TILL
Welcome back, Perry. I noticed that you said later in this posting I am
responding to that you have been very busy, and so you have been lurking. I
understand the situation you are in. I am having to curtail activity on the
list too in order to organize my notes for a debate in Oklahoma City. I
worked on them all this morning and only went to the list after I had put in
the five hours that I had resolved to spend on my notes. I will be doing
the same thing probably for the next eight weeks.
Anyway, if after our projects are finished, you would like to debate the
Exodus 6 genealogy, I would be glad to do so. Matthew needs some help on
it, needless to say. You will agree, won't you, that he took a terrible
beating when we were posting on this issue several times per day? At least,
I hope your allegiance to biblical inerrancy has not blinded you so much
that you will resort to patting anyone on the back who opposes the skeptics
on the list. I also understood that you were going to send a response to
my Uzziel postings. If you ever get it finished, I would like to see it.
ROBINSON
The point in EX 6 is to show the legitimacy of Moses and Aaron, hence
this is why the geneaology is clearly stuck in the middle of the
Narrative.
TILL
No, actually, Perry, most scholars recognize that the genealogy in Exodus 6
is an editorial insertion that was probably made by an Aaronic priest when
different branches of the tribe of Levi were vying to be recognized as the
only legitimate priests. I don't have the time now to go through the texts
that indicate such a struggle for power took place, but there are
indications right in the Exodus genealogy itself to show that this is the
probable source of this genealogy.
Notice these points about the genealogy:
(1) It begins at verse 14 and clearly interrupts the continuity of the
chapter, which is concerned with the conflict between Moses and Pharaoh. To
see what I mean, why don't you begin at 6:1 and read through the entire
chapter in one sitting? Then go back, begin at 6:1 again and read through
verse 14; then stop and skip to 6:28 , and see how the continuity of the
throught flows smoothly if the genealogy is skipped. Verses 28-30 may also
be a part of the editorial insertion that was included to restate what was
said in verse 12 and 13 just before the text was interrupted to insert the
genealogy.
(2) The genealogy begins as if it is going to be a genealogy of all of the
sons of Jacob, but when the editor reached Levi, he dropped the other sons
of Jacob and focused on Aaron's descent from Levi, and then the descent of
Eleazar and Phinehas, the priests who were Aaron's son and grandson
respectively.
(3) For some reason, this Aaronic line of descent was important to the
writer, and that is very evident from a statement that the editor made at
the end of the genealogy (right before the conflict between Moses and
Pharaoh resumed):
"These are the heads of the fathers' houses of the LEVITES, according to
their families. These are that AARON and Moses, to whom Yahweh said, Bring
out the children of Israel from the land of Egypt according to their hosts.
These are they that spoke to Pharaoh king of Egypt to bring out the children
of Israel from Egypt. THESE ARE THAT MOSES AND AARON" (vs:25-27).
Do you see how the writer was laboring to prove that this genealogy was
concerned with THAT AARON AND MOSES who led the Israelites out of Egypt, as
if it would be necessary to emphasize this at all, since no other biblical
characters were even named Aaron and Moses. In all probability, this editor
was an Aaronic priest who inserted the genealogy here to establish the
importance of Aaron and Moses and indirectly priestly descent through the
Aaron who was the first priest and the father of the first priests. In
making the insertion, however, this editor carelessly put a chronological
discrepancy into the text that simply cannot be harmonized with the
chronological claim of Exodus 12:40. Nevertheless, it is a problem that
biblical inerrantists are stuck with. It obviously gave Matthew fits and
reduced him to simply denying that there was a discrepancy and refusing even
to consider nonbiblical Jewish writings that wouldn't fit into the
how-it-could-have-been mold that he made.
Farrell Till
Skepticism, Inc.
jftill@midwest.net
====================================================================
For help, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"help" in the subject or body of your message. To unsubscribe from
ERRANCY, send a message to errancy-request@infidels.org with the word
"unsubscribe" in the subject or body of your message.