Can fundamentalists explain Job 26:12-13 for me?

It mentions Rahab (the much forgotten Rahab, not the harlot of Jericho) and the period of chaos before the creation (or just during it) of man, near the very beginning.I think it refers to a mythological dragon, and thus the debate among fundamentalists should be whether the Canaanites borrowed the dragon myth from the Hebrews (which fundamentalists assume to have existed before the 13th century) or whether the Hebrews borrowed it from the Canaanites.But before we get to that stage, we need to figure out if a primeval dragon is even mentioned here in Job 26. (Can we all agree that the primeval period is the subject?)Actually the first step is to refuse to ignore the issue. Those on this site are less likely to ignore the issue and its implications. The fundamentalist community at large (and the entire world for the matter, Christian or not) is another issue. Ignorance is the order of the day - naturally.But since we are on EVC, then we can skip the last paragraph and its "first step" question.Lets first ask if a primeval dragon is even being covered in the text of Job 26:12-13.Then we should ask who borrowed from whom. Who is the who and who is the whom?This is a question that has lots of potential for clarity, though questions exist. (for example, Lambert says that Enuma Elish wasn't written till 1074 BCE and that the dragon slaying myth most likely came from the Levant, and not from Mesopotamia, and infact the Canaanites - if not the Hebrews - had the theme first.) I start out quite impressed by the amount of evidence that we have to answer this question, anyway.So start answering so I can watch the discussion.Thanks alot.

This is the entire chapter. Notice, below, how verse 10 is parallel to the dry land appearing (a feature of one of the days in Genesis), verses 12 to 13 mention the waters below being separated from the waters above, etc. The piercing of the "fleeing serpent" is a reference to the Rahab monster just mentioned. It clearly refers to the heavens being separated.

quote:

---

Then Job answered:

​

2
How you have helped one who has no power!
How you have assisted the arm that has no strength!

​

3
How you have counseled one who has no wisdom,
and given much good advice!

​

4
With whose help have you uttered words,
and whose spirit has come forth from you?

​

5
The shades below tremble,
the waters and their inhabitants.

​

6
Sheol is naked before God,
and Abaddon has no covering.

​

7
He stretches out Zaphon[a] over the void,
and hangs the earth upon nothing.

​

8
He binds up the waters in his thick clouds,
and the cloud is not torn open by them.

​

9
He covers the face of the full moon,
and spreads over it his cloud.

​

10
He has described a circle on the face of the waters,
at the boundary between light and darkness.

​

11
The pillars of heaven tremble,
and are astounded at his rebuke.

​

12
By his power he stilled the Sea;
by his understanding he struck down Rahab.

​

13
By his wind the heavens were made fair;
his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.

​

14
These are indeed but the outskirts of his ways;
and how small a whisper do we hear of him!
But the thunder of his power who can understand?

---

This was the New Revised Standard Version.We never hear about a sea monster when we have to deal with creation science and school classroom issues. It needs to be brought up (for sure) when discussing this creation evolution issue.And this entire chapter covers the time before the creation of any life - sealife or otherwise. This is the primeval period, essentially the period of chaos and early creation. This was a chaos monster.Job 26 ( alone!) is solid evidence that the early days of Genesis clearly are related to an earlier Enuma Elish type of situation with a pierced monster being used to associate the separation of waters for the heavens (and the associated dome), earthly waters, and separation/creation of dry land.See Psalms 89 too.

quote:

---

5
Let the heavens praise your wonders, O Lord,
your faithfulness in the assembly of the holy ones.

​

6
For who in the skies can be compared to the Lord?
Who among the heavenly beings is like the Lord,

​

7
a God feared in the council of the holy ones,
great and awesome above all that are around him?

​

8
O Lord God of hosts,
who is as mighty as you, O Lord?
Your faithfulness surrounds you.

​

9
You rule the raging of the sea;
when its waves rise, you still them.

​

10
You crushed Rahab like a carcass;
you scattered your enemies with your mighty arm.

​

11
The heavens are yours, the earth also is yours;
the world and all that is in ityou have founded them.

​

12
The north and the south[c]you created them;
Tabor and Hermon joyously praise your name

---

Here we have Psalms 89:9-11 and the context of creation of the heavens."You rule the raging of the sea;
when its waves rise, you still them.
You crushed Rahab like a carcass;
you scattered your enemies with your mighty arm.
The heavens are yours, the earth also is yours;
the world and all that is in ityou have founded them."Just like Job 26:12-13"By his power he stilled the Sea;
by his understanding he struck down Rahab.
By his wind the heavens were made fair;
his hand pierced the fleeing serpent."The evidence is like 99.9% that the Israelites saw the creation story as part of a myth involving a mythological dragon being slayed to create the heavens.How can anyone deny it?Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Note that these are poetic passages. This is poetic imagery, saying that the true God is more powerful than the gods and fearful monsters of the other nations. The OT has quite a few such polemical statements against the gods of Egypt and Canaan.
....
I think these are just poetic ways of saying that the true God is stronger than the gods of Egypt and Canaan.

---

But, can the same be said of Genesis 1? Verses 6-8 talk of the firmament (atmosphere?) being placed to separate the waters above from the waters below. Is that poetry?Is the sudden creation of man - as opposed to a millions of years evolutionary process - also part of the poetry and polemic?Would a 1000 BCE Israelite know how to distinguish the unhistorical lines from the literal?Tell me this. Which verses in Job are literally true? Which use poetic imagery that feature unhistorical mythological events from the primeval period placed in the hands of the Israelite God?Place the Rahab serpent in its Genesis 1 context. Place the rest of Job 26 and its 14 verses in context (if possible). Which verses (that can be placed in Genesis 1 or not) are historical and which aren't?I'm wondering if the Rahab verses are the only ones you discriminate against in this way.

quote:

---

The Babylonian goddess of ocean waters.

​

Tiamat - definition of Tiamat by The Free Dictionary

---

From the first lines of Enuma Elish

quote:

---

1. When in the height heaven was not named,

​

2. And the earth beneath did not yet bear a name,

​

3. And the primeval Aps, who begat them,

​

4. And chaos, Tiamat, the mother of them both,

​

5. Their waters were mingled together,

​

6. And no field was formed, no marsh was to be seen;

​

7. When of the gods none had been called into being,

​

8. And none bore a name, and no destinies [were ordained];

---

It's an old translation.Marduk then killed her.

quote:

---

101. He seized the spear and burst her belly,

​

102. He severed her inward parts, he pierced (her) heart.

​

103. He overcame her and cut off her life;

​

....
129. And the lord stood upon Tiamat's hinder parts,

​

130. And with his merciless club he smashed her skull.

​

131. He cut through the channels of her blood,

​

132. And he made the North wind bear it away into secret places

---

Then the use (of her ribs or crotch in newer translations) of Tiamat as a firmament to hold back her heavenly waters.

quote:

---

135. Then the lord rested, gazing upon her dead body,

​

136. While he divided the flesh of the ..., and devised a cunning plan.

​

137. He split her up like a flat fish into two halves;

​

138. One half of her he stablished as a covering for heaven.

​

139. He fixed a bolt, he stationed a watchman,

​

140. And bade them not to let her waters come forth.

​

141. He passed through the heavens, he surveyed the regions (thereof),

​

142. And over against the Deep he set the dwelling of Nudimmud.

​

143. And the lord measured the structure of the Deep,

​

144. And he founded E-shara, a mansion like unto it.

​

145. The mansion E-shara which he created as heaven,

​

146. He caused Anu, Bl, and Ea in their districts to inhabit.

​

1. He.(i.e. Marduk) made the stations for the great gods;

​

2. The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed.

​

3. He ordained the year and into sections he divided it;

​

4. For the twelve months he fixed three stars.

---

This was the sacred texts site but here is the Wikipedia page link
Tiamat - WikipediaJob 26:12-13 seems very similar.By his power he stilled the Sea;
by his understanding he struck down Rahab.
By his wind the heavens were made fair;
his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.Psalms talks about God crushing Rahab like Marduk did to Tiamat. Rahab is a serpent and the sea, like Tiamat. The primeval chaos waters and serpent monster that was the universal sea, which was then divided into upper and lower waters.Enuma Elish might not be the source for Genesis 1, Job 26, and Psalms 89, but it does indeed show us what the people of that region believed. Enuma Elish and the biblical creation accounts could be later writings of a common ancestral motif of the primeval period.A creation by God using a giant sea monster is actually more difficult to falsify then a 6 day creation that is now 6000 years ago old with a universal global flood 4200 years ago. Creationists ignore it because it sounds so "mythological" on the one hand, and, on the other hand, it just reeks of pagan mythology. But, why not just say the pagans got the idea from the pristine Hebrew scriptures with their literal historical truths? It seems that it is another example of airbrushing out the parts of scripture that are culturally embarrassing. In our modern culture (church culture and secular culture alike), it just seems embarrassing I suppose. Plus people aren't conditioned to it.Should it be seen as historical? By "his hand pierced the fleeing serpent". God's hand.On the other hand, we have another perspective.Jesus said (in Matthew 19) that divorce notes were allowed to be written by Moses because of the cultural attitudes of the Israelites, but from the beginning it was never allowed. Cultural sensitivity allowed (according to Jesus) severe moral lapses to be tolerated and even enshrined in sacred scripture as moral and good. A grave sin to God was recorded in scripture as o.k.Perhaps cultural sensitivity caused a situation where sacred scripture had a record of a mythological creation event that never happened?Interesting questions because we have a fundamentalist community that includes both open-minded people that explore the issue(s) with integrity, and the other more dominant group that ignores inconvenient issues yet makes a crusade like effort to impose their own (selective) "biblical" issues on everybody else. It would be interesting regardless, just from a humanistic perspective to understand history and texts, but this is a political issue - a vitally important one at that,Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

She is ultimately defeated by Marduk, who incapacitates her with his "Evil Wind" and then kills her with an arrow. Marduk splits her in two, creating heaven and earth from her body, the Tigris and Euphrates from her eyes, mist from her spittle, mountains from her breasts and so on. Throughout the epic, there are differing descriptions of Tiamat: she appears both as a body of water, as a human figure, and as having a tail (Tablet V, line 59). These varying descriptions are ultimately reconciled as Marduk turns her limbs into geographical features.

​

Ancient Mesopotamian Gods and Goddesses - Tiamat (goddess)

---

Then

quote:

---

"He sliced her in half like a fish for drying:
Half of her he put up to roof the sky,
Drew a bolt across and made a guard to hold it.
Her waters he arranged so they could not escape." (Dalley 255)

​

Notice that the sky is seen here as solid, holding back the waters

​

Enuma Elish--The Babylonian Creation Story

---

(quotation marks added above and below to site text by me LamarkNewAge because EVC wont let me space the translation of the ancient text to create a margin)

quote:

---

...armed with the arrows of the winds, a net, a club, and an invincible spear.

​

"And the lord stood upon Tiamat's hinder parts,
And with his merciless club he smashed her skull.
He cut through the channels of her blood,
And he made the North wind bear it away into secret places."

​

Slicing Tiamat in half, he made from her ribs the vault of heaven and earth. Her weeping eyes became the source of the Tigris and the Euphrates, her tail became the Milky Way.
Tiamat - Wikipedia

---

The preexisting chaos creature seems to make up the matter of the entire universe. Marduk and his "evil wind" (like YHWH and his ru'ach or spirit/mighty wind) blew across the primeval waters/sea/Tiamat (like Tehom/The Deep in Genesis 1:1-1:3). Interesting that the starts weren't yet mentioned in Job 26. But it mentions the heavens in verse 13 after the defeating of Rahab and piercing of the serpent (like Marduk exactly did). Tiamat was the Tehom ("The Deep") and "the firmament" of Genesis plus the waters in the sky and below in the sea (and Tigris and Euphrates). Tiamat even was used to make up stars - her tail to be specific. She was a serpent and then the stars too. Stars came to be in Genesis after "the firmament" was made. Stars were placed "in the firmament" in Genesis 1. How can stars be places in what is essentially thought by Christians to be the atmosphere? Enuma Elish shows us that the primeval dragon was the material for the invisible dome/atmosphere, the outer space water, and the stars!The primeval dragon is the focus of creation in both the Bible and the ancient near east (especially Enuma Elish).It is the fundamental ingredient with YHWH in the Bible.Absolutely fundamental.100% important.Not to be ignored (at all).

quote:

---

The book of Job is essentially all poetry, filled with poetic imagery. All of Job is "true". But I don't know what you mean by "literally true" in this context.

---

I said this: "Tell me this. Which verses in Job are literally true? Which use poetic imagery that feature unhistorical mythological events from the primeval period placed in the hands of the Israelite God?"How do you distinguish the mythic parts from the historical? Forget about whether it is poetry or prose.

quote:

---

I'm not sure that the Job passage matches exactly to Genesis 1. But if it does, it's probably to verse 2, where "darkness was over the face of the deep". The word "deep" here is the Hebrew "tehom", which means "abyss". The word "yam" ("sea") could have been used and probably would have been a more normal word choice. I think "tehom" was used because it sounds somewhat like "Tiamat", the pagan sea god. The ancients were afraid of the sea and the dark, both present in Gen 1:2. The true God steps in and defeats these elements.
There may also be an allusion to Rahab/Leviathan/SeaMonster in 1:21, where God creates the great sea monsters. They are nothing to be afraid of, they do not challenge God for power, they are just His created playthings. Similar in Psalm 104:26 where God created Leviathan to play in the water.

---

o.k.Then you quoted me asking"I'm wondering if the Rahab verses are the only ones you discriminate against in this way."You responded

quote:

---

??? Where have I "discriminated against" any Rahab verses?? Or any other verses?? I'm simply trying to explain what I understand them to mean. Perhaps my interpretation "discriminates against" your interpretation, but I don't believe that it "discriminates against" the text in any way.
(P.S. I would NOT call myself a "fundamentalist", so perhaps I should not have answered your question at all.)

---

I was simply asking how you are able to distinguish between the lines that are supposedly meant to be taken for granted as unhistorical imagery and then the historical lines.

quote:

---

Just a couple of general comments or questions.
First, having a tie to some earlier story in Job does not have quite the same impact as having the same story found in Genesis. Job might be using any number of sources including astrology and myth in order to describe how great his God was. So how do you address the thought that maybe mapping some parts of the story to Genesis and then dragging in all of Job 26 to be a story of the origin of the universe may be an argument with some holes in it.

---

Job isn't in the first pages of the Bible, that's for sure. Now Job might be using stories from diverse sources but he said that the hand of God pierced the primeval serpent and he placed the creation of the heavens right in between his Rabah serpent revelation. Job was the one that talked about the creation of the heavens. Verses 10 to 13 are:10He has described a circle on the face of the waters,
at the boundary between light and darkness.
11 The pillars of heaven tremble,
and are astounded at his rebuke.
12 By his power he stilled the Sea;
by his understanding he struck down Rahab.
13By his wind the heavens were made fair;
his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.Fundamentalists use verse 7 to say that God placed a spherical earth into empty space. They say that "Job said it in God's great book, so it must be true". Job said the hand of God did something, so however obscure it is due to its being deep into the Holy Bible (away from the page 1 creation of Genesis), Job still said God did it. He pierced the serpent while making the heavens.

quote:

---

Secondly, not all of the examples in Job 26 seem to allude directly to creation. The intent is to describe awesomeness, but creation is just one such awesome thing. Things like binding water into clouds, covering the face of the moon, and stilling raging seas are things God does everyday and not just during 'Creation Week'. How do you sort out for sure when the serpent got speared?

---

Verses 7 to 13 are about the primeval period, which was a period of God's creation. God made the heavens.I sort out the spearing as during the making of the heavens. The Rahab line was immediately followed by God making the heavens then right back to the speared serpent. The context is very clear to objective ears.

quote:

---

quote mining is really unproductive.

---

This quote?

quote:

---

Enuma Elish
101. He seized the spear and burst her belly,
102. He severed her inward parts, he pierced (her) heart.
....
136. While he divided the flesh of the ..., and devised a cunning plan.

​

137. He split her up like a flat fish into two halves;

​

138. One half of her he stablished as a covering for heaven.

​

139. He fixed a bolt, he stationed a watchman,

​

140. And bade them not to let her waters come forth.

​

141. He passed through the heavens, he surveyed the regions (thereof),

​

142. And over against the Deep he set the dwelling of Nudimmud.

​

143. And the lord measured the structure of the Deep,

​

144. And he founded E-shara, a mansion like unto it.

​

145. The mansion E-shara which he created as heaven,

​

146. He caused Anu, Bl, and Ea in their districts to inhabit.

​

1. He.(i.e. Marduk) made the stations for the great gods;

​

2. The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed.

​

3. He ordained the year and into sections he divided it;

​

4. For the twelve months he fixed three stars.

---

Or this quote?

quote:

---

Job 26
12
By his power he stilled the Sea;
by his understanding he struck down Rahab.

​

13
By his wind the heavens were made fair;
his hand pierced the fleeing serpent.

---

Sorry but shouldn't this be used to present the argument and put Job 26 into its context? I was mad at myself for not quoting from Genesis 1, but I saved space by trusting that people here were familiar with it.God made the heavens while piercing the serpent Rahab. It has a clear cognate in the Ancient Middle east.

quote:

---

Job is a morality tale dealing with some pretty profound questions like why do bad things happen to good people and when that does happen how should a theist of his period respond.
Trying to pretend it is a Creation Myth or biology text serves no purpose and has no value

---

Well, I said it covered the period before biological life was formed. And I didn't say that a Creation Myth is the exact same thing as a biology text (especially not a modern one). I don't see why it isn't a creation myth. You must have a very strict criteria, that's for sure.Yes it does have morality tales in it.Job still said God pierced the primeval dragon while making the heavens.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

I said this.

quote:

---

Well, I said it covered the period before biological life was formed. And I didn't say that a Creation Myth is the exact same thing as a biology text (especially not a modern one). I don't see why it isn't a creation myth. You must have a very strict criteria, that's for sure.

---

Jar then said that my creation myth issues were "just a total irrelevancy, a pointless exercise" and with wacked up contextual issues as it relates to Job.But, this scholar ,below , feels it is important.

quote:

---

We have established that there is an ancient myth embedded in the Bible that Yahweh conquered the forces of chaos, personified as Ym and Liwytn. However, we have yet to discuss the different contexts in which thismyth is alluded to in the Bible.
....
This story is not only referred to in Genesis — we have seen this notion already in Job 26:13, that the skies were ‘made fair’ with the defeat of Ym and Rahab.

​

Academia.edu

---

The contextual issues usually involve proving that Psalms 89:10 and Job 26:12-13 belong to the time of creation (and not some later time).GoogleI did this search trying to find the Anchor Bible Dictionary quote about Psalms 89 clearly being in the context of creation (not pasted here). It is in the logos discussion at the top of the google search. I found the above scholarly article (pasted in part).Jar seems to be thinking that Job should never be used to see what the Israelites thought literally, since the point of job is a morality tale or something (others say it was "just poetry" and Job was using his poet's license) That is like saying that Enuma Elish shouldn't be used since it was simply used to exalt Marduk and to establish his cult.We still have a primordial dragon myth on our hands and Job mentioned it.

quote:

---

All of the evidence shows that different cultures from all over the world and all periods of time came up with similar creation myths. One recurring theme is some serpent or dragon or great fish that represents chaos and slaying the critter brings about order. In addition regional cultures adopted and exported the myths to and from their neighbors. Who has priority on some concept or image really seems irrelevant when discussing a story where such passages are used only as a plot device.

---

The Canaanite texts of Lothan (or Littanu or whatever)are a clear cognate of Psalms 74 except for the name of the God doing the killing of the multi-headed beast. The Ugaritic texts pre-date 1200 BCE, which is before the Psalm's text.Enuma Elish could date as late as 1074 BCE, which means that parts of the Bible (including Genesis 49) could actually be older.I was more interested in what exactly the Biblical texts were saying though. Not chronological priority issues and who stole from whom. (most of the worlds creation myths can't be dated at all however, and could be just a few hundred years old, so get suspicious when one claims they are old)Also.The "plot device" claim hasn't been demonstrated. Really, why shouldn't we assume it was a belief that was taken literally? The text could very well have been based on a real, literal, rock solid historically accurate belief (with regards to the primeval age and the associated "creation")by the author of Job

Here is a post, from another poster, that I noticed Phat agreed with.

quote:

---

Note that these are poetic passages. This is poetic imagery, saying that the true God is more powerful than the gods and fearful monsters of the other nations. The OT has quite a few such polemical statements against the gods of Egypt and Canaan.
....
I think these are just poetic ways of saying that the true God is stronger than the gods of Egypt and Canaan.

---

I responded with the questions."But, can the same be said of Genesis 1? Verses 6-8 talk of the firmament (atmosphere?) being placed to separate the waters above from the waters below. Is that poetry?""Is the sudden creation of man - as opposed to a millions of years evolutionary process - also part of the poetry and polemic?""Would a 1000 BCE Israelite know how to distinguish the unhistorical lines from the literal?"Is every pagan concept that gets mentioned there ONLY a polemic, and not meant to be historical?Placing the stars in the firmament or atmosphere is just a polemical way to describe things? Just like the waters being above the firmament or atmosphere. It came from ancient middle eastern beliefs, as we see in Enuma Elish. The biblical text was just a polemic so as to overthrow pagan concepts?

quote:

---

136. While he divided the flesh of the ..., and devised a cunning plan.

​

137. He split her up like a flat fish into two halves;

​

138. One half of her he stablished as a covering for heaven.
....
140. And bade them not to let her waters come forth.

​

141. He passed through the heavens, he surveyed the regions (thereof),

​

142. And over against the Deep he set the dwelling of Nudimmud.

​

143. And the lord measured the structure of the Deep,

​

144. And he founded E-shara, a mansion like unto it.

​

145. The mansion E-shara which he created as heaven,

​

146. He caused Anu, Bl, and Ea in their districts to inhabit.

​

1. He.(i.e. Marduk) made the stations for the great gods;

​

2. The stars, their images, as the stars of the Zodiac, he fixed.

---

I asked if the ancient Israelites were let in on the so called "plot devices" and "polemical references" to unhistorical and unscientific pagan concepts.Martin Luther sure wasn't

quote:

---

Lectures on Genesis
Martin Luther
"Indeed, it is more likely that the bodies of the stars, like that of the sun, are round, and that they are fastened to the firmament like globes of fire, to shed light at night, each according to its endowment and its creation."

​

Martin Luther, Luther’s Works. Vol 1. Lectures on Genesis, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1958), p.42

---

Then

quote:

---

Luther
ibid. p.30
We Christians must be different from the philosophers [i.e. scientists] in the way we think about the causes of these things. And if some are beyond our comprehension (like those before us concerning the waters above the heavens), we must believe them and admit our lack of knowledge rather than either wickedly deny them or presumptuously interpret them in conformity with our understanding.

---

If a biblical text is proven to be unscientific, then it is just a "polemic against the pagans" or "poetic language this is simply a plot device".Gods, monsters, and cosmological conceptions that are now seen as unscientific were never meant to be literal history. So it goes now.Or are the cosmological conceptions in Genesis accurate? We now hear about "vapor canopies" which were able to project the stars into our field of vision so as to match the Genesis text with "science". A creationist Carl Baugh said that the early "firmament" might have actually sung the stars into the field of our senses in an acoustic way (I heard that somewhere).It's just the mention of pagan primeval monsters that is polemical I suppose? Genesis is both polemical and scientifically accurate at the same time?When does the mythological creature referencing polemical tactic end and the straight literal historical record begin to be used in the text?And when the heck were the ancient Israelites "in the know" when it came to the tactic? Nevermind the early, not to mention medieval, Christians.

quote:

---

In addition, to even find any reference in those two lines to creation or some primal chaos you need to even cherry pick the translation.

---

Here is an English translation of the Septuagint (which is super-important when it comes to Job)

quote:

---

12He has calmed the sea with his might, and by his wisdom the whale has been overthrown.

​

13And the barriers of heaven fear him, and by a command he has slain the apostate dragon.

​

Job 26 Brenton's Septuagint Translation

---

Job 26:12 Hebrew issues
Job 26:12 Hebrew Text Analysis
Hebrew Concordance: ma -- 3 OccurrencesJob 26:13 Hebrew issues
Job 26:13 Hebrew Text Analysis
Hebrew Concordance: llh -- 1 OccurrenceI have only quoted from the NRSV till my Septuagint translation.I use the NRSV because is seems to be somewhat neutral when it comes to translating verses in order to match theological beliefs and also because is uses the 27th (?) edition of Nestle-Allen while the NIV (and most others) use only the 21st edition. The World Council of Churches is the largest protestant organization in the world and they attempted to have a scholarly translation.The NRSV plus Septuagint aren't exactly the translations to go to when one attempts to cherry pick. I'll use an example later to show you what the NIV does. I'll think of one.

First the issue.

quote:

---

Exodus 13:2 Sanctify unto me all the firstborn, whatsoever openeth the womb among the children of Israel, both of man and of beast: it is mine

​

13 and all the firstborn of man among thy children shalt thou redeem.

​

Jeremiah testifies to the fact that burnt offerings and sacrifices were not ordered on the day Israel left Egypt.

​

Jeremiah 7:22 For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices.

​

This is in contradiction to the text of Exodus 12:43 to 13:16. To free the people from this bondage is the task of Amos, Isaiah and Jeremiah.

​

Amos 5:22 Though ye offer me burnt offerings and your meat offerings, I will not accept them: Neither will I regard the peace offerings of your fat beasts.

​

24 But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.

​

25 Have ye offered unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O house of Israel?
Forbidden

---

The NIV adds words and changes the text so as to match the Exodus text. But the Hebrew words are nowhere to be found in any text.
Jeremiah 7:22-24 NIV - For when I brought your ancestors out - Bible GatewayThe NIV, despite itself, seems to admit that there is a contradiction (albeit in a dishonest way) when the text gets altered in translation.The NIV is a go to translation for quote mining to change the original text's meaning.There are others for sure, but the NIV is amazingly dishonest.Not the NRSV. Especially not the NRSV when it is used alongside Septuagint translations.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

NIV
"He stirs up the sea with His power,
And by His understanding He breaks up the storm.
By His Spirit He adorned the heavens;
His hand pierced the fleeing serpent."

​

NASB

​

"He quieted the sea with His power,
And by His understanding He shattered Rahab.
"By His breath the heavens are cleared;
His hand has pierced the fleeing serpent..."

---

Here is a scholarly translation and commentary on text (scroll up slightly for beginning of coverage of the area of interest)God's Battle with the Monster: A Study in Biblical Imagery - Mary K. Wakeman - Google BooksHere is a piece of Catholic endorsed scholarship

quote:

---

Collegeville Bible Commentary
NIHIL OBSTAT: Robert C. Harren, J. C. L.
IMPRIMATUR: +Jerome Hanus, O. S. B.
Bishop St Cloud Minnesota
October 19, 1988
(COPYRIGHT 1992 by The Order of St. Benedict, Inc., Collegeville, Minnesota)

​

p.690
Verses 12-13 name the sea dragon, the mythological figure for chaos: God stirs up Sea (better than NAB the sea), crushes Rahab, and splits open the dragon.

---

Fundamentalist scholarship below

quote:

---

Illustrated dictionary of the bible
HERBERT LOCKYER, SR., EDITOR
with F.F. Bruce and R.K. Harrison
( Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986)
.
Scores of leading evangelical scholars contributed articles for this project.
.
-The Publishers
.
p.898
RAHAB THE DRAGON [RAY hab] (agitated)-a mythological sea monster or dragon representing the evil forces of chaos that God subdued by His creative power.
....
God’s smiting of Rahab is described in Job 26:12 (NIV) to signify God’s power over the chaos of primeval waters at the Creation. The NKJV translates as the storm for Rahab.

---

See fuller quotes of the last 2 books here
EvC Forum: Evidence of a seas monster myth in Genesis 1? Even fundi scholars admit so(?)! Enough of this quote mining business. (accusations and such)
Sorry for the large number of quotes.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Job 26:12-13 NIV - By his power he churned up the sea; by - Bible GatewayHere is a link where one can look at all the translations for Job 26:12-13I think I quoted the NKJV above and said it was the NIV.The NIV might be the second. Not the NASBComputer was stalling badly when I was pasting.Here is NASB

quote:

---

Job 26:12-13New American Standard Bible (NASB)

​

12 He quieted the sea with His power,
And by His understanding He shattered Rahab.
13 By His breath the heavens are [a]cleared;
His hand has pierced the fleeing serpent.

---

NKJV

quote:

---

Job 26:12-13New King James Version (NKJV)

​

12 He stirs up the sea with His power,
And by His understanding He breaks up the storm.
13 By His Spirit He adorned the heavens;
His hand pierced the fleeing serpent.
New King James Version (NKJV)

---