Genesis Apocryphon Research Articles

Some Egyptian Elements in the Genesis Apocryphon: Evidence of a Ptolemaic Social Location?

Though the social and geographic milieu of the Genesis Apocryphon has regularly been considered to be Greco-Roman period Palestine, there are several indications that the author(s) of this text had a special knowledge of, and interest in, Egypt. This essay explores three possible connections with Egypt: use of the name Hyrcanus for the Pharaoh’s official, employment of the name Karmon for the river separating Canaan and Egypt, and the practice of sibling marriage for Shem’s children only after the flood. Taken cumulatively, these factors speak to a general familiarity of the author(s) with Egypt, plausibly during the Ptolemaic period, though an Egyptian compositional setting is far less certain.

Is the Genesis Apocryphon a Unity? What Sort of Unity Were You Looking For?

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

The Literary Relationship between the Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees: The Chronology of Abram and Sarai’s Descent to Egypt

Scholars have long noted the affinity of the Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees. However, there is still no consensus regarding the direction of the relationship between them. This study approaches this question by analysing their shared chronology surrounding the patriarchs’ descent to Egypt. It is demonstrated that 1QapGen’s chronology results from considerations of biblical interpretation. Interestingly, Jubilees’ chronological framework is problematic at exactly this point. It is suggested that this confusion is the result of the conflation of the Apocryphon’s chronology with an alternative interpretation of Gen. 16.3. Jubilees therefore reflects a later stage in the development of these traditions than the Apocryphon.

The Literary Relationship between the Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees: The Chronology of Abram and Sarai’s Descent to Egypt

Scholars have long noted the affinity of the Genesis Apocryphon and Jubilees. However, there is still no consensus regarding the direction of the relationship between them. This study approaches this question by analysing their shared chronology surrounding the patriarchs’ descent to Egypt. It is demonstrated that 1QapGen’s chronology results from considerations of biblical interpretation. Interestingly, Jubilees’ chronological framework is problematic at exactly this point. It is suggested that this confusion is the result of the conflation of the Apocryphon’s chronology with an alternative interpretation of Gen. 16.3. Jubilees therefore reflects a later stage in the development of these traditions than the Apocryphon.

One Voice or Many? The Identity of the Narrators in Noah’s Birth Story (1QapGen 1–5.27) and in the ‘Book of the Words of Noah’ (1QapGen 5.29–18.23)

The present article explores the puzzling variety of narrative voices in the so-called Genesis Apocryphon from Qumran Cave 1. Lamech, Noah, and Abram in turn act as first person narrator, and all three of these stories also include third person narration. Focusing on the columns preceding the Abram story, it is shown that both the account of Noah’s birth (1–5.27) and the ‘Book of the Words of Noah’ (5.29–18.23) are basically narrated in the first person by Lamech and Noah, respectively. It is concluded that the rare shifts to third person narration are not unusual in ancient Jewish literature.

Is the Genesis Apocryphon a Unity? What Sort of Unity Were You Looking For?1

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

Divine Titles and Epithets and the Sources of the "Genesis Apocryphon"

Divine Titles and Epithets and the Sources of the "Genesis Apocryphon"

"Each to His Own Inheritance" Geography as an Evaluative Tool in the Genesis Apocryphon

AbstractThe Genesis Apocryphon has often been compared with the Book of Jubilees; especially the parallel accounts of Noah's oversight of the earth's post-flood distribution between his sons and grandsons (1QapGenar 16–17//Jub. 8:8–9:15). A close examination of the Genesis Apocryphon demonstrates that, while this comparison is valid, the two works are more different than scholars have typically assumed. Not only is the treatment of Noah's special role and the earth's proper division more widespread and prominent in the Apocryphon than in Jubilees, but the most directly corresponding passage exhibits a different arrangement. This may suggest a common cartographic source, and attests to a more robust interest in such geographic matters on the part of the Apocryphon. While both authors clearly drew on similar traditions, it is suggested that the author of the Genesis Apocryphon was more occupied with the right of Israel to the Promised Land than the author of Jubilees.

NOAH'S YOUNGER BROTHER REVISITED: ANTI-NOACHIC POLEMICS AND THE DATE OF 2 (SLAVONIC) ENOCH

The paper investigates the anti-Noachic tendencies in 2 Enoch. The analysis shows that anti-Noachic polemics in 2 Enoch are based on the «original» Noachic materials which demonstrate close parallels with the fragments of the Book of Noah found in 1 Enoch, Jubilees and the Genesis Apocryphon. The anti-Noachic debates involve a substantial rewriting of the «original» Noachic motifs and themes. The research shows that 2 Enoch contains a systematic tendency to diminish or refocus the priestly significance of the Noachic tradition. These anti-Noachic revisions take place in the midst of the sectarian debates about the sacrificial practice and the priestly succession.

CELESTIAL CHOIRMASTER: THE LITURGICAL ROLE OF ENOCH-METATRON IN 2 ENOCH AND THE MERKABAH TRADITION

Enoch-Metatron's liturgical office plays a prominent role in the Merkabah lore, yet this tradition appears to be absent in early Enochic texts, including the compositions collected in 1 Enoch, Jubilees, Genesis Apocryphon and the Book of Giants. Despite this apparent absence, this study argues that the roots of Enoch-Metatron's liturgical imagery can be traced to the Second Temple Enochic lore, namely, to 2 Enoch, the Jewish apocalypse, apparently written in the first century CE. Some traditions found in this text appear to serve as the initial background for the developments of the future liturgical role of Enoch-Metatron as the celestial choirmaster. Scholars have previously noted that Enoch's figure portrayed in the various sections of 2 Enoch appears to be more complex than in the early Enochic tractates of 1 Enoch. For the first time, the Enochic tradition seeks to depict Enoch, not simply as a human taken to heaven and transformed into an angel, but as a celestial being exalted above the angelic world. In this attempt, one may find the origins of another image of Enoch, very different from the early Enochic literature, which was developed much later in Merkabah mysticism — the concept of the supreme angel Metatron, the «Prince of the Presence». The attestation of the seventh antediluvian patriarch as the celestial liturgical director in 2 Enoch gives additional weight to this hypothesis about the transitionary nature of the Slavonic account which guides the old pseudepigraphical traditions into the new mystical dimension. In this respect the tradition found in 2 Enoch represents an important step towards defining and shaping Enoch-Metatron's liturgical office in its transition to his new role as the celestial choirmaster. It is also significant that the beginning of Enoch's liturgical functions in 2 Enoch is conflat¬ed there with the development of his new titles-offices as the Youth and the Servant of the Divine Presence which will later play a prominent role in the Merkabah passages pertaining to Metatron's liturgical actions.

Isaiah 11:15: A New Interpretation Based on the Genesis Apocryphon

Isaiah 11:15: A New Interpretation Based on the Genesis Apocryphon

The Jewish Context of Jesus' Miracles (review)

Reviewed by: The Jewish Context of Jesus' Miracles James H. Charlesworth The Jewish Context of Jesus' Miracles, by Eric Eve. JSNT Supplement Series 231. New York, London: Sheffield Academic Press, 2002. 420 pp. $125.00. In his first book, Eric Eve adds more than four chapters to his dissertation at Oxford University. The first chapter is an introduction that covers the major issues, clarifying that a "miracle" in the biblical world did not denote, as it has in the West since the Enlightenment, an act by God that breaks "the laws of [End Page 183] nature." The next two chapters are devoted to Josephus and Philo. Chapters four through six concentrate on apocryphal literature, especially Pseudo-Philo and Enoch. Chapter Seven concentrates on the Qumran texts (esp. 1QapGen, 4QprNab, and the so-called Messianic Apocalypse). In Chapter Eight Eve returns to the apocryphal texts with a discussion of miracle and romance in Tobit and Artapanus. The next five chapters discuss miracle in Second Temple Judaism (charismatic figures, prophets, exorcists, healers, magicians). The fourteenth chapter completes the book with a conclusion. Eve points out, correctly, that comparisons of Jesus with others who may have been known to have performed miracles, such as Abraham in the Genesis Apocryphon, is misleading. Jesus was not one who was reputed to have performed only one or an occasional miracle. His life (or narrative) was characterized by miracles (and, I would add, the proof that he performed healing miracles is the polemic of those who resisted him. His opponents claimed he performed miracles because he was aligned with evil and Beelzebub). The work could have benefited by careful editing (on page 180, for example, the discussion is poorly written and self-contradictory). Far too often the discussion lacks lucidity, and frequently statements are later contradicted or modified. Eric's claim that the surviving Jewish literature comes from the elite and urban groups and therefore provides us with a skewed view is generally correct but needs nuance. A chapter on the Testament of Solomon would have clarified and modified this general rule. This Jewish text provides insight into folkloristic views of magic, healing, and exorcism (he mentions this pseudepigraphon only twice and obliquely). Of course, the traditions in the gospels and Acts are not to be categorized as the ideas of those who are elite and urban. Some readers may find the book to be a difficult read due to such new and unfamiliar acronyms as BNP (Bearer of Numinous Power), PNP (Petitioner of Numinous Power), and MNP (Mediator of Numinous Power). Generally, this book is a helpful study that clarifies what it means to grasp that Jesus' miracles should be understood in terms of miracles, healings, and exorcisms in Jesus time, place, and religion. Eve indicates that Jesus did not attribute sickness to God or humans, but most likely to demons. Jesus is never reputed (contra, I would add, Asclepius and his sons [cf. Plato, Res Publica 3.407 E-408 A]) to have healed broken bones and wounds. Worthy of further discussion is the claim that Jesus, like Elijah and Elisha (especially), combined the healing role of folk heroes with the office of a prophet. Also, refreshing and challenging is the suggestion that Jesus' healings and exorcisms were perceived by his contemporaries as related to the great miracles of national deliverance in the past (viz., the Exodus and the withdrawal of the Assyrian army during the time of King Hezekiah). Jesus' uniqueness seems clearer thanks to Eve's [End Page 184] research. Jesus is unlike Hanina ben Dosa because he engaged in a ministry of healing; he was also unlike Josephus' "sign prophets" because he not only promised miraculous signs but also healed and promised healing. Eve thus tends to support G. Theissen's conclusion that Jesus' uniqueness resides in proclaiming eschatological salvation experienced in the present through acts of healing or exorcism. In summation, Eve points to Jesus' "experience of divine empowerment" that caused him "to combine and transform Jewish traditions" (p. 381). James H. Charlesworth Princeton Theological Seminary Copyright © 2005 Purdue University

Englishing

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

Avant-Propos

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

The Critical Aspects of Beckett's

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

'(Hiatus in MS.)': and the Textual Genesis of

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

Peau De Chagrin: Beckett and Bion on Looking Not to See

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

The Uncertainty of Self: Samuel Beckett and the Location of the Voice

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

The Eye, the Voice, the Skin: La Peau, La Voix, L'Œil

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.

"Everywhere Stone is Gaining": The Struggle for the Sacred in Samuel Beckett's

A source-critical or tradition-historical approach to the Genesis Apocryphon will quite justifiably emphasize the features of the Apocryphon that point toward what can be described as its lack of compositional unity. There exists, however, a level on which the Apocryphon can be shown to be a whole; that is its narrative unity. The latter is the result of the ways in which the final author/composer organized and manipulated the sources and traditions, whether written or oral, with which he worked. The acknowledgment that the Apocryphon is unified on this level opens the door to its treatment as an integral (if fragmentary) literary artifact, as I shall demonstrate in further studies.