Marked contrasts

Whilst there have been some posts on this blog that highlight the ways in which Genesis relates itself to Ancient Near East mythologies, it is equally important to note the ways in which it contrasts.

In the ANE creation was made to serve the gods. But in the Genesis account creation is there for the benefit of humanity. The cosmos is good because it provides a home for us.

In the ANE people are also made to serve the gods, but in Genesis people are called into relationship with God, co-workers with him.

We really are the climax of creation.

The Bible and Mythology part 4

The emergence of dry land from the waters is a common element in Egyptian cosmology, and there it has a definite referent. That is, the emergence of the primeval hillock in cosmology reflectsnthe yearly relity of the fertile soil emerging in the aftermath of the inundation of the Nile. Thus it is clear that the emergence of dry land is associated with the growing of food.

The Lost World of Genesis 1 by John H Walton

Creation's Title

The first verse of Genesis 1, that grand opening statement, can be interpreted in a number of different ways.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Some commentators see this as being a pre-creation that occurred before the actions of the following verses but Walton disagrees. Of the term 'beginning' he says (p45):

In Hebrew usage this adverb typically introduces a period of time rather than a point in time. We can see this most easily in Job 8:7

which says...

Your beginnings will seem humble, so prosperous will your future be.

So what Walton is suggesting is that verse 1 is actually referring to the period of the creation that follows in the rest of the chapter.

This suggests that verse 1 serves as a literary introduction to the rest of the chapter. This suggestion is confirmed by the fact that Genesis 2:1 concludes the seven-day report with the statement that the "heavens and earth were completed"

Oh no! Its happened again!

Having a bad case of deja vu. Hope this one turns out to have a happy ending...

Functional not Material

I'm enjoying reading 'The Lost World of Genesis One' at the moment. I'm hoping there will be a few posts to extract from it! John Walton's book looks at Genesis 1 within its ANE context and builds the thesis that 'creation' in that setting means functional, and not material as presupposed in our 21st century understanding.

ANE mythology asked about the purpose of the world around it rather than how it came into material existence. Therefore the Biblical account reflects that definition of the creation concept. For example:

Throughout Genesis 1 any number of possible meanings have been proposed for "good". In the history of interpretation it has been often been understood in moral/ethical terms or as a reference to the quality of the workmanship. While the Hebrew term could be used in any of those ways, the context indicates a different direction. We can find out what the author means when saying all of these things are "good" by inquiring what it would mean for something not to be good. Fortunately the near context offers us just such an opportunity: "It is not good for man to be alone" (Gen 2:18). This verse has nothing to do with moral perfection or quality of workmanship - it is a comment concerning function. The human condition is not functionally complete without the woman. Thus throughout Genesis 1 the refrain "it was good" expressed the functional readiness of the cosmos for human beings.

Love is a drug

This excellent video by Alistair Jennings illustrates the power of attraction. This is love as society often understands it. But the love of Jesus, agape, is different. It is a self sacrificing, faithful, constant love. A love that never fails and never depends upon our own beauty to keep it burning.

The limitations of reductionism

I've written on this before, but this quote from Martin Rees reinforces what I was trying to say:

Everything may be the outcome of processes at the subatomic level, but even if we know the relevant equations governing the micro-world, we can't, in practice, solve them for anything more complex than a single molecule. Moreover, even if we could, the resultant 'reductionist' explanation would not be enlightening. to bring meaning to complex phenomena, we introduce new 'emergent' concepts. (For example, the turbulence and wetness of liquids, and the textures of solids, arise from the collective behaviour of atoms, and can be 'reduced' to atomic physics, but these are important concepts in their own right; so, even more, are 'symbiosis', 'natural selection', and other biological processes.)

From Just Six Numbers