Opentopia Directory Encyclopedia Tools

Creation according to Genesis

Encyclopedia : C : CR : CRE : Creation according to Genesis



 

Part of the series on
Creationism
History of creationism
Creation in Genesis
Types of creationism:
Creation science
Intelligent design
Islamic creationism
Modern geocentrism
Neo-Creationism
Omphalos creationism
Old Earth creationism
Progressive creationism
Theistic evolution
Young Earth creationism
Controversy:
Creation vs. evolution
... in public education
Associated articles
Teach the Controversy

Creation according to Genesis refers to the description of the creation of the heavens and the earth by God, as described in Genesis, the first book of the Bible. The text spans Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 of the book of Genesis. The [original Hebrew] has been translated into English on innumerable occasions; the most famous of these is the [King James version].

Overview

Genesis is part of the canonical scriptures in Christianity and Judaism, and to a lesser degree in Islam, and thus to believers is taken as being of spiritual significance with most treating it as being inspired by God. (For a discussion of the comparison between the first two chapters of Genesis and the theory of evolution, see Creation vs. evolution debate.)

The opening of Genesis tells the biblical story of creation. The first verse of Genesis 1 begins with a description of how God (Elohim) created Heaven and Earth. The text thus begins by establishing a series of dualisms (heaven and earth, dark and light, day and night etc) by which the created order is progressively established, with God creating by means of the movement of his "spirit" (ruach) moving across the deeps (tehwom). Creation is established both by speaking (e.g. "Let there be light") and actively working ("dividing the light from the darkness") over a period of six days.

Those who treat Genesis as a historical description take the Genesis 1 creation account to be teaching that the creation events took place over six successive days of 24 hours each. Others believe the Genesis creation story should be interpreted allegorically, and Christians have treated it allegorically rather than as an historical description since long before the development of Darwinism. Saint Augustine (5th century) argued on theological grounds that everything in the universe was created by God in the same instant, not in seven calendar days; instead,

the terms "light," "day," and "morning" bear a spiritual, rather than physical, meaning. Yet for Augustine, spiritual light is just as literal as physical light, and the creation of spiritual light is just as much a historical event or fact as the creation of physical light [link].
Today, the manner in which the creation story may be interpreted in relation to empirical elements connected to our modern scientific understanding of the world is related to an interpreter's conservative or liberal stance theologically, to the nature of his belief the doctrine of biblical inerrancy, and to his awareness of relevant areas of science.

The story

Genesis chapter 1

The story begins by saying "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." (King James translation) Then the six-day creation begins:

Dusk of the sixth day

In the Jewish tradition, according to a midrash on the creation story [link], at dusk, God created a number of specific items, scattered around the world and possibly throughout time. Scholars disagree on whether there were 10 or 13 objects made. These are:

Genesis chapter 2

Chapter 2 continues with what some consider to be a different account of creation. It is often referred to as the "Yahwist" version (see below) and provides an account of plants being created first (after the earth and the heavens). Man is then formed of the dust of the ground. God plants a garden in Eden. and puts the man ("Adam") in the garden to tend it. God decides the man needs a companion and makes the animals, presenting them to Adam for naming, but none are suitable. Lastly, he creates woman from one of Adam's ribs. We are told "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh."

Others consider it to be an account of the details of Day 6, whereas the previous chapter presents a broader view. [link] [link]

The story of man's expulsion from Eden follows in Chapter 3.

Translation and authorship

The text does not name its author, and a variety of theories have arisen regarding its authorship.

Mosaic authorship hypothesis

Michelangelo's painting of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel shows the creation of the stars and planets as described in the first chapter of Genesis.
Enlarge
Michelangelo's painting of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel shows the creation of the stars and planets as described in the first chapter of Genesis.

According to many of the Hebrew and Christian traditions, the first 5 books of the Bible, or Pentateuch, were written by Moses. John the Evangelist presents Jesus as having accepted Mosaic authorship ().

It is often accepted that parts of the Pentateuch were added by later authors. Most commonly cited is Deuteronomy 34, which records the death of Moses, and the list of Edomite kings (in Genesis) which includes the kings who lived after Moses had died. Many Liberal Christians and unbelievers claim that this shows that the claim of total and exclusive Mosaic authorship is disproven. Traditionalists claim that it was Joshua appended this to Moses' writings, just as many copies of Shakespeare mention his death. But like the rival claims about Shakespearian authorship, this , so some Liberals and unbelievers claim, opens the door to the questioning of the authorship of other passages of Genesis. There are, however, a number of other passages that may indicate that Moses wrote texts, which may be part of the Pentateuch as a whole; e.g. ; ; ; ; , and but no passage explicitly ascribes the book of Genesis to Moses. (Benware 1993)

However, traditionalists argue that Moses seems to have all the right criteria to be the author. The books show immense familiarity with the customs, geography, fauna and flora of Egypt, which is consistent with an author who grew up there. But there is a curious naivety about Palestine, which seems inconsistent with being written after Israel was a nation.[link]

Several possibilities have been suggested as to how Moses came to write the text:

Some believe that Moses wrote the Pentateuch by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Others believe that Moses wrote the text, but not under any divine inspiration.

Critics argue that belief in Mosaic authorship is unjustified because the text does not claim to be written by Moses; because large portions of the text were written about events long before Moses lived, or (in a few cases) after he died, were therefore not firsthand knowledge, and must have originated elsewhere (although there is no proof for this); and because stylistic, vocabulary, and structural changes exist in the text indicating multiple authors and redaction.

A computer study was undertaken to determine the authorship of Genesis. The study concluded that it was produced by a single author, and that the author had major Egyptian influences. Omni magazine of August 1982 says:

After feeding the 20,000 Hebrew words of Genesis into a computer at Technion University in Israel, researchers found many sentences that ended in verbs and numerous words of six characters or more. Because these idiosyncratic patterns appear again and again, says project director Yehuda Radday, it seems likely that a sole author was responsible. Their exhaustive computer analysis conducted in Israel suggested an 82 percent probability that the book has just one author.

JEPD authorship hypothesis

Modern textual critics posit that the first two chapters of Genesis are a composite of two different literary strands: the "Jehovist" (10th century BC), and the "Priestly" (7th century BC); and that the strands were compiled by an unknown redactor (but often suspected to be Ezra). One such scholar wrote, "The book of Genesis, like the other books of the Hexateuch, was not the production of one author. A definite plan may be traced in the book, but the structure of the work forbids us to consider it as the production of one writer." (Spurell xv). These strands were first identified by their different choice of the name of God.

The postulated source streams include:

Textual critics assert that the two passages tell the story of creation in different ways, and that there are inconsistencies between the two accounts. They conclude that the most probable explanation for the two inconsistent accounts is that a redactor combined the two independent creation stories into the final text which we have today. Bible defenders argue that the inconsistencies are apparent rather than real.[link]

The small minority of academics rejecting the methodology of textual criticism, as well as non-academic Creationists, argue that when a biblical text is measured against the scholar's own concept of unity and found wanting, this probably says more about the biblical scholar's sense of unity than about the text's prehistory. (Carr 24).

The documentary hypothesis has also been criticized on the grounds that it apparently must even attribute different parts of individual sentences to different authors, since many sentences in Genesis refer to God both as Elohim and Jehovah. A good example is Genesis 2:4 through the end of chapter 3, where all 19 times the name "Jehovah" is found, it is followed immediately by "Elohim" (God).

Many of Julius Wellhausen's assumptions are no longer held today, e.g. that there was no writing at the time Moses was alleged to have written. Also, J. P. Holding has argued that Deuteronomy is written as a suzerain–vassal treaty in the form common from 1400 to 1200 BC, centuries before the time Wellhausen thought it was written.[link]. Nevertheless, the documentary hypothesis has survived these changes, changing to reflect the developments, and the modern documentary hypothesis is currently supported by over 90% of academics in the field#redirect [[Template:Fact]].

Theories of textual interpretation

The single account theory

Some scholars believe that the Genesis account is a report of creation, which is divided into two parts, written from different perspectives: the first part, from 1:1 to 2:3, describes the creation of the Earth from God's perspective; the second part, from 2:4-24, describes the creation of the Garden of Eden from Humanity's perspective. One such scholar wrote, "[T]he strictly complementary nature of the accounts is plain enough: Genesis 1 mentions the creation of man as the last of a series, and without any details, whereas in Genesis 2 man is the center of interest and more specific details are given about him and his setting." (Kitchen 116-117).

The dual account theory

Other scholars, particularly those ascribing to textual criticism and the Documentary hypothesis, believe that the first two chapters of Genesis are two separate accounts of the creation. (They agree that the "first chapter" should include the first three verses of chapter 2.) One such scholar wrote: "The book of Genesis, like the other books of the Hexateuch, was not the production of one author. A definite plan may be traced in the book, but the structure of the work forbids us to consider it as the production of one writer." (Spurell xv). The distinction between the 'two' creation stories is concealed by some translations, such as the New International Version. For some religious writers, such as Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik, the existence of two separate creation stories is beyond doubt, and thus needs to be interpreted as having divine importance.

The first chapter, is associated with the Priestly source which typically portrays God as transcendental and remote. The very human story of the Garden of Eden with a strong female character is typical of the Jahwist-source.

The dual perspective theory

Other scholars, such as Pamela Tamarkin Reis, assert that the text can be read either as one account or as two accounts from different perspectives, as the text uses a literary device to describe the same events first from the perspective of God, and second from the perspective of Humanity. According to the documentary hypothesis the existence of two creation stories is the result of the merging of two distinct traditions into one unified text. Literary and linguistic analysis by various authors offer a number of theories concerning modifications and editing which produced the text that exists today. Some readers of the Bible deny that two distinct creation stories exist; they have created a detailed set of religious readings which attempt to show that any differences are only apparent, but not actually real.

Specific issues of textual interpretation

Literary intent

\"In the Beginning\"

Timescale

Use of different words for God

The first section exclusively refers to God as Elohim (often translated God), whereas the second exclusively uses the composite name Yahweh Elohim (the former word is often "translated" Lord or LORD, though it is sometimes rendered as God).

Writing style

Though not so obvious in translation, the Hebrew text of the two sections differ both in the type of words used and in stylistic qualities. The first section flows smoothly, whereas the second is more interested in pointing out side details, and does so in a more point of fact style.

The likelihood of parallel inconsistent accounts

The single account theory asserts that it is unlikely that the text would have survived for three to four thousand years in such an obviously contradictory state, and that it is therefore much more likely that the two segments are consistent with each other, with the first being general and the second being more specific to the creation of humans and the garden.

However, those who argue that the differences in the accounts are irreconcilable point to several historic factors that would have allowed the contradictory accounts to survive uncorrected. Prior to the modern era, factors that would have made correction difficult included mass illiteracy, hand copying of manuscripts prior to the printing press, early rules preventing translations of the scriptures into common languages, church discouragement and punishment of critical analysis of scripture, and the church's canonization of texts as they were. In early times, there were few incentives or opportunities to criticize or correct scriptural text.

How apparent the differences are depends on the translations. For example, some modern English Bibles translate the two different words for God--Yahweh and Elohim--both as God. Others, however, such as the King James and Revised Standard Versions, translate Elohim as God, and Yahweh as LORD. In addition, some translations (e.g. the New International Version) have rendered the start of the second section as the day when, since the Hebrew beyom ("in the day") is an idiomatic expression for "when". So the NIV regards Ch. 2 as a review of past events--rather than the literalistic on that day, as if it were a first recording of events.

The dual perspective theory

Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam (1512) is the most famous Fresco in the Sistine Chapel
Enlarge
Michelangelo's The Creation of Adam (1512) is the most famous Fresco in the Sistine Chapel

Biblical scholar Pamela Tamarkin Reis (2001) proposes that Genesis 1 and 2 can be seen as either one story from two perspectives or two separate stories.  Both are appropriate.  She draws the parallel with the ancient story-telling technique of telling the same sequence of events through the eyes of several different people.  This method is best known from its use by Kurosawa in the movie Rashomon.  One can make sense of that movie either as four different stories or as four people having four different realistic narratives of the same story.

Ms. Reis analyzes Genesis 1 as God's narrative and Genesis 2 as man's narrative. In Genesis 1, the style of narration is very orderly and logical, proceeding from basics like heaven and earth, through plants and animals to man and woman. And everything is "good" or "very good." Ms. Reis suggests that the story-teller has a bit of whimsy in noting how perfect everything is from God's view.

In contrast, in Genesis 2, man tells the story from his own self-centered perspective. Man is created first, and there are a few flaws. For example, Man is alone, without a woman (in contrast to Genesis 1, where the two were created simultaneously). Where Genesis 1 repeats the phrase "heaven and earth" several times, Genesis 2 uses "earth and heaven." Moreover, Genesis 2 contains a notice that "there was no one to till the ground." The implication that the ground must be tilled contrasts with the completeness implied in Genesis 1.

Even the words used in Genesis 1 suggest serenity, the godly plane of existence. For example, in Genesis 1, the word for God is Elohim, the generic and distant God, while God's name in Genesis 2 is the personal and sacred YHWH Elohim, the Lord of Gods. Even the verb of making is different in the two narratives; in the first narrative the verb is the Hebrew "arb" which means "create from nothing," something that only God can do. In contrast, the verb in the second narrative means "make;" God "made earth and heaven." Furthermore, Man and Woman are both formed from pre-existing matter, in contrast to their creation ex nihilo in the first chapter. This brings God's act within the range of human experience. There are also details about where to find gold and lapis lazuli--but only in the second narrative.

Ms. Reis argues that Genesis 1 and 2 make sense either way, just as for Kurosawa's Rashomon. They make sense as two different stories. Or they make sense as two narratives of the same story from different personal perspectives: that of God and that of man.

References and resources

See also

External links

Sources for the Biblical text

 


From Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. Original article here. Support Wikipedia by contributing or donating.
All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License See Wikipedia Copyrights for details.


Search Titles
0123456789
ABCDEFGHIJ
KLMNOPQRST
UVWXYZ?

E-mail this article to:

Personal Message: