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

quote:

---

And as I have said, even if true it is still just an irrelevancy and distraction from the subject matter of Job

---

Earlier you were obsessed with the King James translation.Here is the NKJV translation.

quote:

---

Job 26
12He 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.

---

"storm" was Rahab.This fits even (slightly) better with the point I am trying to make. Tiamat was the preexisting sea and primordial abyss.Here is the Hebrew cognate word from the same root. Tehom and it was in the first few verses of Genesis 1. Here is the fundi dictionary definition.

quote:

---

Illustrated dictionary of the bible
HERBERT LOCKYER, SR., EDITOR
with F.F. Bruce and R.K. Harrison
( Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986)
p.293
DEEP, THE-a vast space, expanse, or abyss. He term is used in Scripture in several ways. The first use occurs in Genesis 1:2: The earth was without form, and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep (Gen. 1:2). The word may refer in this phrase to the chaos existing at creation, or it may indicate the vast expanse of waters which covered the earth at creation (Ps. 104:6; Prov. 8:28).

---

Remember that it said Rahab represented the primordial chaos

quote:

---

ibid.
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.

---

But back to the NKJV and 26:13a
"By His Spirit He adorned the heavens"That fits even better with Enuma Elish, doesn't it?

quote:

---

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.

---

The New King James version has Rahab translated as"the storm" but then says the "heavens" were "adorned" as the "serpent" was "pierced". All in verse 13 of Job 26. In Enuma Elish the tail of Tiamat was used to make the Milky Way (I need to find a better, and more complete translation of Enuma Elish). Tiamat was the primordial sea and a serpent. The "Sea" god Yam was mentioned in Job 26:12a and Rahab was crushed in verse 12b.It fits even better with the NKJV except you need to understand that "storm" it Rahab.The parallels are striking. Job 26:12-13, Enuma Elish, and Genesis 1 all come together.In Genesis 1, the intelligent biological life didn't exist until AFTER the placing of the lights in the firmament (which Tiamat was used for in Enuma Elish), just like in Job 26, where the heavens were "adorned" and intelligent life still wasn't created yet. Just like Enuma Elish. The primordial serpent wasn't mentioned in Genesis 1 but the deep/tehom was. cognate with Tiamat and parallel to Rahab. The dragon was the deep/primordial waters, firmament, stars, ALL in Enuma Elish. The chaos matter that became the raw material for the universe.

quote:

---

Job may have believed in a bunch of stuff that is not described in Genesis. If he said that God was greater than Set, would that, in your mind, elevate Set towards reality or to the same level as the Creation story as told in Genesis.

---

It (Job) mentioned a preexisting dragon (that was pierced) as probably the material to adorn the heavens. It was pierced at the same time as the heavens were made.If it (Job or wherever in the scripture) said that Set was the material for the universe, then that would be another thing.The devil is in the details.

quote:

---

Fundy's say a lot of cute stuff. They are just adorable. Yeah, verse 7 is clearly a description of a creation level event.

---

Job 26:7?It is a adorning of the universe with the earth, right?26:7-13 do seem related to the creation of Genesis, in a slightly different tradition (textual or otherwise).Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Even if true they are still simply irrelevant and just another cause to miss the whole point of Job. And again even what you post does not support a primal serpent. There are actual serpents you know and they are far more common than any primal serpent.

---

Even fundamentalist scholars disagree with you.I'll quote it again.

quote:

---

Illustrated dictionary of the bible
HERBERT LOCKYER, SR., EDITOR
with F.F. Bruce and R.K. Harrison
( Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986)

​

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.

---

You are hardly standing on strong ground in your statements.And, since you ignored the documentation the first time, I'll remind you that it is parallel to "the deep" from the first verses of the Bible.

quote:

---

ibid.
p.293
DEEP, THE-a vast space, expanse, or abyss. He term is used in Scripture in several ways. The first use occurs in Genesis 1:2: The earth was without form, and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep (Gen. 1:2). The word may refer in this phrase to the chaos existing at creation, or it may indicate the vast expanse of waters which covered the earth at creation (Ps. 104:6; Prov. 8:28).

---

post 33 of jar says:

quote:

---

A serpent.
There is no dragon in Job.

​

And you continue to simply quote mine, to take small sections out of context.

​

I agree that is also what fundamentalists and so called "Biblical Christians" do but it is as pitiful and silly when you do it as when they do it.

---

I am assuming that a primeval serpent mentioned as a parallel on par with the adorning/making of the heavens (as the NRSV and NKJV have it) would be a very large serpent (otherwise known as a dragon) at that.You first accused me of quote mining because I failed, in my various posts, to quote from the couple of several hundred year old Bible translations you dug up. (granted you also were upset that I had the audacity to not ignore just a few verses - 26:12-13 - in Job. The fact that I acknowledge the relevance of Job 26:12-13 seems to have you questioning my approach)Here is jar's post 20.

quote:

---

[jar]
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.

---

He then went on to quote the c.1890 ASV (which the c. 1950 RSV was the direct successor and the 1990 NRSV was the successor to both), the 1611 King James, and the 200-300 year old Douay-Rheims to prove that I was quote mining.I either pay too much attention to the text of Job or I "cherry pick" the translation because I ignore the ASV and instead quote from it's grandson successor the NRSV. And I quoted the NEW King James Version of the last half-century too btw. I admit that I don't know what the actual successor of the Douay-Rheims is. Why do we have to use translations that almost date back to the middle ages anyway?

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
God then marks out the horizon of the ocean, which is the place where we see the separation of night and day (v. 10). The cosmic pillars (v.11) hold up the heavens, that is, the dish-shaped dome (or firmament) that keeps out the waters above (see Gen 1:6-8). God’s rebuke (v.11) is the storm-god’s thunder or war cry, which strikes fear in the heart of God’s foes (see Ps. 104:7-9). 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.

---

Sorry for having to quote it again, but jar seems to just want to make pronouncements - based on little more than the weight of his own authority -, and ignore every last bit of academic documentation I present from the qualified sources.

quote:

---

Yes I disagree with what you and the scholars you quote say, not based on my own authority but rather on what is actually written

---

Here is the NKJV again.

quote:

---

Job 26
12He 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.

---

"he breaks up Rahab, by his spirit he adorned the heavens (stars surely referenced), his hand pierced the fleeing serpent"

quote:

---

and the fact that I see quote mining and taking pieces parts out of context as dishonest, irrelevant and a total waste of time meant only to obscure and pervert the Bible stories real purpose.

---

I'm glad you feel there was some grand purpose in the book of Job, but your "big picture" obsession hardly means that the actual lines of the text should be ignored.You have some strange definitions for terms like "out of context" and "quote mining".

quote:

---

"Probably the material to adorn the heavens". Probably based on what reasoning or calculation?

​

And where does the text say that the dragon was pierced at the same time the heavens were made. Again, the verses in question describe God's might works, only some of which are creation related.

---

Because the making/adorning/furnishing of the heavens is placed right after Rahab is smote and right before the spearing of the serpent. Right smack in the middle is the making of the heavens. The relation is clear.

quote:

---

Again, the verses in question describe God's might works, only some of which are creation related.

​

Example:

​

"8: He bindeth up the waters in his thick clouds; and the cloud is not rent under them."

​

Not a creation event.

​

"9 He holds back the face of his throne and spreads his cloud upon it."

​

Not a creation event but an ongoing state of affairs expressed in present tense.

​

"10 He hath compassed the waters with bounds, until the day and night come to an end."

​

A creation event.

​

"11 The pillars of heaven tremble and are astonished at his reproof."

​

Not a creation event. A statement of power based on God's current circumstance.

​

"12 By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he shattered Rahab."

​

Who knows when this happened. The seas grow rough even today at times.

​

"By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent."

​

Not sure what to make of that... Garnished means something other than created although it may describe a happening during creation. Not sure about the rest of the verse. Some poetry may not be worth the time and trouble to unravel. The story of Job is about something else entirely. The verses given here are to allow us to appreciate God's power as expressed by Job in a way that his peers would understand.

---

Genesis 1 says God placed the stars in the firmament, so "placing" might be the standard.Your translation is old and/or bad. It looks like the KJV 1611.Here is the Yale Anchor Bible Dictionary scholarship.

quote:

---

John Day, "Rahab (Dragon)"
vol. 5, The Anchor Yale Bible Dictionary, ed. David Noel Freedman
(New York: Doubleday, 1992),
610-11.

​

RAHAB (DRAGON) [Heb rahab (רַהַב)]. The name of a mythological sea serpent or dragon, lit. boisterous one, referred to a number of times in the OT (Ps 87:4; 89:11Eng 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12; Isa 30:7; 51:9). The name of this monster has not hitherto been discovered in any extrabiblical text. In the OT, Rahab functions similarly to Leviathan, an originally Canaanite chaos monster, but whether these are to be identified or are separate monsters in origin is not entirely clear.

​

Rahab appears in two different contexts in the OT. On the one hand, it appears as a sea monster defeated at the time of creation (Ps 89:11Eng 89:10; Job 9:13; 26:12), and on the other as a metaphorical name for Egypt (Ps 87:4; Isa 30:7). In Isa 51:9 the two usages may be fused.

​

Ps 89:10—11Eng 89:9—10 declares to Yahweh, You rule the surging of the sea: when its waves rise, you still them. You did crush Rahab with a mortal blow, you did scatter your enemies with your mighty arm. The following (vv 12—13Eng 11—12) clearly spell out the creation context of this conflict, so that it is necessary to reject the view of those scholars who see here an allusion to the Exodus or, as some would maintain, to both Exodus and creation. The references to God’s conflict with Rahab in both Job 9:13 and 26:12 also appear to be set in creation contexts. Job 26:12—13 reads: By his power he stilled the sea; by his understanding he smote Rahab. By his wind the heavens were made fair; his hand pierced the twisting serpent (nāhā bārı̄aḥ).

---

You quoted me asking.
"It is a adorning of the universe with the earth, right?"Then you said.

quote:

---

Adorning? Why do you call it that? I suppose anything God made could be considered an adorning.

​

"He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing."

---

I called it that because jar preferred the KJV translation as somehow authoritative. So I used the NKJV "adorning" instead of "made".

quote:

---

Where do you get Rahab from?

​

I am a fundamentalists and the first thing you have to do is know what the original text says to understand it. Or you have to use a good translation.

​

What you are quoting is not a translation of it is supposed to be a transliteration but they used the Masoretic text which has vowels and the original did not have vowels.

​

A true transliteration would be Rhb.

​

means: 1.pride, blusterer.

---

Then

quote:

---

In the last half of the verse Job is deriding Bildad about his pride.

​

In verse 13 the crooked meaning 1.fleeing serpent meaning 1.serpent, snake.

​

I hope that explanation satisfies you and if it don't you are free to believe anything your mind can imagine it says.

---

I prefer to let scripture define scripture.Take the "fleeing serpent" of Job 26:13 and the "he smiteth" Rahab of 26:12 "smiteth is Hebrew mchz. "fleeing serpent" is nchs brych. The so-called "formed" translation of the KJV is is chll.Here, in Psalms, the KJV translates chll as"wounded"

quote:

---

Psalm 109:22
HEB: אָנֹ֑כִי וְ֝לִבִּ֗י חָלַ֥ל בְּקִרְבִּֽי׃
NAS: And my heart is wounded within
KJV: and my heart is wounded within
INT: and my heart is wounded within

---

But back to the use of nchs brych.Let scripture define scripture.Here is the NIV translation of Is. 27:1

quote:

---

In that day, the LORD will punish with his sword-- his fierce, great and powerful sword-- Leviathan the gliding serpent, Leviathan the coiling serpent; he will slay the monster of the sea.

---

The "gliding serpent" is the exact same nchs brych of Job 26:13 so that is a clear parallel.The "coiling serpent" of Is. 27:1 is Hebrew nchs 'qlltnThe "monster of the sea" is tnyn 'sr bym . Now 'as is therelative pronoun "who, which, that" ... "in Yam" or "in the sea"Now lets look at the Lotan parallel in Ugaritic text KTU 1.5 I 1-4.

quote:

---

"When you smite Lotan the fleeing serpent ... the twisting serpent ...with seven heads, the heavens will wither...

---

"you smite" is Ugaritic tmchz which is same root as mchz in Job 26:12 and KJV 'he smiteth"."twisting serpent" is Ugaritic btn 'qltn which is same as Hebrew text in Is 27:1 nchs 'qlltn (translated coiling serpent" in NIV) except for the doubled consonant in the Hebrew.Psalms 74:12 (or round about) has Leviathan with multiple heads.The scholars seem to be allowing the scripture to define the scripture, then comparing it to the Canaanite texts , which use nearly the same language, for further clarification to seal the deal.

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.

---

You might like the King James and its translation (you quoted it in #42, and rested upon it's text)

quote:

---

Job writes:
26:12 He divideth the sea with his power, and by his understanding he smiteth through the proud.

​

26:13 By his spirit he hath garnished the heavens; his hand hath formed the crooked serpent.

---

You prefer the latter (the 1611 King James), the 1st century Jews (like Jesus and his followers) prefered the former.The Rabbinical commentaries were also on the side of the modern scholars translations and 1st century Jews.The scholars look at the uses in the entire Bible anyway.

It is an interesting issue, and one that needs further research. Archaeological digs hopefully can discover much in Iran, Pakistan, and India. Much has been destroyed by changer water courses and the construction of dams. The sad fact is that civilization lived along the waterways and they have been changing course, destroying underground ruins that probably contained countless precious texts - now destroyed. Dams have been a nightmare for those who want to see some impressive discoveries. Permanent destruction that is just terrible - priceless and irreplaceable treasures (like texts) gone forever and never able to be discovered and learned from.When Egypt, Iran, Turkey, etc. needed to build dams to help their economic situation, it is sad that we were spending our billions of $$ on bombs instead of offering compensation projects in return for not building dams. Nice if we would have funded archaeological research.It would seem a no-brainer to build solar plants in Egypt for example. Give them billions of $$ to fund solar projects instead of building a dam. Too late for that.Anyway.The issue Phat raised.From wikipedia

quote:

---

Dragon or serpent[edit]

​

Further information: Chaoskampf

​

One common myth among almost all Indo-European mythologies is a battle ending with a hero or god slaying a serpent or dragon of some sort (Watkins 1995).
Zeus vs. Typhon, Kronos vs. Ophion, Apollo vs. Python, Heracles vs. the Hydra and Ladon, Perseus vs. Ceto, and Bellerophon vs. the Chimera in Greek mythology;
Thor vs. Jrmungandr, Sigurd vs. Fafnir and Beowulf vs. the dragon in Germanic mythology;
Indra vs. Vrtra in the Rigveda;
Krishna vs. Kāliyā in the Bhagavata Purana;
Fereydun, and later Garshasp, vs. Zahhak in Zoroastrianism and Persian mythology;
Perun vs. Veles, Dobrynya Nikitich vs. Zmey in Slavic mythology;
Făt-Frumos vs. Zmeu in Folklore of Romania
Tarhunt vs. Illuyanka of Hittite mythology;
Proto-Indo-European mythology - Wikipedia

---

The Hindu story is actually from the Rigveda.

quote:

---

Rigveda is one of the oldest extant texts in any Indo-European language.[13] Philological and linguistic evidence indicate that the Rigveda was composed in the north-western region of the Indian subcontinent, most likely between c. 1500—1200 BC,[14][15][16] though a wider approximation of c. 1700—1100 BC has also been given.[17][18][note 1]
Rigveda - Wikipedia

---

The issue came up earlier as to whether other stories are actually ancient.This is of an undisputed pre-1000 BCE age. Older than pretty much the entire Bible.Here is an interesting reference, related to what we have been discussingFrom the google cache

quote:

---

Some rabbinical texts equate Leviathan with Tiamat, the primordial cosmic dragon as ... Leviathan's portrayal also parallels that of the earlier Ugaritic Lotan (or ... In the Hindu myths, Sesa-Ananta is the thousand-headed dragon who is older ...

---

Here is the google book link.
Encyclopedia of Earth Myths: An Insider's A-Z Guide to Mythic People, Places ... - Richard Leviton - Google BooksThis is the title
Encyclopedia of Earth Myths: An Insider's A-Z Guide to Mythic People, Places ...
By Richard LevitonWe have to deal with the documents and evidence we have, not what we should have had by now.

I'm sure the 1611 Englishmen knew so much more about the Hebrew text than the Septuagint translators. The Septuagint dates back from 150-200 BCE (and tradition puts it close to 300 BCE) and it was a translation by Jews in the extreme part of northern Egypt, not far from Palestine.The King James translators though that Pharoh Necho II of Egypt was fighting the Assyrians when their ignorance of the language prevented them from seeing that he was helping Assyrians. Remember the death of Josiah?No modern translation makes that same mistake.

Jar didn't like my use of the NRSV so he went cherry-picking (while accusing me of what he was doing) and his examples were always the early English translations.ICANT thinks the King James is the last word because it was somehow pristine or something.I always have used the Septuagint as a response, because it is old old old for a translation.However I never really commented on the implications of the areas where it differs from the scholars translations.

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.

---

It is very solid ancient testimony that Rahab was a water creature and not "pride" as the KJV translates things.It is solid evidence that there was a slaying of the serpent from verse 13 and not a making of the serpent as the KJV has it.But what about the "barriers of heaven fear him" part? Why so different.Because the Septuagint uses different Hebrew texts (than the KJV) as its source. The original Job text might have been a different one than what the KJV uses. And it could have been the LXX type as we see here.So how does the issue of "barriers of heaven" stack up to the point I am trying to make?Remember that Tehom in Genesis 1 was split up to make up the "firmament" that was a barrier between outer space and our earthly atmosphere, and what we know to be outer space was what the Bible describes as the "waters above" being divided from the "waters below" (the whole world was water below the firmament till dry land appeared).Tehom is this

quote:

---

Illustrated dictionary of the bible
HERBERT LOCKYER, SR., EDITOR
with F.F. Bruce and R.K. Harrison
( Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1986)
p.293
DEEP, THE-a vast space, expanse, or abyss. He term is used in Scripture in several ways. The first use occurs in Genesis 1:2: The earth was without form, and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep (Gen. 1:2). The word may refer in this phrase to the chaos existing at creation, or it may indicate the vast expanse of waters which covered the earth at creation (Ps. 104:6; Prov. 8:28).

---

It is parallel to Tiamat AND parallel to Rahab both!From the same fundamentalist dictionary

quote:

---

ibid. p898
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.

---

Got that? Rahab is" representing the evil forces of chaos" and "chaos of primeval waters " while Tehom/DEEP is "chaos existing at creation, or it may indicate the vast expanse of waters which covered the earth at creation".Got it? Fundamentalist scholarship.Now Tiamat in Enuma Elish.

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.

​

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),

---

Sounds like "the barriers of heaven", doesn't it?Fits even better with the context!And this is the textual type that Jesus, James, and the Apostles used.

quote:

---

where did you get Rahab from? You do not get it from the meaning of which is what is in the Hebrew text.

---

It is in various places in the scripture.Not just one place.And the Septuagint doesn't agree with you.These are ancient Jews who translated the LXX.

quote:

---

you choose to believe what someone tells you the scripture says.

---

This coming from the person who has essentially anointed a bunch of Englishmen from 1611 as the representatives of divine revelation.

quote:

---

The Hebrew word translated formed in Job 26:13 and the Hebrew word translated wounded in Psalm 109:22 are two different words.

---

I admit that I was squinting to see the Hebrew characters, but they looked the same to me.Then you responded to me saying:"The "coiling serpent" of Is. 27:1 is Hebrew nchs 'qllt"Your response was

quote:

---

Why quote the worst translation ever since the New World Tranalation.

---

Amazing that you ignored the Hebrew transliteration - the actual issue of my post. And I quoted the NIV because it was the first online text I found for Is. 27:1 (computer was going real slow). The translation was almost irrelevant.I was showing that nchs 'qllt was used for Leviathan exactly as it was used for Job 26:13.Worry about the parallel.It means that not only do the endless scriptural references to Rahab (by name!) clearly indicate a sea creature, as opposed to "proud", but the Leviathan verses also are a parallel witness to what we are dealing with when we see the word "Rahab".Not what the KJV says.It's what the Bible of Jesus, Paul, James, etc. said. The Jewish Septuagint translators of the 2nd century BCE knew it was an aquatic creature.They disagree with the Englishmen of 1611 A.D. (that you hold in higher esteem than Jesus it seems).You then took issue when I said
"The scholars seem to be allowing the scripture to define the scripture"You said

quote:

---

What scholars are you talking about?

---

All the ones I quoted, including the work by scores of leading evangelicals.

From Strong's Hebrew: 2490. (chalal) -- pierce2490. chalalStrong's Concordancechalal: pierce
Original Word: חָלַל
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: chalal
Phonetic Spelling: (khaw-lal')
Short Definition: pierceBrown-Driver-Briggs
I. חָלַל verb bore, pierce (Arabic perforate, pierce through, transfix, Ethiopic (hollow) read; Aramaic חֲלַל hollow out, חֲלִילָא pipe; adjective hollow, cave, sheath, etc.; Late Hebrew in derivatives חָלָל noun hollow, adjective slain, חָלִיל pipe);
Qal Perfect לִבִּי חָלַל בְּקִרְבִּי my heart is pierced (wounded) within me Psalm 109:22 (? literally one has pierced my heart; or readPu`al חֻלַּל ?); Infinitive construct חַלּוֺתִי הִיא Psalm 77:11 it is my piercing, my wound (my woe, my cross; so Ew Hi De Bae MV SS Ki. 341, but Hup Pe Bi Che read חֲלוֺתִי my sickness).Pi`el Participle plural (Baer) בְּיַד מְחַללֶי֑ךָ Ezekiel 28:9 in the hand of the ones wounding thee (Sm Co read מְחוֺלְלֶ֑ךָ).Pu`al Participle מְחֻלֲלֵי חֶרֶב pierced by the sword Ezekiel 32:26.Po`el Perfect3feminine singular חֹלֲלָה יָדוֺ נָחָשׁ בָּרִחַ Job 26:13 his hand pierced the fleeing serpent; Participle feminine מְחוֺלֶלֶת תַּנִּין Isaiah 51:9 who pierced the dragon.Po`al Participle מֲחֹלָל מִמְּשָׁעֵינוּ Isaiah 53:5 pierced, wounded because of our transgressions (of the servant of ׳י, "" מְדֻכָּא מֵעֲוֺנֹתֵינוּ).II. [חלל] verb denominative play the pipe, pipe Qal Participle plural וְשָׁרִים כְּחֹלֲלִים Psalm 87:7 as well the singers as the pipe-players, compare AV; < RV Pe De Che Bae and othersPolel Participle from 1. חוּל dancers.III. [חָלַל] verb pollute, defile, profane;more

I just found the larger body of text for the Britannica Zoroastrianism.Before I get to that, the issue about Zoroastrianism I want to cover.Here is an example of why the religion must be understood. Just one example.Remember that even fundamentalists admit that Jews didn't believe in resurrection.

quote:

---

Resurrection was a late arrival on the scene in classic biblical writing, however. Much of the Hebrew Bible assumes that the dead are in Sheol, which sometimes looks uncomfortably like Hades: The dead do not praise the Lord, nor do any that go down into silence (Psalm 115:17). Clear statements of resurrection are extremely rare[2]. Daniel 12 is the most blatant, and remembered as such for centuries afterwards: Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt (Daniel 12:2). Daniel is, however, the latest book of the Hebrew Bible.
The Resurrection of Resurrection - NTWrightPage

---

Now the text.

quote:

---

Indian and Iranian beliefs in the afterlife have many features in common, probably dating back to the Indo-Iranian period: a feminine encounter, a bridge with dogs watching it, a heavenly journey. In the ancient Indian texts, the Upaniṣads, the soul is welcomed in heaven by 500 apsaras (cloud maidens). In Iran the soul meets his own religion (dan) in the form of a beautiful damsel if he has lived justly; otherwise, he meets a hideous hag.

​

Either before this encounter or after, according to the various texts, the soul must cross a bridge. This, with the young girl and the gods, is attested in India in the Yajurveda and the Upaniṣads. In the Gths it is called the Bridge of the Requiter. It leads the good souls to paradise, but the bad ones fall into hell.

​

The soul has also to undergo a judgment; it appears before Mithra and his two companions, Sraosha and Rashnu. Finally it ascends through successive stages representing respectively his good thoughts (the stars), good words (the moon), and good deeds (the sun) to the paradise (of infinite lights). In the Veda it is said only that the sojourn of the good deed is beyond the path of the sun. In paradise the soul is led by Vohu Manah, the Good Mind, to the golden throneof Ormazd.

​

Hell also has, symmetrically, four levels. And there is, for the souls whose good actions exactly balance their evil ones, an intermediate place.

​

Zoroastrianism | Definition, Beliefs, Founder, Holy Book, & Facts | Britannica

---

Remember how the very late book of Daniel (no earlier than 500 BCE even according to fundamentalists) introduced the concept of a resurrection?

quote:

---

NRSV
2 Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 Those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky,and those who lead many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.

---

Only mentioned after contact with the Persian Empire.Interesting issue of influence, and it affected Paul's terminology (and maybe even more than just terms of speech and analogies)

quote:

---

The Beginning of the Gospel: Probings of Mark in Context
By Adela Yarbro Collins

​

In other words, they are given celestial bodies, like those of the heavenly beings. That Paul's understanding of resurrection was similar to that expressed in Daniel 12 is supported by Paul's comparison of resurrected bodies to the sun, moon, and stars in 1 Cor 15:40-41. Both Daniel 12 and 1 Corinthians 15 express the notion of resurrection in terms of astral immortality.

​

The Beginning of the Gospel: Probings of Mark in Context - Adela Yarbro Collins - Google Books
Daniel 12:2-3

---

The, conservative "Sadducees who denied it" were the majority of the Temple officials.The evidence seems to be that Zoroastrians influenced the late 2nd Temple Jews and not just with regards to the the astral issues. It is very difficult to imagine that the influence came from Palestine to Persia. Persia influenced Palestine, though there were lots of cross currents over such a long period.The astral issues seemed relevant to the topic of this thread.