Subject:
|
Re: The Brick Testament begins the Book of Joshua
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.build.ancient
|
Date:
|
Fri, 20 Aug 2004 18:17:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3581 times
|
| |
|
|
Hi, Matthew.
In lugnet.build.ancient, Matthew J. Chiles wrote:
| |
Not to nit-pick, but Joshua 3:15-16 says “As soon as the feet of the priests
carrying the ark of the covenant touched the water, the water coming
downstream toward them stopped”. You portray the water piled up both upstream
and downstream, rather like crossing the Red Sea.
Shouldn’t we assume that the water flowing downstream continued to flow away
since there is no mention of it stopping? Thus the water should be portrayed
more like a single wall/dam of water on the upstream side only, rather than
like a canyon of water...
|
I’ve reviewed the passages describing the parting of the Jordan, and while the
text doesn’t rule out that the water piled up downstream as well, I have to
agree that it would make more sense to portray this scene with only one wall of
water.
The only passage I can cite in defense of my two-water-walls depiction is Jos
4:23 which says:
For Yahweh your God dried up the Jordan before you until you had crossed over.
Yahweh your God did to the Jordan just what he had done to the Red Sea when he
dried it up before us until we had crossed over.
This argument hinges on an interpretation of “just what he had done” to mean
“exactly as he had done”, which would imply he split the waters in exactly the
same fashion.
It’s a pretty weak argument.
Truth be told, I just thought the double water walls looked more pleasingly
dramatic for that scene.
Looking around on the web at some other people’s depictions of this scene, it’s
a mixed bag. Here’s
one that agrees with my two-walls portrayl.
With this one is
hard to tell whether it’s one wall or two, but I like how God is actually there
doing the grunt work, holding the river back with his strangth.
In a departure,
this
one portrays the Jordan River as a tiny stream that didn’t part at all, but was
rather stepped right over (either that, or the Israelite priests are enormous!).
And finally, in this
one, the Israelites are black.
So there you have it. Lack of concensus. @8^)
-Brendan
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The Brick Testament begins the Book of Joshua
|
| Not to nit-pick, but Joshua 3:15-16 says "As soon as the feet of the priests carrying the ark of the covenant touched the water, the water coming downstream toward them stopped". You portray the water piled up both upstream and downstream, rather (...) (20 years ago, 18-Aug-04, to lugnet.build.ancient)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
