Bible Background - Genesis 2
2:1-3. seventh-day rest. In the Egyptian creation account from Memphis, the creator god Ptah rests after the completion of his work. Likewise the creation of humans is followed by rest for the Mesopotamian gods. In Mesopotamia, however, the rest is a result of the fact that people have been created to do the work that the gods were tired of doing. Nonetheless, the desire for rest is one of the motivating elements driving these creation narratives. The containment or destruction of chaotic cosmic forces that is often a central part of ancient creation narratives leads to rest, peace or repose for the gods. Likewise it is the gods’ inability to find rest from the noise and disturbance of humankind that leads to the flood. In all it is clear that ancient ideologies considered rest to be one of the principal objectives of the gods. In Israelite theology, God does not require rest from either cosmic or human disturbances but seeks rest in a dwelling place (see especially Ps 132:7-8, 13-14). 2:1. sabbath divisions. Dividing time into seven-day periods was a practice that is so far unattested in the other cultures of the ancient Near East, though there were particular days of the month in Mesopotamia that were considered unlucky, and they were often seven days apart (that is, the seventh day of the month, the fourteenth day of the month, etc.). Israel's sabbath was not celebrated on certain days of the month and was not linked to the cycles of the moon or to any other cycle of nature; it was simply observed every seventh day. Bible Background Commentary - The IVP Bible Background Commentary – Old Testament. Genesis 2:4-25 2:5. botanical categories. Only the most general descriptions of plants are found. Trees, shrubs and plants are listed, but no specific species. We know, however, that the principal trees found in the Near East were acacia, cedar, Cypress, fig, oak, olive, date palm, pomegranate, tamarisk and willow. Shrubs included the oleander and juniper. The principal cultivated grains were wheat, barley and lentils. The description in this verse differs from day three in that it refers to domesticated or cultivated plants. The reference then is not to a time before day three but to the fact that agriculture was not taking place. 2:5. description of condition. A creation text from Nippur sets the scene for creation by saying that waters did not yet flow through the opening in the earth and that nothing was growing and no furrow had been made. 2:6. watering system. The word used to describe the watering system in verse 6 (niv: “streams”) is difficult to translate. It occurs elsewhere only in Job 36:27. A similar word occurs in Babylonian vocabulary drawn from early Sumerian in reference to the system of subterranean waters, the primordial underground river. The Sumerian myth of Enki and Ninhursag likewise mentions such a watering system. 2:7. man from dust. The creation of the first man out of the dust of the earth is similar to what is found in ancient Near Eastern mythology. The Atrahasis Epic portrays the creation of humankind out of the blood of a slain deity mixed with clay. Just as dust in the Bible represents what the body becomes at death (Gen 3:19), so clay was what the body returned to in Babylonian thinking. The blood of deity represented the divine essence in mankind, a similar concept to God's bringing Adam into being with the breath of life. In Egyptian thinking it is the tears of the god that are mixed with clay to form man, though the Instructions of Merikare also speak of the god's making breath for their noses. Ancient Near Eastern Mythology and the Old Testament Mythology in the ancient world was like science in our modern world—it was their explanation of how the world came into being and how it worked. The mythological approach attempted to identify function as a consequence of purpose. The gods had purposes, and their activities were the causes of what humans experienced as effects. In contrast, our modern scientific approach identifies function as a consequence of sturcture and attempts to understand cause and effect based on natural laws thaat are linked to the structure, the composite parts, of a phenomenon. Beccause our scientific worldview is keenly interested in structure, we often go to the biblical account looking for information on structure. In this area, however, the biblical worldview is much more like its ancient Near Eastern counterparts in that it views function as a consequence of purpose. That is what Genesis 1 is all about—it has very little interest in structures. This is only one of many areas where understanding ancient Near Eastern culture, literature and worldview can help us understand the Bible. Many parallels can be identified between ancient Near Eastern mythology and Old Testament passages and concepts. This is not to suggest that the Old Testament is to be considered simply as another example of ancient mythology or as being dependent on that literature. Mythology is a window to culture. It reflects the worldview and values of the culture that forged it. Many of the writings we find in the Old Testament performed the same function for ancient Israelite culture that mythology did for other cultures—they provided a literary mechanism for preserving and transmitting their worldview and values. Israel was part of a larger cultural complex that existed across the ancient Near East. There are many aspects of that cultural complex that it shared with its neighbors, though each individual culture had its distinguishing features. When we seek to understand the culture and literature of Israel, we rightly expect to find help in the larger cultural arena, from mythology, wisdom writings, legal documents and royal inscriptions. The community of faith need not fear the use of such methods to inform us of the common cultural heritage of the Near East. Neither the theological message of the text nor its status as God's Word is jeopardized by these comparative studies. In fact, since revelation involves effective communication, we would expect that whenever possible God would use known and familiar elements to communicate to his people. Identification of similarities as well as differences can provide important background for a proper understanding of the text. This book has only the task of giving information and cannot engage in detailed discussion of how each individual similarity or difference can be explained. Some of that type of discussion can be found in John Walton, Ancient Israelite Literature in Its Cultural Context (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1987). 2:8-14. location of Eden. Based on the proximity of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and the Sumerian legend of the mystical, utopian land of Dilmun, most scholars would identify Eden as a place in or near the northern end of the Persian Gulf. Dilmun has been identified with the island of Bahrain. The direction that it is “in the east” merely points to the general area of Mesopotamia and is fairly typical of primordial narratives. This, plus the direction of flow of the rivers (the location of the Pishon and Gihon being uncertain), has caused some to look in the Armenia region, near the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates. However, the characteristics of a well-watered garden in which humans do little or no work and in which life springs up without cultivation fits the marshy areas at the base of the Gulf and may even be an area now covered by the waters of the region. 2:8. The “garden of Eden.” The word Eden refers to a well-watered place, suggesting a luxuriant park. The word translated “garden” does not typically refer to vegetable plots but to orchards or parks containing trees. 2:9. tree of life. The tree of life is portrayed elsewhere in the Bible as offering extension of life (Prov 3:16-18), which sometimes can be viewed as having rejuvenating qualities. Various plants with such qualities are known from the ancient Near East. In the Gilgamesh Epic there is a plant called “old man becomes young” that grows at the bottom of the cosmic river. Trees often figure prominently in ancient Near Eastern art and on cylinder seals. These have often been interpreted as depicting a tree of life, but more support from the literature would be necessary to confirm such an interpretation. 2:11. Pishon. Analysis of sand patterns in Saudi Arabia and satellite photography have helped identify an old riverbed running northeast through Saudi Arabia from the Hijaz Mountains near Medina to the Persian Gulf in Kuwait near the mouth of the Tigris and Euphrates. This would be a good candidate for the Pishon River. 2:11. Havilah. Perhaps because gold is mentioned in relation to Havilah, it is named in several other passages (Gen 10:7; 25:18; 1 Sam 15:7; 1 Chron 1:9). It has most often been placed in western Saudi Arabia near Medina along the Red Sea, an area that does produce gold, bdellium and onyx. Genesis 10:7 describes Havilah as the “brother” of Ophir, a region also known for its wealth in gold. 2:21-22. rib. The use of Adam's rib for the creation of Eve may find illumination in the Sumerian language. The Sumerian word for rib is ti. Of interest is the fact that ti means “life,” just as Eve does (3:20). Others have suggested that a connection should be seen with the Egyptian word imw, which can mean either clay (out of which man was made) or rib. 2:24. man leaving father and mother. This statement is a narrative aside, which provides a comment on the social world of the people in later times. It uses the story of Eve's creation as the basis for the legal principle of separate households. When a marriage was contracted, the wife left her parents’ home and joined the household of her husband. New loyalties were established in this way. Furthermore, the consummation of the marriage is associated here with the idea of the couple becoming one flesh again, just as Adam and Eve come from one body. The statement here that the man will leave his family does not necessarily refer to a particular sociology, but to the fact that in this chapter it is the man who has been seeking a companion. It also may reflect the fact that wedding ceremonies, including the wedding night, often took place in the house of the bride's parents.
|