For a more sharply focused discussion of Ong's philosophical thought, see my essay "Understanding Ong's Philosophical Thought" at the UMD library's digital commons:
d-commons.d.umn.edu:8443/handle/10792/2696
For Ong, in the book THE TWO-EDGED SWORD: AN INTERPRETATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT (Bruce Publishing, 1956), the American Jesuit biblical scholar John L. McKenzie (1910-1991) establishes that the existentialist and personalist orientation of the Hebrew Bible.
Now, to spell out the obvious, Sacks believes in a personal God. In addition, he discusses the Hebrew Bible, especially the stories in Genesis extensively in his new book. Indeed, he claims that Genesis is a "philosophical treatise constructed in the narrative mode. It represents truth-as-story rather than truth-as-system, and it does so for a profoundly philosophical reason: it is about meanings, and meanings cannot be conveyed except through narrative -- by a plot that unfolds through time, allowing us to enter the several perspectives of its dramatis personae and sense the multiple interpretations (narrative and counter-narrative) to which stories give rise. Unlike philosophical systems, which we either understand or don't, biblical narrative functions at many different levels of comprehension. Out understand of it deepens as we grow" (page 171; his emphasis).
To spell out the obvious, Sacks does NOT claim that Genesis, or any other part of the Hebrew Bible, is a philosophical treatise in the ancient Greek philosophical tradition of thought.
Granted, we do NOT usually think of philosophical treatises as constructed in the narrative mode.
Nevertheless, the narrative mode abounds in Plato's writings. In the book THE MYTHS OF PLATO (Macmillan, 1905), John Alexander Stewart has compiled all of the narratives from Plato's dialogues in Greek and translated them on parallel pages into English.
So if the narrative mode was perfectly acceptable for Plato to use to construct his philosophical dialogues, then the narrative mode surely must be acceptable for the anonymous human authors of Genesis, and other parts of the Hebrew Bible, to use to construct their philosophical arguments.
But Sacks works with the opposition of the biblical thought-world to the mythological thought-world (pages 88, 116, 117, and 141) that parallels and is consistent with the opposition that Mircea Eliade works with in his book THE MYTH OF THE ETERNAL RETURN, translated by Willard R. Trask (1954; orig. French ed., 1949), a work that Ong frequently refers to.
Also see Eric Voegelin's book ISRAEL AND REVELATION (1956), which Sacks quotes (page 230).
As Sacks notes, the Hebrew Bible argues that time is more than a cycle of eternal recurrences (page 157). As he points out, historical time "makes its first appearance in the Hebrew Bible, and constitutes one of the most original contributions to human thought" (page 140). Sacks says, "Biblical consciousness is chronological" (page 171; his emphasis).
For a perceptive account of the difference between the mythological thought-world and the ancient Greek philosophical thought-world, see Eric A. Havelock's book PREFACE TO PLATO (1963), a work that Ong never tired of referring to.
Despite Sacks' strong argument that the Hebrew Bible does NOT represent the mythological thought-world of ancient Greek mythology found in the Homeric epics, the ILIAD and the ODYSSEY, and in ancient Greek tragedies, he unequivocally characterizes certain biblical narratives as expressing the mythological thought-world found in ancient Greek sources. But then he belabors the brilliant distinction between what he refers to as the narrative (the mythological thrust) and the counter-narrative in Genesis (pages 121, 123, 124, 125, and 172). In Genesis, at least at time, the counter-narrative undercuts the narrative, most notably in the extended story about Jacob.
But Sacks does NOT claim to detect a mythological thrust in the story about Abraham -- who is considered by all three monotheistic traditions -- Judaism, Christianity, and Islam -- to be the exemplar of their religious faith. In plain English, Sacks does NOT see Abraham as representing a mythological hero. As Sacks points out, Abraham "sought to be true to his faith and a blessing to others regardless of their faith" (page 4). But Sacks sees young Jacob as representing the spirit of the mythological hero.
However, Sacks himself says that Jacob's wrestling match at night with the angel of God "was Jacob's battle with existential truth. Who was he? The man who longed to be Esau? Or the man called to a different destiny, the road less travelled" (page 138).
Presumably each and every one of us must wrestle with such existential questions.
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
