Part II – Gen. 10:1 – 32 – Table of the Nations
It will help if you read the notes for this chapter, http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/10. The notes make the original meaning of the passage more accessible to us.
To begin you might notice that the first verse reads, “These are the descendants of Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth, to whom children were born after the flood.” While the last verse reads, “These are the clans of Noah’s sons, according to their origins and by their nations. From these the nations of the earth branched out after the flood.” Beginning and ending a passage in similar wording is called an inclusion, a literary device to mark off the passage. In other words, this passage is a piece of literature; it was written in faith to people of faith for the sake of their faith.
The second thing to notice, if we exempt Nimrod from the count, 70 generations are identified. By now, perhaps, the number 70 might be recognized as having symbolic meaning for the Israelites. Our struggle is that the number 70 spoke to the original audience; it moved them. For us, however, it probably leaves us cold, it has little or no meaning. When we thing of wedding anniversaries, for example, 25 and 50 have special meaning. I just turned 70 and that had more meaning than 69 had. But even these two examples have meaning primarily in their counting value. It would be a misread of the text to think of 70 as having primarily a numerical value; that is, there were 70 descendants and only 70.
A third thing to notice is that in verses 21 and 22, Shem is introduced twice and, in addition, six generations are listed for him while only three are listed for his two brothers. This, again, is a way for the author to indicate that Shem has greater importance, not because Shem is more important but because his descendants meant more to the author. It helps to understand the times in which the author wrote to understand what he wrote, what God revealed and the notes make that a bit more open to us.
Reading and Discussion
Reading the passage is, in itself, a challenge; many names are difficult to pronounce, most of them are foreign to us, and the truth is scholars have not been able to identify exactly who these tribes, nations were in every instance. Nonetheless, I would encourage you to read aloud the passage.
Despite its difficulty, our group didn’t take long to engage in a lively discussion. Heber remarked, as I mentioned in Part I of this session, “No place in here does it mention any of the wives names …” We’ve addressed this observation previously. A little more fuel to the fire was added by other comments in the discussion. For example, Jodie shared that in her literature class at Akron U., the professor told them that during this period women were thought of as unimportant.
We have to keep in mind that the dominant culture of this time was patriarchal; all things, other persons, and events were understood through the lens of the male. To rise to the level of our times would be to recognize that cultural realities are not the same as revelational realities. Often the scripture is used to justify a particular cultural reality embedded in the times in which the scriptures were written. And, as is often the case, those who want to use the scripture to justify a particular cultural value, pick and choose passages to bolster their argument. Maybe you could mention examples of this type of abuse of scripture that you have experienced.
For Christians, the lens through which the whole of scripture needs to be understood is the person of Jesus, the Christ. But to appreciate what is written about Jesus is also to recognize the cultural realities of his day. This whole discernment of cultural values and religious values is quite challenging. For me the starting point to do this would be to make the following statement. I am not a citizen of the United States who happens to be a Christian. I am a Christian who happens to have been born in the United States.
Much more was discussed about the relationship between men and women in the past and into the present. Enough has been written, however, to give you a reference frame for your own discussion. I invite you to join the discussion