[Milton-L] Biblical Scholarship
jamesrovira at gmail.com
Tue Aug 24 17:25:47 EDT 2010
I'm not a Biblical scholar, but from what I understand, there's some
recognition of differences between Genesis 1 and 2 in midrash and
other Jewish commentary prior to the 17thC. I just moved and all of
my theological books are in boxes right now, otherwise I might be able
to come up with names and dates. Off the top of my head, Alexander
Geddes comes to mind as an early English commentator who would be open
to this kind of observation, but he's 18thC. See his Critical Remarks
on the Hebrew Scriptures. I am unsure what he says about Gen. 1 and
2. Origen attacks literal readings of the Genesis account in the
2nd-3rd century in his On First Principles -- see the opening
paragraphs of Bk IV, ch. III -- but I don't recall if he notices
differences between Gen. 1 and 2 elsewhere in his commentary.
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 4:50 PM, <wmmoeck at aol.com> wrote:
> Dear Milton List,
> A question for the biblical scholars among you:
> It has long been recognized by critics of Paradise Lost that the texts of
> Genesis on which it based, chapters 1 and 2, are inconsistent. Adam is
> created after the animals in chapter 1 but before the animals in chapter 2.
> Which biblical scholar of the seventeenth century first observed this
> discrepancy? (I am assuming it to be 17th c scholar.) Thanks.
More information about the Milton-L