HUMAN NATURE IN THE HEBREW BIBLE PHILOSOPHY 224

RELIGIOUS THEORIES OF HUMAN NATURE We are going to focus on the philosophical rather than religious significance of the sacred texts of the various world religions we are going to consider. This will be an easier distinction to make for most of us for Hinduism or Islam than for either Judaism or Christianity in that most of us have little pre-reflective understanding of these traditions and we can thus approach them much more openly and straightforwardly.

INTERPRETIVE PRINCIPLES To the extent possible, this approach will require us to put aside questions concerning the ultimate implications of these belief systems in order to concentrate on what they have to tell us about the sort of creatures that we are. We must be careful however to not denature these systems of belief. We have little hope of understanding what they have to tell us about anything unless we keep in mind their context. One thing we have to acknowledge is that these belief systems, are not monolithic institutions. For example, the term "Hinduism" is really just a way to designate the religious practices emanating from a specific oral and written tradition. These practices have the same diversity that is seen amongst Christian sects. Another important point is that all of these belief systems are textual religions. That is, the substance, if not the practice, of the religion is grounded in the interpretation of a collection of sacred texts.

THE TORAH Traditionally, Jews, Christians and Muslims have believed that the Torah (the first five books of the Hebrew and Christian Bibles) was dictated by God to Moses on Mt. Sinai. Most biblical scholars today accept some version of the documentary hypothesis which insists that these early books (including Genesis) are composites of texts written over many hundreds of years by authors influenced by many older and culturally diverse written and oral narratives. These texts reflect the diverse political and social contexts in which they were written, contexts which modern historical, archeological and interpretive methods have made clear.

GENESIS 1-3 According to the documentary hypothesis, the creation story in Genesis 1 was authored by the so-called Priestly Source, "P," written shortly after the Babylonian captivity and influenced by the Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish. The second creation story in Genesis 2 comes from "J," the so-called Yahwist source, who wrote much earlier, sometime in in the tenth or ninth century B.C.E. Yet another author, from the northern kingdom, the "E" source, becomes apparent later in Genesis (in one of the two versions of Noah's ark story, for example). According to the documentary hypothesis, the "J" and "E" texts were combined into a single document, "J/E," in the late eight century B.C.E., to which the "P" text was added centuries later, along with other material by a final editor, "R," in the fifth century B.C.E.

TWO CREATION STORIES Let’s consider the two creation stories presented to us in Genesis, Chapters 1 and 2. What features do they share? Where are they different? What conclusions should we draw about the metaphysical viewpoint of the author(s) of these stories?

THE NATURE OF THE HUMAN A key feature of the first creation story is the creation of human beings, which, unlike other creatures, are distinctive by being made in the “likeness” of God. Jewish (and Christian) interpretation of this claim insists that “likeness” in this instance does not mean physical, material resemblance, but rather similarity in nature. The Hebrew work translated as likeness is “zelem,” which refers to the nature or essence of a thing; “to’ar” would be the term used if the sense was of resemblance of form. So what is the nature that we share with God. For Judaism and Christianity, that nature is essentially rational: the ability to discern and understand. We see this in Psalm 8 (3-4), and 90 (8-9, 12).

THE PLACE OF THE HUMAN We can also recognize this “likeness” in the account of what humans are ordained to that is offered in both creation stories: dominion over the rest of creation. It’s important to note that this idea is expressed differently in each story. In the older, second story it take the form of naming, which in primitive cultures has a magical significance. The ability to name something gives you power over it. In the first, more recent story, it is just simply dominion. On whatever account, humans are placed at the top of creation, distinctive in their rational capacities and in authority over the rest.

THE CRISIS All that might lead us to believe that humans are in pretty good shape, but we are quickly disabused of that notion in Genesis, Chapter 3. What might explain this shift? What is its theological/philosophical justification? How is the shift accomplished? The completion of human knowledge in the knowledge of good and evil. This completion is realized in the awareness of shame (body as evil?), introduction of physical evil, suffering and death, banishment from paradise.

DIAGNOSIS AND PRESCRIPTION: THE PSALMS What do the two Psalms suggests is the source of our problematic experience? One suggestion: the gap between us and the divine (8, 3- 4), though the psalm goes on to celebrate the mastery apparently granted to us over the world. Could this be another sort of problem? Power corrupts? Is it the divine itself (90, 3-12)? What, is it suggested, should we do about it? Consider the last few verses of Psalm 90.