Alberto Rus Lhuillier on Astronomy among the Maya

  

Astronomy

 

In comparison to the ancient peoples of the Old World (Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Chinese, Greek), the methods used by the Maya for astronomy were rudimentary. The Maya used a pole set upright on the ground to mark the moment when the sun passed by the zenith of a particular spot and rods with intercrossed threads to trace the sight lines to significant astronomical points. We know some buildings were constructed for astronomical purposes, amongst these, the so called Caracol or Observatory at Chichén Itzá and Mayapán, the tower of the Palace at Palenque and the F. Group Complex at Uaxactun. In these structures sight lines leaving from a point on the staircase of the pyramid and directed towards three temples aligned on a platform opposite, determine the points on the horizon from where the sun rises at the equinoxes and solstices.

 

Despite the lack of accurate instruments the Maya determined precisely the cycles of the moon, the sun and of Venus, as well as some of the constellations. For the Moon they observed a cycle of approximately 29 and a half days. According to the Dresden Codex their exact calculation was for 29.53086 days and today modern scientists calculate the figure as 29.53059 days.

 

According to modern observations the actual tropical year (the solar cycle) has a duration of 365.2422 days. With the addition of the leap year every four years in the Gregorian calendar, the cycle is estimated at 365.2425 days, which is more accurate than the Gregorian calendar by one day in every 10 thousand years. The correction to the accumulated error was made with the civil calendar of 365 days.

 

For the cycle of Venus they established a pattern of 584 days divided into different phases. The morning star phrase was 236 days, for 90 days the planet disappeared, returned for 250 days in the evening star phase and then finally another disappearance, this time for 8 days. In modern astronomy, the Venus cycle has the following phases, respectively: 240, 90, 240, 14 with a total duration oscillating between 580 and 587 days, averaging 583.92 days.

 

Although it is unproven, the Maay ought to have known the cycles of the other planets whose hieroglyphs appear on their inscriptions. Great importance was given to stars and constellations. Some of the most important ones were the Pole Star Xaman Ek, or the big star, that guided merchants and travelers, the Pleiades or Tzab, “the rattles” and Geminin or Ac, “the turtle”. The representation of animals hanging from the celestial belt in the Paris Codes has led to the suggestion that a zodiac was used for some prophesying.

 

In the Dresden Codex, a table or register predicting eclipses has been identified that is valid for 33 consecutive years, and repeated to infinity. Modern calculations show that the table is in general accurate. Differences are small, not exceeding one day. (Alberto Rus Lhuillier, The Ancient Maya [trans. Margaret Shrimpton; Mérida, Mexico: Dante, 1992], 37, 39)

 

Robert Butterworth (Jesuit Priest) on Creation

 On Genesis 1:

 

It would be difficult to maintain that the first Genesis account expressly teaches that God created all things out of nothing. The notion of ‘nothing’ was unimaginable to the unphilosophical author, but he can still get across the essential truth that whatever does exist was created by God. For this reason everything that exists is good, as the author repeatedly insists. There is no dualism of a good and a bad principle at play in the work of creation. Evil did not exist alongside God, and cannot have come from him. Man, too, stands in a privileged position, directly and specially created by God with God-like qualities: no mixture of clay and a dead god’s blood. (Robert Butterworth, The Theology of Creation [Theology Today Series 5; Butler, Wis: Clergy Book Service, 1969], 37)

 

 

Commenting on 2 Maccabees 7:

 

Not only does this mother’s speech display the sustaining power that faith in God the Creator had come to have among the Jews; it also shows how, through contact with Greek thinking, the Jews were able to make clear, in a way that had been beyond the author of the first Genesis account, that God created what exists out of nothing. The myth of pre-existing chaos, independent of God, had been finally laid to rest. (Robert Butterworth, The Theology of Creation [Theology Today Series 5; Butler, Wis: Clergy Book Service, 1969], 41)

 

In other words, before 2 Maccabees and the influx of Greek thinking among the Jews, the Genesis 1 account, as well as creation itself, was understood as being ex materia. Of course, I dispute the reading proposed for 2 Maccabees, as do many scholars.

Genesis 1 Teaching Creation from Pre-Existing Materials in the March 1, 1888 Issue of "The Christadelphian"

While browsing materials on the "guph" in the Bible, I came across the following. It is interesting to note that the author of this article in The Christadelphian concluded that the Genesis 1 creation was discussing creating from pre-existing materials (i.e., creation ex materia) in 1888 (*) 

 

1. In the beginning.—We have here the first note of divine revelation; less than this it could not be, for man had not yet been called into existence. The question afterwards addressed by the Almighty to Job, might with equal propriety have been addressed to Adam—“where wast thou,” said Yahweh, “when I laid the foundations of the earth?” (Job 38:4.) The introductory words of this oracle tell us plainly, that there was a divinely initiated starting point, to all that constitutes heaven and earth; and that therefore, what has come to be called “matter,” is not eternal, with respect to its past existence (as some say.) This is confirmed by the Spirit of wisdom speaking through Solomon, for says wisdom, ‘the Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old. I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was. When there was no depths, I was brought forth; when there was no fountains abounding with water; before the mountains were settled, before the hills was I brought forth: while as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields, nor the highest parts of the dust of the world” (Prov. 8:22–26). The Genesis beginning is the beginning of a purpose, requiring as the basis of its operations, the creation of a human habitation, commensurate with the vastness, and far-reaching character of the scheme, before the divine mind. The phrase “in the beginning,” may therefore be said to cover the whole of the productions embraced in the first chapter; for while chapter one commences with the words “in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”; chapter two begins with the declaration “thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them” The first verse of the first chapter comprehends the generation of the substance out of which the subsequent six days creations were developed. This is to be inferred from the fact, that at the beginning of the six days work, the Spirit begins to operate upon already existing materials, to wit, an earth “without form and void,” a deep enveloped in darkness, and a heaven without light (Jer. 4:23). How long these pre-existing materials had been in course of formation, we are not informed, for the chronology of human affairs commences with the second verse. (“Expository Notes: Genesis, Chapter 1,” The Christadelphian 25, no. 285 [March 1, 1888]: 168-69, emphasis in bold added)

 

(*) Christadelphians do affirm creation ex nihilo (although Robert Roberts, the second pioneer of the movement, did not like that phrase in his works).

John Turner Marshall on the Pre-existence of Souls and the "Guph"

  

PRE-EXISTENCE OF SOULS.—The only hint in NT of a belief in the existence of human souls prior to birth is in Jn 9:2, where the disciples of Jesus put the question, ‘Rabbi, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind?’ The primâ facie interpretation of this passage certainly is that the disciples believed it possible that the soul of this man had sinned before the man was born. Many commentators, as, e.g., Dr. David Brown, hold this to be untenable, because ‘the Jews did not believe in the pre-existence of souls.’ If by this is meant that this belief did not form part of the older Jewish religion, that would be correct, for the tenor of OT teaching is distinctly traducian. In Gn 2:7 we are taught that the soul of the first man was due to the Divine in-breathing; and Gn 5:3 tells that ‘Adam begat a son, after his image.’ But to affirm that Jews in Christ’s time did not believe in pre-existence, is simply inaccurate. The disciples of Jesus had at all events some points of affinity with the Essenes; and Josephus expressly states that the Essenes believe that the souls of men are immortal, and dwell in the subtlest ether, but, being drawn down by physical passion, they are united with bodies, as it were in prisons (BJ ii. viii. 11). In Wis 8:11 the doctrine is clearly taught: ‘A good soul fell to my lot: nay rather, being good I came into a body that was undefiled.’ Philo also believed in a realm of incorporeal souls, which may be arranged in two ranks: some have descended into mortal bodies and been released after a time; others have maintained their purity, and kept aloft close to the ether itself (Drummond, Philo Judæus, i. 336). In the Talmud and Midrash, pre-existence is constantly taught. The abode of souls is called Guph, or the Treasury (אוֹצִד), where they have dwelt since they were created in the beginning. The angel Lilith receives instruction from God as to which soul shall inhabit each body. The soul is taken to heaven and then to hell, and afterwards enters the womb and vivifies the fœtus. (Weber, Lehren des Talmud, 204, 217 ff. [Jüd. Theologie auf Grund des Talmud², etc. 212, 225 ff.]).

 

Whence did Judaism derive a creed so much at variance with its earlier faith? Most probably from Plato. There are some scholars, however, who find support for the doctrine even in the OT: e.g. Job 1:21 ‘Naked came I from my mother’s womb, and naked shall I return thither.’ To find pre-existence here, one must suppose the mother’s womb to be the abode of souls, and ‘I’ to be the naked soul. Sir 40:1 seems to be explaining the word ‘thither’ in Job 1:21, when it says, ‘Great travail is created for every man, from the day they go forth from their mother’s womb to the day of their return to the mother of all living.’ Again, in Ps 139:13–15 some scholars find an account of the origin, first, of the body, then of the soul: ‘Thou hast woven me in the womb of my mother. My substance was not hid from thee, when I was formed in the secret place, when I was wrought in the deeps of the earth.’ Since the doctrine of pre-existence is not in the line of Revelation, most divines are reluctant to admit that it is taught in these passages. Dr. Davidson on Job 1:21 says, ‘The words “my mother’s womb” must be taken literally; and “return thither” somewhat inexactly, to describe a condition similar to that which preceded entrance upon life and light.’ And as for Ps 139:15, Oehler, Dillmann, and Schultz prefer to interpret it of the formation of the body in a place as dark and mysterious as the depths of the earth. The passage in Jn 9:2 simply represents the earlier creed of the disciples. There is no evidence that it formed part of their mature Christian faith. (John Turner Marshall, “PRE-EXISTENCE OF SOULS,” in A Dictionary of the Bible: Dealing with Its Language, Literature, and Contents Including the Biblical Theology, ed. James Hastings et al. 5 vols. [New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1911–1912], 4:63)

 

François Bovon on Luke 2:48

  

Τί ἐποίησας ἡμῖν οὕτως (“why have you treated us like this?”) is a Hebrew Bible formulation. It belongs “always in the context of a deception, out of which it is spoken; thus it is an expression of ‘disillusionment’ or ‘disappointment.’ In this sense, the idiom also suits perfectly the situation presupposed in Luke 2:48.” The postpositioned οὕτως (“like this”), which refers back to v. 43 and not to Jesus’ last action (vv. 46–47), appears instead of the proleptic τοῦτο (“this”), which shows that Luke is consciously using this old formulation. Usually, “I” takes the first place in a coordinated formula (“I and Barnabas,” 1 Cor 9:6). Mary says here, “Your father and I.” According to Augustine, Mary is following the ordo conjugalis (in Eph 5:23, the man is the head of the woman); but Luke is rather trying to make the wordplay about the two fathers clearer (vv. 48, 49). (François Bovon, Luke 1: A Commentary on the Gospel of Luke 1:1–9:50 [trans. Christine M. Thomas; Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2002], 113-14, emphas in bold added)

 

J. Reiling and J. L. Swellengrebel on Luke 2:48

  

ho patēr sou kagō odunōmenoi ezētoumen se ‘your father and I were looking for you in great anguish’. The subject consists of a noun in the 3rd person and a pronoun in the 1st, hence the verb is in the 1st person plural. odunōmenoi ‘(being) in great anguish’ goes with the subject of the verb ezētoumen, and indicates the state of mind in which Joseph and Mary were during their search.

 

^. . .

 

Anxiously. Versions in English and several other languages have to render the attributive participle, qualifying the state of mind of the agent, by an adverbial expression, qualifying the action performed by the agent while being in that state of mind. Elsewhere it is better to shift to a co-ordinate verbal clause, ‘and we were worrying’, “and have been very anxious” (Goodspeed). Several translators follow Goodspeed in using a stronger expression than RSV does. e.g. ‘much distressed/troubled’ (Thai, Tagalog, Kapauku, Sundanese), “in anguish and grief” (BFBS), in order to give expression to the emphatic position the word has in the clause. For anxious, i.e. worrying and apprehensive of ills that may happen, c.p. on 10:41. (J. Reiling and J. L. Swellengrebel, A Handbook on the Gospel of Luke [UBS Handbook Series; New York: United Bible Socities, 1993], 152)

 

The Syriac Chronicle Known as that of Zachariah of Mitylene (6th-century) Discussing Soteriology

  

"For you rightly and justly say that the doctors are not in opposition to one another, even as Paul is not in opposition to James when the one says, By faith is a man justified with- out works,' while the other wrote, 'Faith without works is dead'; because Paul spoke of faith before baptism, which is the perfection of confession out of a pure heart, when it has not previously displayed good works in the world, but such a man is justified by believing and confessing and being baptized; while James referred to faith after baptism, when he said that it is dead without works, if a man does not confirm it by right action. For baptism is the earnest of a good conversation; since even our Lord, who was to us an instructor, after He had hallowed the water and been baptized by John and given us the institution of baptism, went up to the mountain and underwent a struggle with the tempter and destroyed all his power, thereby guiding us, that we might know that after the divine cleansing we ought to display a contest in deed and to struggle according to law with the adversary, therein displaying our virtues.

 

"But someone will object, and say, 'Behold ! Paul took Abraham as a proof that a man is justified by faith without works, saying, "Therefore they that are in the faith are blessed with the believing Abraham" and, "To him that hath not worked but hath believed on Him that can justify sinners his faith is reckoned for righteousness" while James proved by the case of Abraham that a man is not justified by faith only, but by works confirmed by faith. And how are these not contradictory? for the same Abraham is an example of those who have not worked but believed, and of those who have shown faith by faiths.’

 

Wherefore he said of Abraham also that" I am ready to explain from the Holy Scriptures. For he who examines the periods of Abraham's life [will see] that he is an instance of both, of the faith which before baptism confesses salvation by believing in Christ, and of that after baptism which is joined with works, which is a reproduction of the old circumcision of the flesh, which drives away5 the denial of uncircumcision and brings to us the adoption as sons by God; wherefore Moses also was ordered to say thus to Far'oh; And say thou unto Far'oh, "Israel is my son, my firstborn."' Wherefore Paul writes to the Colossians and says, 'In whom ye were circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the flesh of sins and in the circumcision of Christ, and ye were buried with Him in baptism.' he was justified by faith without works while he was in un- circumcision, before he was circumcised, thus pointing to confession before baptism without works, writing to the Romans, 'To Abraham his faith was reckoned for righteousness. How? Not through circumcision, but in uncircumcision.' And he did not speak falsely; for the words of Moses are witness, which say of God that He said to Abraham, 'Look toward heaven and tell the stars, if thou be able to tell them'; and He said, 'So shall thy seed be': and Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.

 

"But again our master James also took the same Abraham as an example in the faith which saves by works after baptism, he being then circumcised and not in uncircumcision. And we may learn from the Scripture; for he writes thus: 'Wilt thou know, O man, that faith without works is dead? For our father Abraham was justified by works, when he offered Isaac his son as a burnt-sacrifice. Thou seest that faith wrought with his works, and by works was made perfect. And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith," Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness: and He was called his friend."' It is easy again for one who reads the writings of Moses to learn from the book of Genesis that Abraham, after he was circumcised, offered Isaac as a burnt-sacrifice5 and fulfilled the commandment and was justified by works, giving us an instance of faith after baptism, which is a spiritual circumcision, justifying a man by works; for it is written, 'Abraham was circumcised, and Ishmael his son, and those born in his house, and those bought with his money from strange peoples'; and then God, trying Abraham, said to him, 'Take thy son, whom thou lovest, even Isaac, and get thee to the high land; and offer him there as a burnt-sacrifice.' Accordingly these words of the apostles and those written in the old law do not seem to be in opposition to one another, but to be one, and to have been spoken by one spirit concerning faith before baptism, which justifies the man who presents him-self upon a short confession only without action, baptism being full salvation if a man depart from the world forthwith, and another faith, which is after baptism, which requires the proof of good works and also raises the man to the measure of perfection and to high place. And so also James very properly says of it that faith is made perfect by works; since the wise Paul also in another place gives similar teaching respecting faith, saying that it is made perfect through works: for the Galatians, after they had been baptized and been reckoned sons of God through the Spirit, were perverted to Judaism and were circumcised, since they vainly supposed that by the circumcision of their flesh they gained something in Christ beyond the uncircumcised; and he wrote to reprove them, saying, 'In Jesus Christ neither circumcision nor uncircumcision availeth anything; but faith which is worked out by love.' From this also, therefore, it is plain that that kind of faith after baptism is of avail and saves with which work is joined and united in love; and what work done in love is Paul declares and says, 'Love is long-suffering and kind; love is not envious and excited and puffed up, nor is it ashamed; and it seeketh not its own, and is not provoked; and it imputeth no evil; and rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; and it hopeth all things, and endureth all things. Love doth not quickly fail.' These things are for the direction of action and labour and toil, that many may be profited and be saved, when united to faith. And who will dare to find fault? for respecting this our Lord also said, 'If ye love Me, keep My commandments.' (The Syriac Chronicle Known as that of Zachariah of Mitylene, Book 9, Chapter 13 [trans. F. J. Hamilton and E. W. Brooks; Byzantine Texts; London: Methuen & Co., 1899], 239-42)