Use of symbolism/allegory in Genesis 1-4 [WAS: mtDNA Eve and the determination of humanity]

 
 
> Of course, Phil's third option looks remarkably like my allegorical one for genesis.
>
> rich faussette
 
Hello, Rich.
 
Being new to the list, I haven't had the chance to hear of your view, yet, and I apologize for that.
 
Maybe I should put boundaries on when I think a symbolism is allowable. I don't want to appeal to symbolism or allegory for anything in the line of Seth onward. I think it is all literal. I agree with Dick that putting it all into recent Mesopotamia works. However, I think the text is *screaming* at us that the line of Cain is purely symbolic, standing in to represent all of earlier human history in a nutshell.
 
For one thing, the parallelism between Cain's line and Seth's line make it very unlikely that both lines are using actual names of a real family. One of the two must have been purposely constructed to match the other. For another, the message of that passage is brought out only through that intentional use of that parallelism. So I believe the parallelism is the key to understanding why that passage is there in the first place.
 
The names in the two lines (placed in parallel columns) are:
 
Seth's line Cain's line
=========== =================================
Seth (no parallel)
 
Enosh Cain (var. Kenan)
Kenan Enoch (var. Enosh, note the criss cross)
 
Mahalalel Irad (var. Jared)
Jared Mehujael (var. Mahalalel, note the criss cross)
 
Enoch (again) (not used again in this line)
 
Methuselah Methushael (var. Methuselah)
Lamech (777 age) Lamech - 70 x 7 curse
 
One Noah Three sons
brings salvation develop human culture
 
Observation:
 
a. There is not one single name in Cain's line that isn't found in Seth's line until you reach the three whose poetically rhyming names are symbolic of their cultural accomplishments, Jabal = "Leading" or "Moving [with herds]", Jubal = "Trumpent" or "Playing [music]", and Tubal-Cain = "World, the Smith".
http://www.abarim-publications.com/Arie/Names/Jabal.html
 
b. Cain's line begins "Cain" and ends with "Tubal-Cain", forming a parenthesis on the passage

 
b. The double use of chiasms. Two of the pairs of names in Cain's line are a criss-cross of the corresponding pair of names in Seth's line. Each occurrence is what Hebrew scholars call a "chiasm", and this structural element (parallellism with a criss-crossed pair) is a regular structural element of Hebrew poetry. This is evidence of design, not randomness in the text
 
c. Both lines culminate in a full-blown fulfillment of the dominating theme (or purpose) of that line. For Cain's line the culmination is the development of human culture but also the expansion of sin and the curse. For Seth's line the culmination is salvation (Noah). This reads like Augustine's "City of God" where there is a secular city (the world = Cain) versus the city of God's people (= Seth). Clearly we are meant to see this parallellism and note the contrast between the world (Cain) and the subculture of God's people (those who are in the world but not of the world). The former develops culture and represents the main features of the world. The latter is a minority group but through it comes salvation.
 
And as Glenn points out, such major cultural accomplishments couldn't have been so neatly achieved by one little family. Either the text is relating unimportant little events in a literal family, or else it is relating major cultural developments in a **symbolic** family.
 
Conclusion:
 
It is hard to believe that such a neat literary construction could have been derived from real names found in **both** lines. The names in Cain's line must have been adapted from Seth's line on purpose to create the parallel. I have to conclude that this is clearly a literary construction. It is meant to symbolically boil down all human history (prior to the beginning of oral Jewish history), along with all its cultural accomplishments, into a neat little nutshell that contrasts with the counter-current of God's people.
 
So my appeal to some symbolism is restricted only to this part of the Bible (Cain's line and the two events that set it up: the Garden and Cain/Abel) where:
 
1. There was no direct transmission of oral history reasonably possible
2. Major anthropological and theological themes are being communicated
3. Nothing is being communicated EXCEPT major anthropological and theological themes
4. Obvious literal construction and use of symbolism (e.g., talking snake = devil) scream to us from the text that the author was intentionally using the literary genre that makes use of such symbolism
 
These four facts ought to be conclusive that this section of Scripture, the whole story up until Seth, is different than the rest of Scripture. I claim that everything in Seth's line and beyond is literal and located in Mesopotamia in agreement with Dick (but there is still the issue of interpreting the ages in the geneologies, of course). These are also four boundaries on the appeal to symbolism and I believe they define a consistent theory of inspiration.
 
God bless,
Phil Metzger
 
========================
Philip Metzger, Ph.D.
KSC Applied Physics Lab
YA-C3-E
NASA/KSC
321-867-6052
========================
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed herein are those of the sender and do not represent NASA, the Kennedy Space Center, or the U.S. Government.
Received on Wed Mar 1 10:02:18 2006