Volunteering as Contributor Five ...

After James Hoffmeier, Gordon Wenham, and Kenton Sparks, AND Lita Cosner.

Before doing this assignment, I only looked at this quote:

The three contributors were asked to do the following:

1) identify the genre of Genesis 1–11; 2) explain why this is the genre of Genesis 1–11; 3) explore the implications of this genre designation for biblical interpretation; and 4) apply their approach to the interpretation of three specific passages: the story of the Nephilim (6:1–4), Noah and the ark (6:9–26), and the Tower of Babel (11:1–9) (p. 20).

I'll volunteer as contributor 4 ... or five. Lita Cosner is contributor four, as far as I am concerned, and this is were you will find not just above backstory, but also her own response:

CMI : Genesis as ancient historical narrative
by Lita Cosner
https://creation.com/genesis-as-ancient-historical-narrative

Now, here is mine.

• 1) a) Genesis 1 is a vision by Moses and b) Genesis 2 to 11 is orally transmitted history.
  
  
• 2) a) For most of Genesis 1, we have no human observer and it can be known only by revelation : tradition says Moses was given this revelation; b) for all of Genesis 2 after God created Adam and up to Genesis 11, we do have human observers, these are not (except those last mentioned in Genesis 11) immediate parts of Abraham's Beduin tribe, and chapters are so short that they could be edited orally for ideal memorisation. They contain three patrilinear and monolinear genealogies, the Cainite one in Genesis 4, the Sethite one in Genesis 5 and the post-Flood one from Shem to Abraham in latter half of Genesis 11, and one patrilinear and branching genealogy known as table of nations in Genesis 10. The three spanning several generations were cumulative works. Like the orally transmitted genealogy from Kunta Kinte to Alex Haley, which led the writer back to his African ancestor - except the transmission was under better conditions each time than that of Kunta Kinte's. The table of nations could well be a "family snapshot" from before Noah died. All the rest is normal narrative of events, each event or series of such reduced to bare essentials so as to be easily memorised. Confer the rest of Genesis, 12 to 50, which are richer in detail and which would have been preserved in writing in the tribe of Abraham - a Beduin tribe will find some place to stock a few tablets or papyrus scrolls. (The oral tradition would normally have been first written, and early ones of following chapters, like 12, following these more closely as models in historiography).
  
  
• 3) There is something else than the genre in these chapters which has implications for interpretation : they are (like their "pagan cousin" Mahabharata and Puranas) leftovers from lost societies. The wording was such as to have some comprehensive content for the new society preserving them, but due to technology loss this could differ somewhat from original notional content and have to be rediscovered. If a Behemoth can be rediscovered as a Sauropod, while tradition had wavered between Elephant and Hippopotamus, because both Elephant and Hippo remind of Sauropod, then there could be other things to rediscover.
  
  
• 4) a) Nephelim : I don't think we need to take Zecharia Sitchen into account. He considers it as self evident that man as such is "primitive" and anything sophisticated came from space or secret societies or ... his main choice being space. Now, I disagree. It seems Judaism has four interpretations : "angels taking risks" (as in book of Henoch), Sethite marrying outside Sethite pious society (think if a believer married a witch and this allowed demons to influence offspring), Cainites marrying outside Cainite pious society (same thing, but considering the line of Cain as a pious one), and tyrants "chosing" brides against the will of the concerned or their parents. Christianity has two traditions, these being the first two, and St Augustine being a main promoter of the Sethite view, and casting Cainite society as the impious one, with the impious women who seduced Sethites.
  
  I tend to the angelic view, note that angels don't have bodies (a position considered as sententia certa among Roman Catholics of the Latin rite) meaning the fallen angels impregnating women would be using human semen also gathered by illicit seductions of human - males. Alternatively, angels have ethereal bodies, really did change them to material ones and DNA appearing as part of that process, and women were mating with something biologically nearly human, though immortal and not meant to do that kind of thing.
  
  In any case other than the last one, either Sethites marrying witches or fallen angels acting as inseminators, the exceptional powers of Nephelim could be due to some covenant with demons rather than biological factors. Those of Samson were due to a covenant with God, I tend to think those of Theseus and Hercules were due to a covenant with the devil, and such things would be possible before the Flood too.
  
  
• 4) b) I'll take this line from Noah and the Ark :
  
  [19] And the waters prevailed beyond measure upon the earth: and all the high mountains under the whole heaven were covered. [20] The water was fifteen cubits higher than the mountains which it covered.
  
  The Abrahamic society which transmitted this were probably not well aware of the entire globe's geography with Australia and Americas. But Noah would have been very well aware of pre-Flood geography. Hence, if he built the Ark on THE then highest mountain, which would make sense, so you don't bump into it from below as waters rise, he would have known water covered it as well as all lower ones. The Abrahamic society transmitting this would not have been great boat builders, but Noah would have been able to know the waterline was going to be 15 cubits, from shape and weight of Ark with all load. Thus, when they felt the Ark moving, they knew the Ark was having a 15 cubit water line at a height of at least 15 cubits and an inch, or more - i e, at least 15 cubits higher water than the presumably flat mountain top.
  
  One can add that details on this verse pair:
  
  [11] And the earth was corrupted before God, and was filled with iniquity. [12] And when God had seen that the earth was corrupted (for all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth,)
  
  were probably preserved (with erroneous addition of polytheism and of too direct identification with India) in Mahabharata, where things are mentioned that indicate nuke wars were part of the horrors.
  
  
• 4) c) I don't know what word you would use for "rocket" if you had to describe it in a language which lacked the word and you were not allowed to use the word "rocket" as such.
  
  For firework rockets, three known words are "rochetta" meaning distaff (because of shape), "fusée" meaning pommel part of a sword (because of shape), and "pyraulos/piravlos" meaning fireflute, because of shape and function. I don't know what the Chinese word for rocket is. Or what it meant prior to meaning rocket.
  
  Our space rockets take the word from the firework rockets. But suppose a space rocket were the primary factor. How would you describe it? For me, a "tower" would be a very good approximation. And if it were a three step rocket, ONLY the top would be meant to reach heaven or space. If we take a look at Mahabharata and its indication there was a pre-Flood nuke war, Nimrod, but not all those transmlitting the text, would have been aware of expolsive potential of Uranium - a very bad rocket fuel. Not ideal to handle as liquid Oxygen and Hydrogen are. So ... making sure this stopped would have saved then and there the world from a second nuke disaster and also prepared these latter day perhaps a bit safer experiments in rocketry.

Hoping to not have strayed outside the boundaries of Orthodoxy, I will now enjoy the contributor number 4.

Hans Georg Lundahl
St Maur
St. Stanislaus of Krakow
7.V.2018

Sancti Stanislai, Episcopi Cracoviensis et Martyris, qui sequenti die coronam martyrii consecutus est. .... Cracoviae, in Polonia, natalis sancti Stanislai, Episcopi et Martyris, qui a Boleslao, impio Rege, necatus est. Ipsius autem festum pridie hujus diei celebratur.

The reason we celebrate St Stanislas today rather than tomorrow is, tomorrow's main feast is St Michael's Apparition on Mt Gargano.