| Creation According To Genesis |
Article Index for Creation |
Website Links For Creation |
Information AboutCreation According To Genesis |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT CREATION ACCORDING TO GENESIS | |
| abrahamic texts | |
| creation stories | |
| creationism | |
| sacred history | |
| hebrew bible chapters | |
| genesis 1-2 | |
| torah events | |
|
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 . Genesis is part of the canonical scriptures for both Christianity and Judaism , and to a lesser degree Islam , and thus to believers is taken as being of spiritual significance. 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. Genesis 1 verse 1 begins with the 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. For those that take Genesis as a literal account, this indicates what occurred on six successive days of 24 hours each. Alternatively, there are those that point to the fact that the first day occurred before the creation of sun and moon (on the fourth day) thus justifying an allegorical interpretation of the story. Many of this persuasion claim it to be a description of humankind's development of a relationship between creation and the creator. Those who argue that it is literal point out that God doesn't ''need'' the sun to produce light, since we are told that the glory of God itself is brighter than the sun. Christians have been considering the idea of the or Theologically Liberal the interpreter is, and the degree to which one accepts or rejects a belief in the inerrant nature of the Biblical text. THE STORY Genesis Chapter 1 According to the version found in Genesis 1, the story begins by saying "In the beginning, there was nothing," and then the six-day creation begins:
Genesis Chapter 2 The version in Chapter 2 provides a different account. It is referred to as the "Jehovist" version (see below) and provides an account of man being created first (not counting the earth), then He created a garden in Eden (there were no plants already existing; there had been no rain and no one to till the soil). He put the man (" Adam ") in the garden and decided the man needed a companion and made the animals. Lastly, he created woman. 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 '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 (John 5:46–47). 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. Exodus 17:14; 24:4–7; 34:27; Numbers 33:2; Deuteronomy 31:9, 22, 24, 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 without Title} Several possibilities have been suggested as to how Moses came to write the text:
. The painting depicts a literal representation of Genesis 1:1 ("Let there be light").]] 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 See Also: Documentary hypothesis Modern (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 without Title} 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 without Title} . Nevertheless, the documentary hypothesis has survived these changes, adopting to reflect the developments, and the modern documentary hypothesis is currently supported by over 90% of academics in the field. 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, " {Link without Title} 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 . 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 two chapters, described as the P-source and the J-source respectively, have been described as a " Project Plan " and a report. This would mean that the P-source (chapter 1) was how God intended the creation to turn out, and the J-source was how it actually did. 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 '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
|
|
|