POST ONE OF TWO
Are there passages from the Bible to corroborate the view that our spirits existed before creation?
Hi
Kilk1
points to be made :
1) When you say "BIBLE", or verses “in the bible”, my first question as a historian of early texts has to be “which bible”?
“Bibles” differ both in different eras and in different geological places. For example, If you are speaking of the 4th century New Testament (C. Sinaiticus), then Barnabas, Hermas, etc. are in the bible. If you are speaking of Eastern Bibles (Ethiopian, their large canon has 81 books, as opposed to our 66), they still retain Jubilees, an Enoch, and other books.
Also, remember that when you are reading the bible, it is often quoting sacred texts
outside of your current canon. For example, when New Testament Jude writes : “
Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all...,” (
Jude 1:14-15)“ (first century a.d.?) he is merely quoting I enoch, the Jewish text (approx 350 b.c.?) which says ”“
Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, to execute judgment upon them...” (
Old Testament I Enoch ch 2)
Thus, some of the quote I have used (e.g. 1 Enoch), were source texts for the writers of the western New Testament Text.
Multiple indexes (such as delamarters) can corelate biblical texts with early non-biblical texts which cover the same themes.
2) CONSIDER THAT BIBLICAL TEXTS CHANGE AS NEW HISTORICAL KNOWLEDGE IS DISCOVERED
Though religionists tend to get their views from similar sacred texts, they often come away with different interpretations of what is meant, and thus, with different beliefs regarding what they read. This is why it is an advantage to know what the earliest christians believed and how they interpreted texts.
For example, consider how GENESIS 1:1-2 is changing to accommodate pre-existence of materials (similar to the concept of pre-existence of spirits).
Frank Cross (of DDS) concludes that
it was the ex nihilo creation tradition of later Christianity which prompted the 1600's era translation of Gen. 1:1 found in the King James and similar versions. Thus in a tail-wagging-the-dog manner, it was the prior doctrine that caused the specific text and not the original text that caused the doctrine of ex-nihilo.
Other versions of the Bible have noticed the forcing within the translation and have NOT followed the wording of the King James. For example, according to The Interpreter's Bible, the Hebrew bere' **** would more properly be rendered "
In the beginning OF creation" rather than simply "
In the beginning."
Many other scholars agree in this. E.A. Speiser translates Gen 1:1 "
When God set about to create heaven and earth, the world being then a formless waste. ." or, as Cross renders it "
When God began to create the heaven and the earth, then God said, 'Let there be light.'" (the Jewish Chumash from stone
also follows Cross' translation here). Thus the traditional translation of Gen. 1:1 as an independent statement, implying that God first created matter out of nothing, and then (verse 2.) proceeded to fashion the world from that raw material, is now widely questioned, and several recent translations have adopted the approach advocated by Speiser and Cross.
Spieser, who translated Gen 1:1 as above, then adds: “
The question, however, is not the ultimate truth about cosmogony, but only the exact meaning of the Genesis passages which deal with the subject.. . . At all events, the text should be allowed to speak for itself.”
Other modern versions which incorporate this usage include
The New Jewish Version: "
When God began to create the heaven and the earth, the earth being unformed and void. . . ."; similarly The Bible, An American Translation (1931); The Westminster Study Edition of the Holy Bible (1948); Moffat's translation (1935); and the Revised Standard Version (RSV), alternate reading
I am currently reading a compilation of midrashic comments from Stone’s Chumas and it
also has the hebrew text corrected as “In the Beginning of Creation”. Thus, the other Jewish texts are changing as well.
The discovery that the text should indicate that materials existed prior to creation is a similar phenomenon to the indication that spirits existed prior to creation.
3) Rabbinic Judaism prohibited questions of and discussions about the pre-creation time period. (I will reference this later), Christians were not forbidden discussion about pre-creation time periods
The Talmud records the prohibition against Jews discussing pre-creation time periods thusly :
“It is forbidden to inquire what existed before creation, as Moses distinctly tells us (Deut. iv. 32): "Ask now of the days that are past which were before thee, since the day God created man upon earth." Thus the scope of inquiry is limited to the time since the Creation.”
In early Jewish legends, God created multiple worlds before this one. The Gemara justifies a proscription against further study of pre-creation time periods by the metaphor of a king who built his palace on top of a garbage heap (prior creations). The king does not want people to discuss what was there (chaotic material or "garbage") before the palace was created in it's place.
MAHARSHA relates that the concept of something existing before this world would lesson Gods’ honor and cause disgrace to him (i.e. building on prior, disorganized materials). I think there are multiple other reasons why the Rabbinic Jews prohibited questions relating to and discussions of pre-creation time periods.
All Rabbinic Jews who obeyed such prohibitions would have lost the knowledge of Pre-Creation themes within a single generation. Still, the Jews of the New Testament occassionally make more than side references to this time period.
Thus, both doctrines and texts concerning this time period would not have had much representation by orthodox Jews in the post Babylonian period of time. (depending upon when one believes rabbinic Judaism forbade discussion of pre-creation time periods). And, importantly, the earliest Christians tended to be Jews.
POST TWO OF TWO FOLLOWS