There is differing views on how believers should interpret the book of Genesis, particularly verses 1-11.
Some believe the text should be read literally, as a history book; others believe the stories are of an allegorical style. People who believe in the latter view include early theologians Wikipedia - Allegorical interpretations
An allegorical interpretation of Genesis is a symbolic, rather than literal, reading of the biblical Book of Genesis. An allegorical interpretation does not necessarily preclude a literal interpretation; interpreters such as Origen of Alexandria and Augustine of Hippo maintained that the Bible is true on multiple levels at the same time.
Saint Augustine, one of the most influential theologians of the Catholic Church, suggested that the Biblical text should not be interpreted literally if it contradicts what we know from science and our God-given reason.
The literalist reading of some contemporary Christians maligns the allegorical or mythical interpretation of Genesis as a belated attempt to reconcile science with the biblical account. They maintain that the story of origins had always been interpreted literally until science (and, specifically, biological evolution) arose and challenged it. This view is not the consensus view, however…....
According to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams: “[For] most of the history of the Christianity there’s been an awareness that a belief that everything depends on the creative act of God, is quite compatible with a degree of uncertainty or latitude about how precisely that unfolds in creative time.[1]
Some religious historians consider that Biblical literalism came about with the rise of Protestantism; before the Reformation, the Bible was not usually interpreted in a completely literal way.
The earliest recorded Christian allegorical interpretation of a passage in Genesis is found in Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians in the New Testament. Paul writes:
“For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free woman. The child of the slave was born according to the flesh; the child of the free woman was born through the promise. Now this is being allegorized: for these women are two covenants. One, indeed, is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery. This is Hagar, for Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia and corresponds to the present Jerusalem, for she is a slave with her children. But the other woman corresponds to the Jerusalem above; she is free, and she is our mother.” Galatians 4:22-26
The wording of the phrase, “this is being allegorized,” indicates that Paul sees the passage as being true both literally and allegorically.
Philo’s masterwork, On Allegory, explores the deeper messages buried in the Biblical text and transforms Moses from a political and religious leader into a philosopher. Philo, in On Allegory, rejected simple and literalistic interpretations of the Bible, including the creation story as told in Genesis 1. “It is quite foolish,” Philo wrote, “to think that the world was created in the space of six days or in a space of time at all.” Six, as he saw it, represented to Moses (Philo assumed Moses to be the author of Genesis) not a number of days, but “a perfect number” signifying the perfection of God’s creation.
A couple of points came to mind after going over the reference material presented above.
One is that if we are undertaking serious bible study, we need to bear in mind a few points if we are to understand the piece in the way the author intended when it was written. Most books of the bible are straightforward, but I think Genesis 1-11 is written differently to, say, most New Testament books.
We need to bear in mind when doing bible study of a book:
1: The historical background
2: The author and date of writing.
3: The theme and message
4: The literary features, writing style and genre.
This book was written for people at a certain time with a clear intention. We need to be careful not to read it a way which would differ from this intention.
The bible may also be understood at another level without going into this depth, as well. The message of Genesis 1-11 may be read without knowing all this, but be appreciated for what is written.
I understand this scripture in that I believe in God, and I believe He created everything, but in a way which may not be fully appreciated, but which is explained here in a true but not a literal way. I think this was how it may have been understood in the ancient world.
PS: The other thing I must note. This forum on Mighty Church has a very limited number of contributors compared to the previous forum on the Christian Anglican site. Where have they all gone? I would have thought that someone might have some opinion on this topic?
We need to bear in mind when doing bible study of a book:
1: The historical background
2: The author and date of writing.
3: The theme and message
4: The literary features, writing style and genre.
Which is consistent with the way I’ve been taught on biblical interpretation (immediate context, historical context, systematic context).
Genesis 1:1-11 would appear to have four broad schools of opinion:
- God created the world in that order in seven days - YEC view
- God created the world in that order over a period of time, perhaps over seven days but perhaps over billions of years.
- God created the world in that order over a period of time, which is over billions of years. “Days” is symbolic.
- The world mystically evolved without God’s intervention; only the order is literally correct.
I’d say the passage lends itself to some allegory (option 3), as a “day” easily refers to a much greater period of time (cf 2 Peter?). But it is clear from the immediate and systematic contexts that God created, whether it be through the means of evolution or otherwise.
Many, like John Dickson for example, consider the early chapters of Genesis to primarily serve a theological purpose while not actually referring to the real world events of the creation, whatever they were.
I agree that Genesis has a primary theological purpose, but I think as a secondary (or even tertiary) purpose that it does and must be about the historical creation of the world. If it’s main purpose is to critique the pagan creation myths it will only be successful by telling the truth, of what actually happened. The sun isn’t to be worshiped and Gen 1 tells us that by showing that it was made after the earth, and even plants! But if in actuality the sun was created long before the earth, doesn’t that argument begin to crumble?
My current speculation is that there was a historical account passed down to Moses, who then rewrote it as a primarily theological account for the new Israelite nation.
Also, about “day”, I can’t read the Hebrew, but the argument that in the context of “evening and morning” “day” can only mean a single 24-hour period seems pretty convincing. The meaning of phrases and idioms takes precedence over the meaning of the individual words they contain.
But in the end, all I think is really essential is that you believe that before the fall there was no human death. Anyone who denies that denies the core of the gospel and is a massive heretic.
I believe there are various theories as to who wrote Genesis, particularly 1-11.
Wikipedia sums it up in “Book of Genesis” article:
Composition
For much of the 20th century, academic scholarship on the origins of Genesis was dominated by the documentary hypothesis advanced by Julius Wellhausen in the late 19th century. This sees Genesis as a composite work assembled from originally independent sources: the J text, named for its use of the term YHWH (JHWH in German) as the name of God; the E text, named for its characteristic usage of the term “Elohim” for God; and the P, or Priestly source, named for its preoccupation with the Aaronid priesthood. These texts were composed independently between 950 BC and 500 BC and underwent numerous processes of redaction, emerging in their current form in around 450 BC.
I don’t know about JEPD, but I’m certain God has better things to do than detail in human language what we believe an d hope is God’s ultimate creation.
It’s entire premise, that we can detect different sources based on the use of individual words, is wrong. There are theological reasons why YHWH is used sometimes and not others. P is sillier… why not have an S source for the parts preoccupied with swords?
Do you have good reasons to believe JEPD is a valid analysis of the source texts?
Doug, why do you say that? Isn’t God the inventor of human language, and wouldn’t he therefore have invented it in such a way that he can communicate to us everything he would ever want to?
Danni I think that we have had this dance before. It could go on forever, eg Archbishop Baronius about 500 yrs ago is quoted, ” the scripture tells how to go to heaven, not how heaven goes “. Its all about trying to personalise God. No harm in trying. Micheal Angelo tried it on a ceiling, but I don’t think he worshiped it.
JEPD doesn’t appear to make sense to me based on one common sense premise.
JEPD asserts that the earlier chapters of Genesis were composed (in various forms) after 1000BC. However, much of the later parts of the Old Testament were composed before 1000BC, based on when the events happened.
So some of the later OT was composed before the earlier chapters of Genesis? Doesn’t make sense to me.
JEPD doesn’t appear to make sense to me based on one common sense premise.
I can’t comment on the merits or otherwise of much of JEPD (Documentary Hypothesis), but ‘common sense’ tells me that Genesis was compiled from multiple sources.
Also, about “day”, I can’t read the Hebrew, but the argument that in the context of “evening and morning” “day” can only mean a single 24-hour period seems pretty convincing. The meaning of phrases and idioms takes precedence over the meaning of the individual words they contain.
Hi Danni,
but even if the word “day” is actually a 24 hour period, what does that actually mean? Surely context tells us that. If the context is a creative narrative purposely reinterpreting other ancient creation myths, but with Hebrew / Christian theology, then surely the whole genre tells us how it is to be read?
EG: If I said “Australians all let us rejoice, for we are greedy materialists, for gold and soil and wealth for toil, we’ll even sell our soul” you can see that I’m reinterpreting our national anthem, and that although certain phrases and terms might be “creative” or “poetic” even, I’m still making some very important points.
See the History of Creationism at CPX, but the great article “Genre of Genesis” seems to have been taken offline?
the link above says a lot about how arguments which lead to the “loss of face” can lead to lots of problems.
I personally have seen this from people who essentially are literalistic creationists. Creationism is really a religion of itself, seperate from Christianity in some cases.
Dave, see my thoughts in comment #3. I’ll accept it’s primary purpose is not to explain history/science. But I won’t accept that Genesis 1 is ahistorical. It looses all theological significance if what it says bares no resemblance to what God actually did when he created the world.
I personally see no reason why Genesis 1 cannot as it’s primary and most important purpose explain the doctrine behind creation and the place of humankind in it, whilst also explaining accurately what God did in history. The best way to explain what God thinks about humans is to actually make a couple of humans in the image of God, call them very good, walk around the garden with them, give them instruction, etc, and then tell us about it.
God takes the symbolic and makes it reality. He did this to so many things in Jesus. He also did it way back in Genesis 1.
That Genre of Genesis article was pretty good. It does indeed seem to have been taken offline… they didn’t even fix their links to it.
The Bible tells me that is was authored by the Holy Spirit through men and as part of the Trinity the Holy spirit being like God does not lie. So if Genesis says that the Universe, the earth and everything in it was made in 6 days why should I have a problem? God can do anything in any amount of time He chooses.
The fact is that scientists fully well know their dating techniques of rocks etc.. are flawed. You can’t really on their dating techniques. Really in the end it’s a matter of believing God’s Word or Man’s science. How often have we found years later the scientists got it wrong again. I’m putting my trust in God. He made everything basically as He said He did and on the 7th day He sat back and enjoyed it and “it was very good”.
GE 1:31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.
GE 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed in all their vast array.
GE 2:2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.
GE 2:4 This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created.
GE 2:2 By the seventh day God had finished the work he had been doing; so on the seventh day he rested from all his work. 3 And God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it he rested from all the work of creating that he had done.
Yes there dating methods can be wrong but notice how the seventh day has no begining or end. Also we have to remember that the Bible is not a science book its a book about God’s relationship with man. It’s like if you rock up to a cooking class exam and you’ve brought your ancient history book instead of a recipe book.
Well thank God the Bible isn’t a science book but it’s the Truth.
Science has got so many things partially wrong or some of it is just guess work based on dodgy evidnece.
It’s your choice wether you choose to believe man’s LIE or God’s Truth.
If you make it an allergory (unlike a parable as we are given what parables mean) then you basically leave it open to what any person thinks it could mean. So instead of God making the Universe we get the Big Bang happened and we eventually came out of the primordial ooze to evolve into human beings. So much for mankind being made in the image of God.
I’m not saying we get here a blow by blow scientifc explaination of the creation of the Universe to satisfy our human intellect (of today). As you read the account you see it didn’t just happen one day it was all planned and made by God in a structured and orderly fashion. Man was formed from the dust and to dust we return. We were given life through God Himself. We see Father, Son and Spirit all working together to form the Universe etc..
I don’t entertain the fact people can take this as they like. This is God’s account of creation, just an outline for us to get an idea of how He did it.
I certainly don’t accept we can marry any kind of science theories that are obviously anti-god into this account. You must understand many scientist’s hate God and openly will say they do not desire any acknowledgement of God at all in their profession. Why do you think Intelligent Design is down played and over shadowed by a faulty (based on openly false evidence) theory of evoultion. Even though there are many more scientifc proofs of Intellctual Design and not only more proofs but many examples of the same proof,not just one skull and a few finger bones found once. Intellectual design theory has been able to be proven and you can re-do the experiments or observations etc.. to get the same results time and again, making it proven by scientific methodology. However, this secular science theory is not taught in schools, pushed down the throats of the ignorant public because it can actually support Christian/Jewish Creation and so it is ignore and stifled. Even many well known/respected scientists have been professionally attacked for their support of Intellectual Design.
Satan doesn’t want you to believe the Bible can be true because if you are willing to make an exception here you will then start doing so in other areas as well.
The Word of God doesn’t come to us through human theories and philosophies. No one can understand it unless the Holy Spirit reveals it to them. If you want to be able to understand God’s Word pray for revealtion and the ability to believe it and no doubt it.
No argument I can put forward to you I’m sure will convince you to just receive God’s Word as truth. I leave that to the Holy Spirit. Praying for God to reveal His truth to you and enable you to believe without doubting so you may stay firm in your faith and not be shaken by the worlds intelligence which is often contrary to God.
1CO 1:20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.
1CO 1:26 Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.”
JAS 1:2 Consider it pure joy, my brothers, whenever you face trials of many kinds, 3 because you know that the testing of your faith develops perseverance. 4 Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything. 5 If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him. 6 But when he asks, he must believe and not doubt, because he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed by the wind. 7 That man should not think he will receive anything from the Lord; 8 he is a double-minded man, unstable in all he does.
JAS 1:12 Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, because when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life that God has promised to those who love him.
I don’t think understanding Genesis is as simple as ‘God’s truth vs man’s lie’. I personally don’t think that evolution can possibly stack up theologically but I still don’t think that Genesis 1 points to a definitive creation time of six 24 hour periods, in the order it suggests because in Genesis 2, when the earth was barren, God made man before plants and then he made animals.
I can reconcile that by understanding that Genesis a theological text that has no problem mucking around with the order of events but if you want to pin it down as scientific history, then you’re going run into some issues. For example, if event order doesn’t matter, then why should the period of time matter? And so on you go.
I know Answers In Genesis and similar organisations want to try and paint the discussions as ‘Good Christian Young Earth Creation Scientists vs Bad, evil evolution believing atheists’ but it just isn’t that simple.
I don’t think understanding Genesis is as simple as ‘God’s truth vs man’s lie’. I personally don’t think that evolution can possibly stack up theologically but I still don’t think that Genesis 1 points to a definitive creation time of six 24 hour periods, in the order it suggests because in Genesis 2, when the earth was barren, God made man before plants and then he made animals.
I can reconcile that by understanding that Genesis a theological text that has no problem mucking around with the order of events but if you want to pin it down as scientific history, then you’re going run into some issues. For example, if event order doesn’t matter, then why should the period of time matter? And so on you go.
I know Answers In Genesis and similar organisations want to try and paint the discussions as ‘Good Christian Young Earth Creation Scientists vs Bad, evil evolution believing atheists’ but it just isn’t that simple.
Lee you are right the Bible is not a scientific dissertation of how the world was created and everything in it. Approaching as such would be foolish. However as a Christian you either believe God’s Word that He created everything or you believe that it was all one big accident “no God required”.
If you choose to say “Oh I beleive in God but I beleive in Evolution as well because it sounds more plausable” it then colours your whole interpretation of life, this world and morality. For example I was watching a CSi last night and it had a murdered person who was under going Gender Reassignment (man to woman). Grissom says, “who knows maybe mankind had the ability like some clams that can become male or female to change genders when we first began to evolve but over time we lost that ability?”
Satan uses evolution to challenge Biblical Truth. I was thinking as I heard this statement last night on CSI how easy it was for people to use evolution to dimiss God’s truth.
GE 1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.
If you desire to look into science that supports Intellectual Design and Creation there are a number of ministries that do this using scientific methods and proofs. We get a magazine from Creation Ministries International and their website is http://creation.com/. They are going to show films challenging Darwinism throughout Australia in the upcoming months. Here is a blurb on it from their website.
2009 has already proven to be a pivotal year in the creation/evolution debate. It’s the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth, and the 150th anniversary1 of the publication of his book The Origin of Species. Evolutionists have been busy with special events, including feature films, TV documentaries, world-travelling exhibitions, tall-ship re-enactments of the HMS Beagle voyage, and much, much more. Even the free distribution of 200,000 ‘commissioned’ comic strip books featuring Darwin as a super-hero!
A unique opportunity
In response, Creation Ministries International, through our subsidiary Fathom Media and using a team of world-class professionals, has produced a major international documentary film costing over $1m.2 Structured around Darwin’s famous HMS Beagle voyage3 , it features stunning wildlife photography, period re-enactments and interviews with leading authorities from around the world. We made this 52min. documentary to the highest production standards utilizing media professionals so that it could be broadcast on general TV.
It is intended to be a thoughtful exploration, a crossover product to seek to influence the “mainstream” to ”think again” about Darwin. It is also a powerful tool that can “break down the barriers” of evolutionary prejudice, overcoming preconceived ideas about biblical creationists by its approach of being gentle and fair without compromising truth.4
Also go to this address for screening locations and times around Australia. It will be released later on DVD.
I’m not good at remembering scientific stuff and then talking about it with others. My husband seems to be like a sponge with this stuff and really can just recall it at the drop of a hat. He has a number of secular friends who are skeptical about Darwin and have already watched a few DVDs with my hubby on Intellectual Design and he has been able to use this topic as a great way to present the gospel to his male work colleagues and friends.
Even though I’m not good in sharing about this topic I still have taken the time to learn as much as I can manage. I like to use some of the magazine articles or booklets that you can get trhough this ministry. I have gone through these with people who have asked me questions about creation. In the end I have also had a chance to talk about God and the gospel. At least I didn’t just say “OH the Bible is true and that is not”, I armed myself with decent scientific evidence in the hope these people would open up to the Bible and come to know about salvation.
However, I first accept the Bible first and foremost as true from cover to cover. I don’t understand all of it but I still accept even the things I don’t fully understand was given to us from the God as true. One day in heave we will understand and know all of it. Until then we have to work as coming to know it little by little with the help of the Holy Spirit.
COL 1:9 For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you and asking God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all spiritual wisdom and understanding.
I don’t think evolution is true because quite simply Romans 5 states that death entered the world through one man Adam. I could be wrong but I don’t see how death could be in the world before sin.
Secondly, I’m not going to have a scientific debate with you because, to be honest, I know nothing about science and I would be willing to bet serious money you don’t either. Reading a few tracts cannot compare to the vast knowledge of what scientists have discovered and that scientists that actually do believe in evolution cannot settle on one answer on how it happened should warn us off making too many statements on these matters. If you have a PhD on biology, geology, astronomy, physics, chemistry or any other of the many disciplines of science, then by all means, debate all you like but if not, I think we should tread very carefully and humbly. In any case, we’re talking about interpreting Genesis theologically so we shouldn’t let science climb into that discussion (either for or against evolution).
Thirdly, and this is what I really want you to answer, was man created on the third or sixth day?
Sorry you think I was challenging you into scientific debate. I was not. I was only offering where you could find scientific evidence (by actual scientists) on this subject.
I don’t have a degree of any sort in Christian Theology but I do know and understand the gospel in a simple way and I share that knowledge regardless. It is the Holy Spirit that brings people to know and understand salvation not my intelligence or my dgree in Christian Theology.
I don’t have a Universtiy degree in science but I did do very well academically at High School and have a University degree (so I’m no dummy). Certainly I have enough knowledge to know the difference between a proven Theory and one that is not.
Even to know and understand the Bible you have to be willing to read the Bible regularly in order to learn more and more about the Lord and what He has recorded for us to learn and understand.
The choice is yours. If you are offended you have misunderstood my post. I’m sorry that you have.
Cheers
Milica
For others reading this thread. I hope you have the time and curiosity to take a look at some of the material offerred at these website I mentioned. I have found it very interesting and helpful.
Praise God we only need to know the Gospel of Salvation like Little Children and don’t need to have completed a PHD in Theology to become Saved and gain Eternal Life. We are Born Again as Spiritual Babies that first need milk and to grow into maturity until we can take Spiritual meat.
Praying for those who visit this forum that you will all grow in your knowledge and understanding of God’s Word and that you will be led into the good works He has prepared ahead of time for you to perform in your lifetime on Earth. Amen
Mmm science, that wonderful methodology where we repeatedly perform experiments to confirm or rule out our hypotheses. It’s always worked so great on the past! (Ever since we invented time machines we can experiment on the past as easily as anything!)
Praise God indeed we don’t need a Theology PhD to be Christians and I’m not saying you need one to be a part of this discussion, because I don’t have one either.
I’m still interested to know what day you think man was created.
[null]Abuse victim 'tried to kill warden'The West Australian[{}]“L” said he had been brought up in a Christian family, but after being sent to the Anglican hostel, he “saw the hypocrisy of the church” and had no faith since then. Now aged 52, he also told the inquiry he had been an advanced “A student” in his early ...
[null]Jean Pakter Dies at 101; Women's Health AdvocateNew York Times[{}]Abortion was still illegal during Dr. Pakter's early years in public health, and she had the task of compiling reports about the commerce in abortion. These reports provided some of the few reliable estimates in the country about the number of women ...
[null]Is the Church Becoming Less Catholic?New York Times[{}]That said, there is more to the Catholic Church's position on abortion than Maureen Dowd cares to acknowledge. The church views abortion as the murder of innocents and thus as an absolute evil, so “absolute intolerance” is not an inappropriate response ...
[null]Does It Mean Anything that a Record Low Are 'Pro-Choice'?New York Times (blog)[{}]Asked to pick one of the two labels applied to the abortion debate, a full 50 percent said they were pro-life, whereas only 41 percent said they were pro-choice, down from the previous low of 42 percent recorded in May of 2009. Republicans are the most ...
RSS Feed