Well, alas, I didn’t get a fight (any real disagreement) over my contention that Genesis is a subversive text concerning its view on patriarchy, that is contra the common idea that is is written supporting strict patriarchy it was instead written in a surrounding that was very patriarchal yet within contains subversive elements undermining the same. No disagreements lead to less discussion.
An interesting thought occurred to me during the class. Now that we had completed our discussions of the independent stories of creation, the cosmological/ontological and the moral/political in which we refrained from “mixing” the stories, that is to say we regarded them independently. But now that we are done, we might regard the question of why the redactor/editor juxtaposed them in this way? Here’s my thought on this:
The first story tells how in its ontological unfolding of a taxonomy of creation that the Cosmos is intelligible. The second story begins to tell the story of how Man is intelligible as well