Thanks for pointing out the basic methodological issues here, Don. The conceptuality, motifs, and devices used in one piece of literature do not necessarily transfer to another piece of literature. Thus, because there is a metaphor in Deuteronomy does not mean Genesis must also be a metaphor.
Furthermore, in this case, one can understand the metaphor more readily in terms of its inception and use when one realises that the ancients generally did conceive of the sky as a hard panel up there. And, as you point out, Genesis sees it as holding back a body of water which, in the flood narrative, is unleashed on the earth below in an act of uncreation — an unseparation of the waters. GEORGE ATHAS Dean of Research, Moore Theological College (moore.edu.au) Sydney, Australia From: Donald Vance <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Saturday, 1 September 2012 12:44 AM To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: George Athas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, B-Hebrew <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] sky In all this discussion, the salient fact that the raqia separated the waters by lifting them implies a solid entity. The metaphorical language is evident in the Dt passage, but that doesn't preclude the conceptualization of the raqia as a solid entity, and a metaphorical explanation ignores the capability of lifting the water. Read Enoch. The sleuce gates/windows are taken quite literally. Donald R. Vance, Ph.D. Professor of Biblical Languages and Literature Oral Roberts University [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> _______________________________________________ b-hebrew mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/b-hebrew
