i) Sorry I didn’t make that more clear to begin with. I hadn’t planned on getting that deep into the explanation here.

ii) I’m talking about the chapter 1 story and first 3 verses of chapter 2 which were written later by preists or the “P source”. Genesis chapter 2 was a story created earlier (from the “J” source). I’m sure you have studied the sources of the Torah at some point, but I’ll recap it here to provide the historical order of the stories to illustrate my point and provide background for anyone that is unfamiliar with the sources. There are 3 main sources in Genesis (and the rest of the Torah).

1) “E” stories of Israel or northern kingdom (God is referred to as Elohim in these texts)

2) “J” stories of Judea or southern kingdom (God is referred to as YHWH in these texts)

3) “P” stories of the priests and scribes which were added to join the two into one unified text

There are possibilities of a few other smaller sources, but the language, writing styles, and cultural references all point to these 3 main separate sources.

Each of the 2 kingdoms had their own stories which were combined later by priests. This was done well after the creation of the nation of Israel and hence after the establishment of the Sabbath as a tradition. This is why we have more than one creation account. Genesis chapter 2 is one of the original stories of the “J” author or the people of the southern kingdom. Chapter 1 (the 6 day creation story) and the intro 3 verses to chapter 2 comes from the “P source” authors which were priests that added text to tie the two traditions together and make the stories fit and often provided a preface to introduce the story and sometimes to provide commentary or more detailed interpretation of a story and tie the story into the established rituals. One of the goals of this new combined Torah was to provide unity in the now reunited kingdom (post-exile).

So in Chapter 1, we have priests interpreting the chapter 2 story and adding in the emphasis of the already established tradition of honoring the Sabbath. I don’t see that the intent was to inform about creation as much as it was to reinforce the importance of the Sabbath. We see this again with the first 3 verses of chapter 2 which were added from the “P” source material to introduce the “J” story and tie it to chapter 1.

I realize that is confusing boiled down into such a small space. IF anyone hasn’t seen this or wants to know more check out this book which is one of the better illustrations of the sources. It makes it really clear by displaying the text in color coded sections. http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Sources-Revealed-Richard-Friedman/dp/0060530693

iii) I’m not sure why you are hung up on the term “social justice”. It seems simple to me. I must be missing something. You mention that you have a problem that it might mean a correction of injustice. That seems adequate to me. What would “kingdom of God” mean if it didn’t mean correction (or replacement) of the current kingdom/system which is not operating on God’s value system. Asking that God’s will be done on earth is saying that the current order of things needs to be corrected.

I do hear the message of social justice in those words of Isaiah. The idea of “one God” is a notion created to enforce identity of a community (family or tribe). We have to remember that these people were accustomed to living in and around a pluralistic society prior to the establishment of Israel and the reunited kingdom. In that pluralistic society, each individual village had their own god. To say we all worship the one true god means that we are all aligned under the same system of rule (kingdom/government/tribe). A tribe’s “god” was what united people and gave them identity. By speaking of YHWH or Elohim, these people were meaning to say “us” or “our community” or the force that gives us our identity. That too is social justice. To say, “there is no god but god” means that our allegiance is to our community and our group identity. By fighting against the Roman Imperial theology that had been enforced, they were fighting for their need to have their own unique identity preserved. That is very much an issue of social justice. Even today, identity preservation is an important part of a just society in a multicultural area. Think about issues surrounding language and culture assimilation in a migrant society. We are dealing with that issue of social justice in America today and it has always been an issue in Europe.

For these people to say “there is no god but god” is not so much saying that we believe our god exists and your god doesn’t. I think ancient Israelites believed the Baal existed just as much as YHWH, but they believed YHWH was more powerful. YHWH (Elohim) was the only god for them. He was all powerful but there was not a push to renounce other gods as not being “real”. It was about proper allegience not proper belief. Allegience to one system of rule is absolutely about social justice. These people had no concept about electing leaders they instituted their rule of allegiance, justice, law and order through their religion. There would not have been a distinction between religion and social justice. It was all the same and the point was community (a peaceful just society) or in other words, it was about “Shalom”.