Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 1447011001459.jpg (99KB, 1152x864px) Image search:
[Google]
99KB, 1152x864px
A thread for religious discussion, without shitposting.
To start off, I would like to advance a theory on the shift between the Old Testament and New as a shift from a primarily oral tradition to a more literary one. Using Ong's work Orality and Literacy, I think this explains perceived inconsistencies between the characterization of God in the books. I will be drawing from his third chapter, "Some Pschodynamics of Orality".
Without delving into the matter more thoroughly, Ong illustrates the additive feature of oral epic forms by using the example of Genesis. Indeed, the Old Testament I would argue is an oral work, composed from stories passed down throughout the years,
Oral based epics are agonsitic - focused on struggle and violence, using these concepts to form community identities. I believe this is the reason the Old Testament is much more violent, and the struggle of the Israelites against the Philistines is a prime example of this. Their own community is forged by these recounted conflicts. This also explains the rather violent actions of God throughout the books.
The New Testament, however, was developed in an era in which writing forms and literacy were much more internalized. While violence is still prevalent, it is now often used to juxtapose with the peaceful actions of the protagonists.
>>
>>1834317
If the books of the OT were an oral tradition wouldn't they be epic poems like the Iliad or Gilgamesh? Correct me if they are actually very similar to epic poems. I'm sure they incorporated oral traditions but I get the impression that the books of the OT, especially Samuel, Kings and Chronicles were originally literary works
>>
>>1834334
I think they were an oral form partially distinct from epic, in which law codes, history, and restrictions were also carried down. My academic focus is normally on Asian religious traditions, so I'm not too well versed on the Old Testament. This idea was something I thought of after reading Ong's book.
The mannerisms in the text (It's additive nature, agonsiticsm, situational, and slight redundancies) correspond with ways oral performance operates, which led me to my perhaps over-generalization that the OT was a purely oral composition. It's quite possible that portions of it were purely literate, and others dictated.
I am mainly trying to reconcile the differences between the OT and NT, which many I've noticed view as hypocritical. I'd say the OT was for a largely literate audience with which its content resounds, whereas the New Testament was composed in an era where literacy was more prevalent and internalized and its content reflects this with a higher level of abstraction and less emphasis on violence.
>>
>>1834317
Sounds like you have a ready-made theory to selectively fit the facts into.
You have talent for academia.
>>
>>1834387
With the lawcodes of Leviticus and Deuteronomy I can definitely see an origin from oral traditions. They're observed in Ruth with some variations without references to the lawcodes, in fact the writer of Ruth is apparently completely ignorant of the law against allowing Moabites into the congregation of YHVH in Deuteronomy. I've heard scholars argue that Ruth is an argument against this view of segregating Jews from certain groups like Moabites but I'm not convinced.
On the other hand I can think of a few examples that seem to show a prose narrative elaborating on an oral tradition. Two good examples of this would be the Song of the Sea in Exodus and the Song of Deborah in Judges. These two songs are considered to use older grammar than most of the OT and both repeat more or less the story preceding it in shorter and more poetic form.
>>
>>1834530
Do you know a lot of Biblical Hebrew? I am wondering how the grammar is within the text, because that could also be used to evince orality. The performative aspect of it allows for a looser grammatical construction which often is utilized to fit within a structure, like in Homeric hexameter.
>>
>>1834565
unfortunately no. I'm not a scholar. I have a Jewish study bible that gives some good insights into understanding the original hebrew text but i still have to rely on the english translation.
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1