You may want to look up what Keener writes about it in The Bible Background Commentary. It was the first source I went to, and I’d be surprised if no other commentators pick up on it.
I always visualized somebody humiliatingly dangling by some chain mail (or irksomely stubborn loin cloth - like @T_aquaticus spoke of) that got snagged somehow. … something like Prince Rabadash outside the castle in Archenland where he had attempted to jump down but didn’t make it all the way to the ground.
Not sure my visual images have gained much in accuracy … poetic justice of somebody’s own wicked devices becoming a snare to themselves - I understand that well enough though. Not sure the bombs images make much sense to me.
1 Like
Yeah, it was probably not socially conventional for men and women to interact alone in public and it might have been seen as forward for both of them to do it, but that’s a ways away from the overt propositioning that I have heard some people try to make it, based on the contention that wells were a common symbol associated with sex and women in erotic ANE love poetry.
Plus, cities in the Hellenized first century were not the same cultural context as the stories of the Patriarchs were set in.
I think the original audience would more likely make the connection between this narrative and John 7:37-38 where “living water” is an eschatological, Messianic symbol. Jesus and the woman make a connection to Jacob’s well, and invoking Jacob was invoking the covenant, which Samaritans were excluded from by Jews. In Revelation, John has living water flowing from the throne of God.
Revelation 22:1-4
Then the angel showed me the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb street of the city. On each side of the river stood the tree of life, bearing twelve crops of fruit, yielding its fruit every month. And the leaves of the tree are for the healing of the nations. No longer will there be any curse. The throne of God and of the Lamb will be in the city, and his servants will serve him. They will see his face, and his name will be on their foreheads. There will be no more night. They will not need the light of a lamp or the light of the sun, for the Lord God will give them light. And they will reign for ever and ever.
I just think that people who try to dumb down the highly theological discussion that the woman and Jesus were having to make it primarily about flauting social conventions or gender dynamics are doing a disservice to the woman, to how seriously Jesus took her mind and her searching, and to how effective she was as an evangelist entrusted with the gospel. In Orthodox and Catholic tradition she is St. Photina and was martyred.
3 Likes
I can appreciate how there is more there than just a marriage prospect. I also appreciated your comment about how Christ purifies a whore to be his virgin bride.
2 Likes
I used to read a book about biblical language and culture, one about science, and one either fiction or history all at once – intentionally.
Absolutely! Reading the first Creation account as though it was written in English under a modern worldview doesn’t yield much theology; reading it as the ancient near eastern literature it is yields a great deal.
The divide there is not giving commands and being obeyed; the other ANE gods could do that. The divide is that they could command distinct items, whereas YHWH-Elohim could command entire realms. There was no fight against darkness because it was defeated merely by YHWH-Elohim essentially brushing it aside by creating light and room for it.
Correctly it is YHWH: the V is the modern pronunciation. I used to know when the linguistic shift occurred and how, but that escapes me at the moment.
Quite so.
Ignoring the ANE context is disrespectful to the Holy Spirit – He chose those people with that language and that culture and literary types and worldview, and we must honor that by seeking to understand the message He gave in that way.
That’s a bit of an understatement – the two are very much alien to each other!
I encountered one recently that knocked me back. This is at Caesarea Philippi:
This rock face is on the side of Mt. Hermon. The Romans followed a long tradition of building temples there; the middle one is a temple to Zeus, the leftmost a temple to “the Divine Augustus” [re-dedicated to Tiberius], between them is a cave shrine to Pan; I don’t know what the rest are except that it was all for pagan gods. What’s depicted is an artist’s reconstruction of what it would have looked like when Jesus and the Twelve were there.
What’s interesting is that this was commonly referred to as “the rock”, and a large cave (not shown) a short distance away was known as “the gates of hades” – and this is right by Caesarea Philippi. That location is important because it’s where Jesus was with the Twelve when Peter made his declaration, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God”. So in view of “the rock” Jesus declared that “on this rock I will build My church”, and “the gates of Hades shall not withstand it”.
Being there would have made the disciples nervous: this was part of Bashan, realm of Ba’al and other pagan deities, next door to where the northern kingdom had put a temple to Ba’al and worshiped other pagan deities. In Jewish lore it was the location where the Watchers came down to Earth to take human wives.
It was sort of “underworld HQ”, and in that context, Jesus’ announcement was a declaration of war.
It puts a whole different light on Jesus telling Peter “you are a rock”!
3 Likes
The petard was a way to get gunpowder placed against the base of a wall of an enemy fortress before explosive shells were invented. The idea was to “hoist” the enemy wall (and enemy soldiers with it) to provide access for attackers. Those who carried petards and placed them were highly paid because timing on fuses was not dependable and so there was a risk of getting killed by the blast or the collapsing wall.
The image of being “hoist by his own petard” thus has an element of grisly humor in that it indicated that the petard exploded not at the wall but on the way to it, something that could result from intending to be a hero by carrying the petard that set off the rest, which was accomplished by cutting one’s fuse a bit shorter – and thus the hopeful hero with his plan to “hoist” the enemy could end up “hoisting” himself, an image of crafty plans turning to strike the one who formed them.
The term was an idiom for flowing water, which was believed to be purer and thus healthier than pond, lake, or well water.
2 Likes
It also tells something about the character of the persons involved:
Isaac is not even there, it is a servant. And Rebecca takes initiative to give water to all the camels! That highlights how Isaac is very passive, but Rebecca will do anything to complete a task. Which can be seen later with how they react to Jacob and Esau.
When Jacob sees Rachel, he immediately removes the stone from the well single-handedly. That shows how Jacob will do anything for the woman he loves, Rachel (and later her sons).
Moses saves Jethro’s daughters from shepherds and waters their flock, and later becomes the shepherd of Jethro’s flock. Which indicates that Moses will save the Israelites from their evil masters, become their shepherd, and water them with God’s laws at Sinai.
2 Likes
That makes the instructions in the Didache more understandable (Didache is one of the early writings among the Apostolic fathers):
“… baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit.” (Didache 7.1-3).
‘Cold water’ may mean something else in the original context than what it means here where lakes and sea freeze during winter. Cold water even after the ice melts in spring or early summer but I have heard of local baptisms where they had to first saw a hole in ice before the persons could lower themselves in water. Compared to those cases, we have been quite comfort-seeking when we have chosen to baptize in indoors pools during winter - is thick ice cover counted as “you are not able to baptize in cold water”?
3 Likes
Another example of how the ANE worldview can be utilized in the interpretation of biblical scriptures:
Revelation 21:1: “Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth passed away, and there is no longer sea.”
Some have claimed that there are no oceans or other seas in the coming Kingdom of God, based on this verse. If we look through the ANE worldview, does it support this interpretation?
In ANE worldview, earth was surrounded by water. (Flat) earth was surrounded by great waters, there was a sea above the firmament, and the springs and rivers got their water from the waters seeping from a sea deep below. Although the seas included great waters in the west (current Mediterranean sea) and south (Red sea), also the Sea of Galilee and the Salt sea (lakes) were counted as sea.
Is it likely that there are no big water pools in the future nor the waters that supported and surrounded the earth, not even that one which was assumed to produce the waters of springs and rivers? My answer is that it is not likely. If not, what could this verse tell?
Sea represented chaos. Although chaos itself, or the chaos monster (Leviathan, Rahab), were not considered evil, ‘sea’ (chaotic waters) produced disorder and danger that humans could not control. In the creation story, God brought order within chaos. That process did not lead to complete order - there were still the chaotic waters and great beasts in those waters (including chaos monster?), and the decisions of humans brought more disorder to the world.
The apocalyptic scenes tell that God will renew the creation and bring order to the world that suffers from disorder. The ‘sea’ probably refers to the source of chaos and disorder. When God finally comes among humans, order will prevail, disorder will disappear. That is my current interpretation. I have not read it from anywhere, just applied the knowledge of ANE worldview, so I may be wrong. Yet, I think this interpretation is justified.
5 Likes
Longman makes the same interpretation with the sea in Genesis and Revelation. It settled for me the issue of imperfection, like animal bloodshed, before the fall.
I see the chaotic sea applying to the quantum flux. Funny how it never really escapes you. For the ancients it was the stormy sea, for us the chaos has only gone down a couple more levels.
3 Likes
A petard is a bomb that is attached to a wall or door in order to breech it. So imagine someone running up to the gates of a castle filled with glee with the thought of attaching that bomb to the front gates. Now imagine the bomb going off while that person is half way across the draw bridge, being hoisted with their own petard.
Now imagine someone typing a social media post that they are sure will own whomever they deem as their online enemy. Now imagine that same post backfiring on them in a way that makes them look worse than the enemies they were going after. Hoisted with their own petard.
3 Likes
True, but in the context the metaphor/symbol/intertexuality goes deeper than that. Jeremiah describes God as the spring of living water his people rejected. Zechariah calls Jerusalem the source of living water, an idea echoed in Revelation with the New Jersualem description of living water flowing from the permanent presence/throne of God through the streets of gold. I don’t think these connections would have been lost on the Jewish audience.
3 Likes
And preceded by the imagery in the Garden, with it being the source of the rivers flowing from it It is also comforting to know that water gushing from a spring is available without having to draw it with a bucket from a well, but is freely given and available.
3 Likes
And echos of Isaiah 55. The moral of the story being, water for the thirsty was tied to Messianic, eschatological, gospel imagery.
1 Like
“Hoist with his own petard” comes up in the Rocky and Bullwinkle The Treasure of Monty Zoom episodes.
The idea of the sea as chaos also lies behind its absence in Revelation 21:1. Rahab and Leviathan were chaos monsters; Rahab also serves as a symbolic nickname for Egypt. Genesis 1:21 and Ps. 104:26 listing great sea beasts as just parts of God’s creation directly challenge the concept of chaos monsters rivaling the gods. (Although this has prompted jokes about whether Rahab of Jericho was named for a chaos monster when she was 2, her name is not the same word as the chaos monster.)
3 Likes
For those who might be wondering, the chaos monster might be more strictly phonetically transliterated as Rakhab, Rachab, or Raxab (middle sound is an achlaut), and the person is closer to Rahab in pronunciation.
2 Likes
I don’t know of any idiom using that. The word there is ψυχρῷ (psu-KROE), which is used of metals similarly to how we say “cold steel” indicating not so much temperature but solidity; it shows up as an idiom for “weak”, “heartless” (including, IIRC, “cold-hearted” or a “cold laugh”), “ineffectual”, even “dead” (think a fire, maybe a scent), “dull” (as in a play or music). I don’t think any of those are helpful.
The only thing I could think of in connection with water would be that cold water was considered invigorating and refreshing.
Not if you’re Russian Orthodox.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.