«=CNUGM / 2KGRG, JGSKS =UDNKTTGF HPR TJG /GIRGG PH ;J/ CT TJG ?OKVGRSKTY PH =T,OFRGWS &$$) 1UMM NGTCFCTC HPR TJKS KTGN KS CVCKMCDMG KO ...»
is highly fragmentary and that the variances do not affect the intertextuality, they are not enumerated here. A second difference that does affect the intertextual relationship with Gen 1.1-5 is the inclusion of night (nu,x) as exemplary of darkness and day (h`me,ra) of light. These appear to be absent in 4QJuba 10, though the state of the fragment precludes absolute certainty.27 The primary lacuna in Gen 1.1-5 that appears to give rise to this text, is the grammatical ambiguity of the relationship of the first three verses of Genesis. It is my assertion that this ambiguity plays into the cosmological speculation of creatio ex nihilo. As is noted in chapter one,28 the Hebrew of Genesis 1.1-3 is ambiguous enough to allow a variety of readings, a basic one (ascribed to by this author) is that v.1 is a dependent clause, v.2 a parenthetic clause, with v. 3 providing the main clause. A byproduct of this reading that sees light as the first object of God's creative speech in v.3 is that there is primordial, pre-created stuff that includes water, darkness, wind, etc. If such primordial stuff poses a theological and/or grammatical problem, then it must be explained. The author of Jubilees poses, what seems to be, the earliest solution.29 In line with the heptadic theme that runs throughout MT Gen 1.1a,30 the solution is proposed in Jub 2.3 – there were seven great works on the first day.
This quotation of Jub 2.2-3 is taken from Epiphanius, On Weights and Measures, 22. This Greek text used here is taken from A.-M. Denis, ed., Fragmenta Pseudepigraphorum Graeca, PVTG 3, Leiden: Brill, 1970) 71-72. The verse numbers in this Greek text correspond with the English translation of the Ethiopian, per Charles, APOT, 2.13Epiphanius (c.315-403 CE) was a Jewish convert to Christianity, growing up in Palestine and serving as the bishop of Salamis (later Constantia), Cyprus. It is not beyond speculation that this translation was done post-200 CE, though it should be noted that this pericope bears no obvious Christian tampering.
J.C. VanderKam and J.T. Milik, DJD XIII.13. See above, p. 116.
G. Vermes, “Genesis 1-3 in Post-Biblical Hebrew and Aramaic Literature before the Mishnah,” JJS 43 (1992) 222.
DJD XIII.13 See above, pp. 11-13.
In his search for a ‘credal’ statement of creatio ex nihilo, J.C. O'Neill, “How Early is the Doctrine of Creatio ex Nihilo?,” JTS 53 (2002), notes among many other texts (not Jubilees however) Isaiah 44.24 (to which I would add Isaiah 45.7) as an early example of a theology that rejects creation out of primordial stuff. (454).
C.f. U. Cassuto, A Commentary on the Book of Genesis; Part 1 - From Adam to Noah, (trans. I. Abrahams;
Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961), for the heptadic ‘numerical harmony’ of Genesis 1. (12ff)
Vis. i.6, the first three of which are also addressed in this chapter. Of these texts, Philo, Opif. 29 also delineates seven things created, though Philo has seven things created prior to the creation of light,31 all eight of which are incorporeal paradigms of the physical.
4.2.3 Josephus, Antiquitates judaicae 1.27-29 evn avrch|/ e;ktisen o` qeo.j to.n ouvrano.n kai. th.n gh.n) tau,thj dV u`pV o;yin ouvk evrcome,nhj( avlla.
baqei/ me.n kruptome,nhj sko,tei( pneu,matoj dV auvth.n a;nwqen evpiqe,ontoj( gene,sqai fw/j evke,leusen o` qeo,j) 28kai. genome,nou tou,tou katanoh,saj th.n o[lhn u[lhn diecw,rise to. te fw/j kai. to. sko,toj kai. tw/| me.n o;noma e;qeto nu,kta( to. de. h`me,ran evka.lesen( e`spe,ran te kai.
o;rqron th.n avrch.n tou/ fwto.j kai. th.n avna,pausin prosagoreu,saj) 29kai. au[th me.n a'n ei;h prw,th h`me,ra( Mwush/j dV auvth.n mi,an ei=pe\ th.n de. aivti,an i`kano.j me,n eivmi avpodou/nai kai.
nu/n( evpei. dV u`pe,schmai th.n aivtiologi,an pa,ntwn ivdi,a| suggraya,menoj paradw,sein( eivj to,te kai. th.n peri. auvth/j e`rmenei,an avnaba,llomai) In the beginning God created heaven and earth. While this32 had not come into sight, as it was both hidden by a thick darkness and a wind from above was moving upon it, God ordered that light should come into being. 28And as it came to be (and) after considering the whole matter, he separated the light from the darkness, and to the one he gave the name night, and the other he called day, calling by name the evening and the day-break, the beginning of light and (its) rest. 29This, then, should be the first day, but Moses said it is (day) one; while I am able to render a sufficient cause even now, since I have promised to hand down the investigation of all these things by itself in writing, I am also putting off until then the interpretation concerning this (matter).
This is the beginning of Josephus' account of the history of the Jews. After a brief introduction to the work as a whole,33 he begins the story with the above retelling of Day One. This text is Josephus' most direct dealing with Gen 1.1-5. While he promises that he will expand upon this in another work,34 regrettably it has not survived or was never completed. This passage is a deliberate retelling of Gen 1.1-5, and, as such, has plenty intertextual markers (evn avrch/|( ouvrano,j( gh/( sko,toj( pneu/ma( fw/j( diacwri,zw( nu,x( h`me,ra( mi,an). There is little room for doubt that Josephus was familiar with Genesis 1. It is not clear, however, with which version(s) he was working. What is clear is that his retelling of Day One is not a direct quotation from any manuscript or translation tradition that is extant.
The general order of the passage reflects the LXX. The content and order of the first sentence matches that of the LXX with the exception of the verb, kti,zw, the verb also used by Aquila.35 The next three phrases, all genitive absolutes, function paraphrastically prior to the main clause in which God orders (keleu,w) light to be. This
A comparison of the lists of Jub 2.2 and Philo, Opif. 29:
Jubilees: 1) heavens, 2) earth, 3) waters, 4) spirit(s), 5) abyss, 6) darkness, and 7) light.
Philo: 1) heaven, 2) earth, 3) air/darkness, 4) a void (keno,j)/abyss, 5) abyss, 6) water,
7) spirit, 8) light.
While it seems most probable that the antecedent of tau,thj is gh/, which is both the closest spatially and in line with both the MT and LXX of Gen 1.2, it is also within the realm of possibility that Josephus is making reference to avrch,.
Ant 1.1-26 Ant 1.29. Josephus promises this next work upon the completion of Antiquities in Ant 1.25.
If we can date Aquila's translation to c.140 CE [see K.H. Jobes and M. Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint, (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2000) 39], then Josephus' use of kti,zw in a Greek translation of Gen 1.1 is older. In Josephus' retelling of Gen 1.1, it should also be noted that he uses evn avrch/| rather than Aquila's evn kefalai,w, likely |
based on the root #)r of ty#)rb, cf. J.W. Wevers, Notes on the Greek Text of Genesis, (SBLSCS 35; Atlanta:
Scholars, 1993) 1.
CHAPTER FOURconstruction is quite unlike LXX Gen 1.2, which has a string of independent clauses.36 One might venture to say that it is grammatically closer to MT Gen 1.2.37 It is safe to say with regard to content that Josephus' retelling of Gen 1.1-5 is condensed. Omitted or paraphrased are avoratoj, avkataskeu,astoj, a;bussoj, and u[dwr, along with any, pronouncement of light as good.38 Also, Josephus thinks it important to note the oddity of Moses' use of the cardinal (mi,a) in numbering what he appears to think should be the first (prw,th) day.39 As noted, Josephus by his own admission does not give his full interpretation of Gen 1.1-5 in this retelling, promising another text.40 He does tell his readers that he is drawing his retelling from the sacred books of Moses,41 but, as noted above, what text is before him is unclear. The question, then, is, what is Josephus trying to highlight or foreground in his retelling of Gen 1.1-5? He does not make creatio ex nihilo a central argument, though it could be inferred. His paraphrastic use of the genitive absolutes prior to the ordered coming-into-being of light suggest that earth was in a state of incompleteness. The picture that Josephus paints of the separation of light and dark is also of a work in progress, as God is considering (katanoe,w) the whole lot, figuring out what to do next.
4.2.4 Philo, De somniis 1.72-76 th.n dV aivti,an evpife,rei( diV h]n to,pw//| u`ph,nthsen\42 e;du ga.r fhsin o` h[lioj( ouvc o` faino,menoj ou-toj( avlla. to. tou/ avora,tou kai. megi,stou qeou/ perifegge,staton kai. periauge,staton fw/j) tou/qV o[tan me.n evpila,myh| dianoi,a|( ta. deu,tera lo,gwn du,etai fe,ggh( polu. de. ma/llon oi` aivsqhtoi. to,poi pa,ntej evpiskia,zontai\ o[tan dV e`te,rwse cwrhsh|( pa,ntV euvqu.j avni,scei kai. avnate,llei) 73 mh. qauma,sh|j de,( eiv o` h[lioj kata. tou.j th/j avllhgori,aj kano,naj evxomoiou/tai tw/| patri. kai. h`gemo,ni tw/n sumpa,ntwn\ qew/| ga.r o[moion pro.j avlh,qeian me.n ouvde,n( a[ de. do,xh| neno,mistai( du,o mo,na evsti,n( avo,rato,n te kai. o`rato,n( yuch. me.n avo,raton( o`rato.n de. h[lioj) 74 th.n men. ou=n yuch/j evmfe,reian dedh,lwken evn e`te,roij eivpw,n\ evpoi,hsen o` qeo.j to.n a;nqrwpon( katV eivko,na qeou/ evpoi,hsen auvto,n( kai. evn tw/| kata. avndrofonwn teqe,nti no,nw| pa,lin\ o` evkce,wn ai-ma avnqrw,pou avnti. tou/ ai[matoj auvtou/ evkcuqh,setai( o[ti evn eivko,ni qeou/ evpoi,hsa to.n a;nqrwpon( th,n de. h`li,ou dia. sumbo,lwn memh,nuke) r`a,|dion de. kai. a;llwj evx evpilogismou/ tou/to katidei/n( evpeidh. prw/ton me.n o` qeo.j fw/j evsti & ku,rioj ga.r fwtismo,j mou kai. swth,r mou evn u[mnoij a|;detai & kai. ouv mo,non fw/j( avlla. kai.
panto.j e`te,rou fwto.j avrce,tupon( ma/llon de. panto.j avrcetu,pou presbu,teron kai. avnw,teron( lo,gon e;con paradei,gmatoj @paradei,gmatoj43#) to. me.n ga.r para,deigma o` plhre,statoj h=n auvtou/ lo,goj( fw/j & ei=pe ga.r fhsi.n o`` qeo,j\ gene,sqw fw/j( & auvto.j de. ouvdeni. tw/n gegono,twn o[moioj) e;peiqV w`j h[lioj h`me,ran kai. nu,kta diakri,nei( ou[twj fhsi. Mwush/j to.n qeo.n fw/j kai. sko,toj The independent clauses, separated by kai,, are as follows: h` de. gh/ h=n avo,ratoj kai. avkataskeu,astoj kai. sko,toj evpa,nw th/j avbu,ssou kai. pneu/ma qeou/ evpefe,reto evpa,nw tou/ u[datoj) Gen 1.2 See above, pp. 14-16.
LXX Gen 1.4 prw,th is another commonality with Aquila.
Ant. 1.29 Josephus' introduction to Antiquities ends with his statement of intent, in which he indicates that he has first hand
experience of the stories from the sacred books of Moses that he is about to retell:
tre,yomai de. evpi. th.n avfh,ghsin h;dh tw/n pragma,twn mnhsqei.j pro,teron w-n peri. th/j tou/ ko,smou kataskeuh/j ei=pe Mwush/j\ tau/ta d/V evn tai/j i`erai/j bi,bloij eu-ron avnagegramme,na) e;cei de. ou[twj\ I will now turn my attention to the telling of the deeds, remembering first that which Moses said concerning the preparation of the cosmos; I have discovered these things registered in the sacred books. He has as follows: Ant 1.26.
LXX Gen 28.11 reads avph,nthsen, from avpanta,w, a verb which may indicate a meeting by chance, an element which seems absent in u`panta,w, as used by Philo.
Editorial correction of Colson, cf. Philo, Philo, 5.336 n.1.
CHAPTER FOURdiateici,sai\ diecw,rise ga.r44 o` qeo.j avna. me,son tou/ fwto.j kai. avna. me,son tou/ sko,touj\ a;llwj te w`j h[lioj avnatei,laj ta. kekrumme,na tw/n swma,twn evpidei,knutai( ou[twj kai. o` qeo.j ta. pa,nta gennh,saj ouv mo,non eivj touvmfane.j h;gagen( avlla. kai. a] pro,teron ouvk h=n( evpoi,hsen( ouv dhmiourgo.j mo,non avlla. kai. kti,sthj auvto.j w'n) But [Moses] brings out the reason why [Jacob] ‘met’ a place; for it says, ‘The sun has set.’ This is not the one that shows itself, but it is the most lustrous and the most sparkling light of the invisible and supreme God. When this shines upon understanding, the secondary [lights] of words set, and greater still all the places of sense-perception are shaded; but when it has drawn back elsewhere, all [these] are dawning and rising at once. 73But do not marvel if the sun, according to the rules of allegory, is likened to the father and commander of the universe. For although in truth nothing is like God, there are two things by [human] notion that are accounted [as such], one invisible and one visible – the soul is invisible, the sun visible. 74An account of the soul he has shown elsewhere, saying, ‘God made man according to the image of God he made him,’ and again in the law set against murderers, ‘The one who sheds the blood of a man, blood shall be shed in return for his blood, because in the image of God I made man,’ but the sun['s likeness to God] he has made known by symbols.
In other ways it is easy to perceive this by reflexion. Since in the first place, God is light – "For the Lord is my illumination and my savior" – in a hymn45 it is sung. And [the Lord is] not only light, but the archetype of every other light – even older than and higher than every archetype, holding (the) word of a paradigm [of a paradigm]. For the paradigm was his most complete word – ‘light’, for it says, ‘God said, “Let there be light,”’ – but he in no way is a likeness of things which have come into being. 76Next, as the sun separates day and night, so Moses says that God divides distinctly light and darkness, ‘For God separated between the light and the darkness;’ above all, as the sun when it rises brings to light bodies which have been hidden, so also God, having generated all things, not only brought them into sight, but also he made things which were not before, being not solely a craftsman but also the creator himself.