters
- 3. Law is given directly to Moses
- a. “For this great fire will consume us; if we hear the voice of the Lord our God any
more, we shall die… Go near, and hear all that the Lord our God will say; and speak to us that the Lord our God will speak to you; and we will hear and do it.” Deut. 5:25-33
- ii. Through this, the monarchy was given divine authority
Weinfeld Outline
[edit]i. Two Types of Covenants in the Hebrew Bible
- 1. Obligatory type
- a.Covenant of God with Israel
- 2. Promissory type
- a. Abrahamic and Davidic covenants
- - Modelled on the "royal grant" that was common in that ancient Near East.
- a. Abrahamic and Davidic covenants
ii.The political treaty vs. the royal grant
- 1. Both include:
- a. historical introduction
- b. border delineations
- c. stipulations
- d. witnesses
- e. blessings and curses
- 2. Differences
- a. The treaty is when the vassal owes something to his master, the suzerain
- - The curse is directed towards the one who will violate the rights of the king's vassal
- - Protects the rights of the master
- - A promise for future loyalty
- b. The grant is when the master owes something to his vassal
- - The curse is directed towards the vassal who will violate the rights of his king
- - Protects the rights of the servant
- - A reward for loyalty and good deeds already done
- - The covenant with Abraham and the covenant with David belong to this group
- - Abraham is promised the land because he followed God's law
- - David was given the dynasty because he served God with truth, righteousness, and loyalty
- a. The treaty is when the vassal owes something to his master, the suzerain
Mendenhall Paragraph
[edit]According to George E. Mendenhall, King Josiah then changed his form of leadership entirely, entering into a new form of covenant with the Lord. Because of what was known as the "book of the law" he wiped out all of the pagan cults that had formed within his land. He, along with his people, then entered into this new covenant with the Lord to keep the commandments of the Lord. According to Mendenhall, in this covenant the Lord was merely a witness to the covenant instead of an actual participant. This defines the covenant as a vassal treaty. Because this covenant had just been discovered, it had to be formed into coalition with the covenant that King Josiah's people were already serving under, the Abrahamic covenant.[2]
Hayes Outline
[edit]What motivated the Israelites to create laws that regulated intermarriage between Jews and Gentiles?
- a. Louis Epstein
- 1. The custom of endogamy
- 2. Enmity with other groups
- 3. Religious differences between the groups
- 4. Racial differences (the desire to keep blood pure or free from adulteration)
- 5. Self-preservation in times of assimilation
- b. Post-biblical discussions of intermarriage
- 1. Prohibiting marriage outside of the Israelite group led to Gentile impurity, not the other way around
Ezra and the Profanation of Holy Seed
- a. Ezra's law against intermarriage was based in fear of defiling the Holy Seed
- 1. The Torah disallows intermarriage because of the fear that Holy people will start imitating unholy people
- 2. From Ezra's POV, God separated his people for a reason and they must remain separated
- Ezra 9:2 and 10:19
- b. Ezra's law also disallows marriage between all nations
- 1. The Torah's law only disallows marriage between the seven Canaanite nations
Olyan Outline
[edit]T: The reconstructing, or restoring, of Israel through a purity ideology
- 1. Lev 18:24-30, Deut. 23:4-9, Deut 7:1-6
- a. A central role in the exclusion of foreign people groups
- b. "The removal of aliens without exception from the Judean community"
- 2. Ezra 9:2, 4
- a. Israel is the holy seed and it cannot be intermingled with UNHOLY SEED
- 3. Ritual impurity vs. moral impurity
- a. Ezra 9:1-2, 10-12, 14
- - Actions that aliens normally do are bad (moral violations)
- b. Neh. 13:28-30
- - Marriage with foreign women pollutes the holy bloodline
- DIVORCE and EXPULSION were the only way to cure the pollution of the holy bloodline
- Profaning holiness and polluting holiness are two separate, different things
- Pollution is more serious
- - Marriage with foreign women pollutes the holy bloodline
- a. Ezra 9:1-2, 10-12, 14
Olyan Paragraph
[edit]Olyan presents the argument that Ezra/Nehemiah's attempt of the restoration of Israel to it's original state was expressed through the expulsion and alienation of foreign peoples that was caused by both ritual and moral impurities.. The Judean people believed that Israel contained the holy seed, and through contamination of the holy seed (with unholy seed) the bloodline would be polluted. Olyan argues that there were different actions that were categorized by the Judean people as ritual impurity and moral impurity. Moral impurity can simply be removed, as in physical removal or separation between groups. This is originally what caused the expulsion of the Gentile people. They simply needed to be removed from the Judean environment and then the environment would be considered pure once again. However, ritual impurity is much more serious. Olyan argues that ritual impurity infects and pollutes covenants, thus a religious ritual must be performed to rid the infection from the people group. In Ezra and Nehemiah, an argument is shaped through both moral and ritual impurity that leads to the expulsion and alienation of the Gentiles. [3]
Paragraph for Tumah and Taharah article
[edit]In an academic article by Christine Hayes, she argues that ritual impurity is the reason for the Gentile expulsion and alienation that occurs in Ezra-Nehemiah. [4] However, in another academic article, Olyan presents the argument that Ezra/Nehemiah's attempt of the restoration of Israel to it's original state was expressed through the expulsion and alienation of foreign peoples that was caused by both ritual and moral impurities.. The Judean people believed that Israel contained the holy seed, and through contamination of the holy seed (with unholy seed) the bloodline would be polluted. Olyan argues that there were different actions that were categorized by the Judean people as ritual impurity and moral impurity. Moral impurity can simply be removed, as in physical removal or separation between groups. This is originally what caused the expulsion of the Gentile people. They simply needed to be removed from the Judean environment and then the environment would be considered pure once again. However, ritual impurity is much more serious. Olyan argues that ritual impurity infects and pollutes covenants, thus a religious ritual must be performed to rid the infection from the people group. In Ezra and Nehemiah, an argument is shaped through both moral and ritual impurity that leads to the expulsion and alienation of the Gentiles. [5]
- ^ Biddle, Mark E. (1990). The " Endangered Ancestress" And Blessing For The Nations. Jefferson City, CO: Carson-Newman College pp. 599-611
- ^ Mendenhall, George (September 1954). "Covenant Forms in Israelite Tradition". The Biblical Archaeologists. Vol. 17 (3): 73–76.
{{cite journal}}
:|volume=
has extra text (help) - ^ Olyan, Saul. 'Purity Ideology In Ezra-Nehemiah As A Tool To Reconstitute The Community'. Journal for the Study of Judaism XXXV (2004): Print.
- ^ Hayes, C. (1999). Intermarriage and impurity in ancient Jewish sources. Harvard Theological Review, 92(01), 11.
- ^ Olyan, S. M. (2004). Purity ideology in Ezra-Nehemiah as a tool to reconstitute the community. Journal for the Study of Judaism, 35(1), 1-16.