OK it may be more than a touch of Abraham, more like a bucket load.
I've read a lot of Hugh Nibley lately. His "An Approach to the Book of Abraham" (ABA) the title is a rip off of his classic "An Approach to the Book of Mormon" but it was an excellent book. And then I perused his "Message of the Joseph Smith Papyrus Ver 2" or something like that. The "Papyrus" book is a reference book that talks about Egyptian documents and the application to Mormonism is supposed to be obvious. I've read parts of it but much of it goes right over my head.And then his "One Eternal Round" which is supposed to be his opus magnus. How's that for a "touch" of Abraham.
Of course I'm not going to try and review all of these books here, or any where, I'm just going to give the high lights.
The Introduction to ABA was probably the most interesting of all. In it Hugh Nibley describes how he was reading Icelandic one day because he wanted to stay close to his roots, and decided that it was boring and that he should start learning Egyptian. So he started taking classes in it. This was a couple of years before the Joseph Smith Papyrus (JSP) was found in the Chicago Museum, or where ever it was found, so that when it came out Dr. Nibley was ready to start making some comments on it. And he did make some comments on it. The first time that I became aware of Dr. Nibley was on my mission. I was looking through the library of the Chapel in Adelaide WA and I found the series of articles that he wrote in the old Ensigns. I took all the copies of those Ensigns back to our apartment and read them, then returned them. They were great then and they were great this time as well.
That is an amazing story about how Dr. Nibley was prepared to be ready for the finding of the JSP, and reading the whole book was worth reading just that story. I always wondered why Dr. Nibley spent most of the later years of his life studying the Book of Abraham.
When I read "One Eternal Round" the thing that I really got out of it is just how far the Lord revelation goes. It says in the Book of Mormon that they Lord gives to every nation just as much of his word as they are ready for and Dr. Nibley really makes a case for this. There is some criticism of his methods, and I've thought that some times he seems to stretch to find his similarities, especially in the Book of Enoch, but the point is that he's amazingly well read and maybe he does just see things that none of the rest of us see.
However I had a cool experience shortly after reading "One Eternal Round", and I think it is "One Eternal Round" where it is talked about. Dr. Nibley goes to great length to show that there is a hugh amount of literature that is apocalyptic in nature. One thing that is common in apocalyptic literature is that the prophet is about to die, or feels he's about to die and calls to be saved and then an angel comes and saves him. In the JS-H Joseph says that he was "ready to sink into despair and abandon myself to destruction" when he called on the Lord to save him and not an angel but the Father and the Son come to him. Very similar and I was surprised that Dr. Nibley never mentioned it, but maybe he did somewhere and I missed it, or maybe this was just a chance for me to find an exciting nugget of wonder.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Sunday, June 19, 2011
Gen 26-38
It's been a while since I've had a chance to write, but I keep reading the BKC when I get a chance, which is more often now that I ride my exercise cycle everyday that I exercise instead of alternating with bodyweight exercises. However, I've started keeping notes on when things strike me which I hadn't been doing.
One thing that I'd never thought about before is that Jacob gets treated by his father-in-law in similar ways to the way that he'd treated his father. In other words Jacob deceived his father to get the blessing, and his father-in-law deceived him. Also, the younger daughter is supplanted by the older daughter, in opposition to the way the younger son supplanted the older son in Esau and Jacob's case. This is pretty funny because now it seems pretty obvious.
I love the story about the way that Jacob increases his flocks. He strips off bark from branches so that they're striped then he puts them in a trough and lets the animals mate in front of the trough. He does only let the strong animals breed but I'm pretty sure that the striped branches didn't have very much to do with the animals coming our speckled. The BKC didn't mention this at all which disappointed me a little.
I've decided that this time threw the Bible I'm going to keep track of the appearances of the Lord. I've decided that I will only keep track of accounts that specifically mention when the accounts state that the person sees the Lord. In the Old Testament there are accounts of the appearance of the "Angel of the Lord," and sometimes the angel is obviously the Lord. This is pointed out by the BKC in Gen 16 where is states that the Angel is associated with the Lord in Gen 16:13; 22:11-12; 31:11, 13; 48:16; Judges 6:11, 16, 22; 13:22-23; Zechariah 3:1-2. However there are other accounts where this is not true Gen 24:7; 2 Samuel 24:16; Zechariah 1:12. These are the ones that the BKC points out but interestingly it doesn't mention the account of Exodus 3:2 where "angel of the Lord" appears to Moses in the midst of a flame. This account is obviously associated with God as well. I say all that because when I was reading Gen 31 I didn't count the appearance of the "angel of the Lord" which makes the appearance in the first of the chapter when Jacob gives an account of the appearances of the "angel of the Lord", but I'd missed in verse 13 where it the angel says "I am the God of Bethel." I'd missed that until I reread what the BKC said about the appearances of the "angel of the Lord"
Gen 32 tells about Jacob entering the promised land. There is a story about Jacob meeting a man and wrestling with him all night, and in the morning the man touches his thigh and dislocates it. Jacob however refuses to let go and then asks for a blessing and the man renames him Israel. However, Jacob names the Peniel "...for I have seen God face to face," The name Peniel means "the faces of God." The etymology of the name Israel may mean "God fights" which is a nice conjunction with the idea the Jacob wrestled with God, but also means that God will fight for Israel, the nation, as well.
Jacob is worried about how Esau is going to receive him, which would only seem to be common sense because he had threatened to kill him when they had parted company earlier in life. The BKC makes a big deal about Jacob's fear of his brother. I guess that does show that Jacob is a little less than 100% confident in the Lord commands to return to Cannan, but it seems to me like he was just taking reasonable. Esau however is glad to see Jacob, and doesn't want the presents that Jacob offers him as a peace offering.
Gen 34 is the story about Dinah which is sad, but it seems like her bothers seemed to over react. In Gen 35 Jacob and Esau have become prosperous that they have to split their holdings. Gen 35 ends with a small account that always surprises me, the brother bury their father together. So this means that back when Jacob and Rebecca fool Isaac because his eyes were weak, and then he blesses Jacob, I always think that this means he's near death, I guess it was a close call because here they are burying Isaac 20+ years later, but he's never mention after that event.
In Gen 36 there are two tol'dots, or accounts. Gen 35 was the end of the tol'dot of Abraham. This chapter is the tol'dot of Esau and his descendants, but there are two of them, and both of them are about the descendants of Esau. The second one talks about Esau's descendants becoming "Chiefs (NIV)" or "dukes (KJV)". I wonder exactly what this means because these men are on a couple of generation removed from Esau. Did they conquer people to become Chiefs? The BKC points out that there were no Chiefs among the descendants of Israel, of course that would seem to exclude Joseph, but I guess the point is true. Somewhere, I seem to remember, the BKC says that Israel was moved to Egypt so that it could become a nation without being bothered by being riven by intertribal rivalries and rising up of Chiefs and dukes. That's a pretty good point.
Gen 37 is the tol'dot about Jacob, so of course the story is all about Joseph from here on out.
One thing that I'd never thought about before is that Jacob gets treated by his father-in-law in similar ways to the way that he'd treated his father. In other words Jacob deceived his father to get the blessing, and his father-in-law deceived him. Also, the younger daughter is supplanted by the older daughter, in opposition to the way the younger son supplanted the older son in Esau and Jacob's case. This is pretty funny because now it seems pretty obvious.
I love the story about the way that Jacob increases his flocks. He strips off bark from branches so that they're striped then he puts them in a trough and lets the animals mate in front of the trough. He does only let the strong animals breed but I'm pretty sure that the striped branches didn't have very much to do with the animals coming our speckled. The BKC didn't mention this at all which disappointed me a little.
I've decided that this time threw the Bible I'm going to keep track of the appearances of the Lord. I've decided that I will only keep track of accounts that specifically mention when the accounts state that the person sees the Lord. In the Old Testament there are accounts of the appearance of the "Angel of the Lord," and sometimes the angel is obviously the Lord. This is pointed out by the BKC in Gen 16 where is states that the Angel is associated with the Lord in Gen 16:13; 22:11-12; 31:11, 13; 48:16; Judges 6:11, 16, 22; 13:22-23; Zechariah 3:1-2. However there are other accounts where this is not true Gen 24:7; 2 Samuel 24:16; Zechariah 1:12. These are the ones that the BKC points out but interestingly it doesn't mention the account of Exodus 3:2 where "angel of the Lord" appears to Moses in the midst of a flame. This account is obviously associated with God as well. I say all that because when I was reading Gen 31 I didn't count the appearance of the "angel of the Lord" which makes the appearance in the first of the chapter when Jacob gives an account of the appearances of the "angel of the Lord", but I'd missed in verse 13 where it the angel says "I am the God of Bethel." I'd missed that until I reread what the BKC said about the appearances of the "angel of the Lord"
Gen 32 tells about Jacob entering the promised land. There is a story about Jacob meeting a man and wrestling with him all night, and in the morning the man touches his thigh and dislocates it. Jacob however refuses to let go and then asks for a blessing and the man renames him Israel. However, Jacob names the Peniel "...for I have seen God face to face," The name Peniel means "the faces of God." The etymology of the name Israel may mean "God fights" which is a nice conjunction with the idea the Jacob wrestled with God, but also means that God will fight for Israel, the nation, as well.
Jacob is worried about how Esau is going to receive him, which would only seem to be common sense because he had threatened to kill him when they had parted company earlier in life. The BKC makes a big deal about Jacob's fear of his brother. I guess that does show that Jacob is a little less than 100% confident in the Lord commands to return to Cannan, but it seems to me like he was just taking reasonable. Esau however is glad to see Jacob, and doesn't want the presents that Jacob offers him as a peace offering.
Gen 34 is the story about Dinah which is sad, but it seems like her bothers seemed to over react. In Gen 35 Jacob and Esau have become prosperous that they have to split their holdings. Gen 35 ends with a small account that always surprises me, the brother bury their father together. So this means that back when Jacob and Rebecca fool Isaac because his eyes were weak, and then he blesses Jacob, I always think that this means he's near death, I guess it was a close call because here they are burying Isaac 20+ years later, but he's never mention after that event.
In Gen 36 there are two tol'dots, or accounts. Gen 35 was the end of the tol'dot of Abraham. This chapter is the tol'dot of Esau and his descendants, but there are two of them, and both of them are about the descendants of Esau. The second one talks about Esau's descendants becoming "Chiefs (NIV)" or "dukes (KJV)". I wonder exactly what this means because these men are on a couple of generation removed from Esau. Did they conquer people to become Chiefs? The BKC points out that there were no Chiefs among the descendants of Israel, of course that would seem to exclude Joseph, but I guess the point is true. Somewhere, I seem to remember, the BKC says that Israel was moved to Egypt so that it could become a nation without being bothered by being riven by intertribal rivalries and rising up of Chiefs and dukes. That's a pretty good point.
Gen 37 is the tol'dot about Jacob, so of course the story is all about Joseph from here on out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)