Creation according to Genesis

"A medieval missionary tells that he has found the point where heaven and earth meet..." -- The Flammarion woodcut.

Creation according to Genesis is the creation myth found in the first two chapters of the Bible, Genesis 1-2. It describes the making of the heavens and the Earth over a period of six days through the spoken word of God, and includes such things as a seven day week, the setting apart of the seventh day as a day of rest (a Sabbath), the creation of man and woman, the sun, moon, and the stars, and the planting of the Garden of Eden.

Creation according to Genesis is similar to Mesopotamian creation myths, differing in that it presents the theological message of Yahwistic monotheism. For Jews and Christians this creation account is considered to be sacred history.

There has been considerable debate concerning this account with regards to the language, structure, and interpretation. The discussion around the language of the original Hebrew concerns whether or not it supports the teaching of creatio ex nihilo ("creation out of nothing") and that of the Christian doctrine of the Trinity. When looking at the structure of these two chapters, the question is whether or not they consist of simply one creation account or of two creation accounts that have been merged together. Then interpretively there are two popular views of the Genesis account that exist today within religious scholarship: The first understands it as being an accurate record of the creation of the universe while the second view interprets it as being allegorical.

Contents

The narrative

Genesis begins with two accounts of the creation: Genesis 1:1-2:3 and Genesis 2:4-2:25. Critical scholarship regards these two accounts as being separate, each having their own focus of attention. Others following the traditional interpretation see this second account as being a continuation and expansion of the first account, specifically "a literary flashback [that] supplies more detail." [1] [2]

First account: Creation week

See Genesis 1:1-2:3

The creation week narrative begins with these words: "In the a beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."[3] It takes place over a period six days and is followed by a seventh day of rest. In these seven days there are seven divine commands spoken:

Literary bridge

Gen. 2:4a "These are the generations (Heb. toledot ) of the heavens and the earth when they were created."

This phrase lies between the creation week account and the Eden account. It is the first of ten toledot phrases used in the book of Genesis, which act as a literary structure for the book.[4] Since the phrase always precedes the "generation" (the toledot ) to which it belongs, it might be expected to refer to what then follows in Genesis 2. This is a position taken by several scholars.[5] Nevertheless, other scholars from Rashi to the present day have argued that in this case it should apply to what precedes in Genesis 1.[6]

Second account: Eden narrative

Painting by Lucas Cranach the Elder, depicting Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.

See Genesis 2:4-25

The Eden narrative addresses the creation of the first man and woman and the creation of a garden in Eden into which they were placed:

Genesis 1-11: Primeval History

These first two chapters in Genesis open up for us "primeval history," which is an historical unit in Genesis that acts as an introduction to the rest of the book. This unit contains the first mention of many themes that are continued throughout Genesis and the Torah, including fruitfulness, God's election of Israel, and his ongoing forgiveness of man's rebellious nature.[12]

Ancient Near East context

Cosmology

The Earth according to the civilizations of the Ancient Near East was a flat disk, with infinite water both above and below it.[13] The dome of the sky, was thought to be a solid metal bowl - tin according to the Sumerians, iron for the Egyptians - separating the surrounding water from the habitable world. The stars were embedded in the under surface of this dome, and there were gates in it that allowed the passage of the Sun and Moon back and forth. This flat-disk Earth was seen as a single island-continent surrounded by a circular ocean, of which the known seas - what we call today the Mediterranean Sea, the Persian Gulf, and the Red Sea - were inlets. Beneath the Earth was a fresh-water sea, the source of all fresh-water rivers and wells.

Religion

Scholars of the Ancient Near East see Yahwistic monotheism as emerging from a common Mesopotamian/Levantine background of polytheistic religion and myth.[14] The narrative elements of Genesis 1-11 appear to draw specifically from four Mesopotamian myths: Adapa and the South Wind, Atrahasis, the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Enuma Elish. These myths share similar motifs and characters with Genesis 1-11, with Genesis challenging the Mesopotamian view point.[15]

According to the Enuma Elish, which has the closest parallels, the original state of the universe was a chaos formed by the mingling of two primeval waters, the female saltwater god Tiamat and the male freshwater god Apsu.[16] Through the fusion of their waters six successive generations of gods were born. A fight amongst these gods began with the slaying of Apsu, and ended with a powerful god, Marduk, killing Tiamat by splitting her two with an arrow. Marduk then used one half of her body to form the earth and the other half to form the firmament of the heavens. It is from the eye-sockets of the slain Tiamat that the Euphrates and the Tigris rivers emerged. Marduk then created humanity - in seven pairs, male and female, and from clay mingled with spit and the blood of another slaughtered god - as a way of making the gods' way of life more comfortable and exciting. He then placed these people on the earth to be the servants to the gods, while Marduk himself was enthroned in Babylon in the Esagila, a temple with "its head in heaven."

Genesis 1-2 parallels the Enuma Elish, not only its creation myth, but also in its religious message which sets up one specific god as Creator and ruler over all things.[17] While the Enuma Elish promotes the power of Mesopotamian gods and honors the patron deity of Babylon, Marduk, as king over all gods and people, Genesis 1-2 serves to place the LORD God (Yahweh Elohim) as king over everything. This theme is picked up on by later Hebrew authors in such places as Psalm 29, and Psalm 93.

World view

Despite their similarities, there is an important and stark difference between Genesis 1-2 and the Ancient Near East with regards to world view.[18][19] The world view of the Ancient Near East was one that saw things as beginning negatively: Man began as nothing more than a "lackey of the gods to keep them supplied with food."[20] It was only with time that things had become increasingly better, as in "things were not nearly as good to begin with as they have become since."

These chapters in Genesis however provide us with a complete contrast to the world view of the day: The world of Genesis starts out "very good" with man and woman as the apex of created order. It was not until after this initial state of "goodness" when Adam and Eve ate the fruit of the tree that was "in the midst of the garden," from which God had forbidden them to eat "lest [they] die" (Genesis 3:3), that God became angry with them (Genesis 3:9-19). From that time things grew steadily worse until it climaxed in Genesis 6:5 which says, "The Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Then the LORD was sorry that he had made man and decided that he would do away with all people in a great flood, saving only Noah and his family (Genesis 6:6-7:24).

Exegetical points

"In the beginning..."

The first word of Genesis 1 in Hebrew, "in the beginning" (Heb. berēšît), provides the traditional Jewish title for the book. The ambiguity of the Hebrew grammar in this verse gives rise to two alternative translations, the first implying that God's first act of creation was the heavens and the earth, the second that "the heavens and the Earth" already existed in a "formless and void" state, to which God brings form and order:[21]

  1. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void...God said, Let there be light!" (King James Version).
  2. "At the beginning of the creation of heaven and earth, when the earth was (or the earth being) unformed and void . . . God said, Let there be light!" (Rashi, also with variations Ibn Ezra and Bereshith Rabba).

The name of God

Two names of God are used, Elohim in the first account and Yahweh Elohim in the second account. This difference, plus differences in the styles of the two chapters and a number of discrepancies between them, formed one of the earliest pieces of evidence that the Pentateuch had multiple origins, and was instrumental in the development of source criticism and the documentary hypothesis.

"Without form and void"

The phrase traditionally translated in English "without form and void" is tōhû wābōhû (Hebrew: תהו ובהו‎). In most Bibles the phrase is translated by various combination of adjectives with which translators attempt to capture the flavor of the primeval terrestrial moment which tōhû wābōhû describes. The Greek Septuagint (LXX) rendered this term as "unseen and unformed" (Greek: ἀόρατος καὶ ἀκατασκεύαστος), paralleling the Greek concept of Chaos.

In the Hebrew Old Testament, this phrase is almost a hapax legomenon, being used only in one other place, Jeremiah 4:23. There Jeremiah is telling Israel that sin and rebellion against God will lead to "darkness and chaos," or to "de-creation." [22]

The rûach of God

Most English translations render this phrase as "the Spirit of God."[23] The Hebrew rûach has the meanings "wind, spirit, breath," but the traditional Jewish interpretation here is "wind," as "spirit" would imply a living supernatural presence co-extent with yet separate from God at Creation. This, however, is the sense in which rûach was understood by the early Christian church in developing the doctrine of the Trinity, in which this passage plays a central role. [24]

The "deep"

Main article: tehom

The "deep" (Heb. tehôm), is the formless body of primeval water surrounding the habitable world. These waters are later released during the great flood, when "all the fountains of the great deep burst forth" from under the earth and from the "windows" of the sky.(Genesis 7:11).[5] The word is cognate with the Babylonian Tiamat,[5] and its occurrence here without the definite article ha (i.e., the literal translation of the Hebrew is that "darkness lay on the face of tehôm) indicates its mythical origins.[25]

The firmament of heaven

The "firmament" (Heb. rāqîa) of heaven, created on the second day of creation and populated by luminaries on the fourth day, denotes a solid ceiling[13] which separated the earth below from the heavens and their waters above. The term is etymologically derived from the verb rāqa, used for the act of beating metal into thin plates.[5][26]

Great sea monsters

Heb. tanninim is the classification of creatures to which the chaos-monsters Leviathan and Rahab belong (cf. Isaiah 27:1, Isaiah 51:9, Psalm 74:13-14).[27] In Gen 1.21, the proper noun Leviathan is missing and only the class noun tanninim appears. The tannînim are associated with mythological sea creatures such as Lotan (the Ugaritic counterpart of the biblical Leviathan) which were considered deities by other ancient near eastern cultures; the author of Genesis 1 asserts the sovereignty of Elohim over such entities.[26] The NJV translates it as "sea monsters".

The number seven

Seven was regarded as a significant number in the ancient Near East. It has been argued that the author of Genesis 1:1-2:3 has intentionally embedded it into the text in a number of ways, besides the obvious seven-day framework: the word "God" occurs 35 times (7 × 5) and "earth" 21 times (7 × 3). The phrases "and it was so" and "God saw that it was good" occur 7 times each. The first sentence of Genesis 1 contains 7 Hebrew words, and the second sentence contains 14 words, while the verses about the seventh day (2:1-3) contain 35 words in total.[28]

Man and the image of God

Main article: Image of God

The meaning of the phrase "image and likeness of God" has been much debated. The medieval Jewish scholar Rashi believed it referred to "a sort of conceptual archetype, model, or blueprint that God had previously made for man;" his colleague Maimonides suggested it referred to man's free will.[29] Modern scholarship still debates whether the image of God was represented symmetrically in Adam and Eve, or whether Adam possessed the image more fully than the woman.

Structure and composition

Main articles: Genesis and Documentary 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.

Structure

Genesis 1 consists of eight acts of creation within a six day framework. Each of the first three days is an act of division: dark/light, waters/skies, sea/land & plants. In the next three days this framework is populated: heavenly bodies for the dark and light, fish and birds for the seas and skies, animals and (finally) man for the land. This six-day structure is symmetrically bracketed by day zero when primeval chaos reigns and day seven representing cosmic order.[30]

Genesis 2 is a simple linear narrative, with the exception of the parenthesis about the four rivers at Genesis 2:10-14. This interrupts the forward movement of the narrative and might therefore be an insertion based on the spring or stream at Genesis 2:6 which waters the ground "on the day when Yahweh Elohim formed earth and heavens."[31]

The “Primeval History” mimics Genesis 1’s intricate structure of parallel halves. The first half runs from Creation to Noah, the second from the Flood to Abraham. Each half is marked by the passage of ten generations (ten from Adam to Noah, another ten from Noah to Abraham). Like Genesis 1, each half has a six-part structure, and the content of each half exactly mirrors the other. Each follows the same themes, but with very different results: in the first half, God creates a perfect world for man, but man sins and God eventually returns his creation to its original state of chaos (i.e., the water of tehom); in the second, man finds himself in a newly created post-Flood world, as if given a chance to start again, but sins again (the Tower). But the result the second time is different: God choses Abram and makes his name (Heb. shem) great. The word shem appears to have structural significance: in Genesis 1, God names the elements of his Creation; in Genesis 2, “the man” (not at this stage named Adam), names the creatures over which he has been given dominion; Noah’s eldest son is “Shem”, and Yahweh is identified as “the God of Shem,” ancestor of Abraham and the Chosen People.[32]

Composition

According to Jewish tradition the first five books of the Bible were written by Moses. Opinions differed among the rabbis on just how Genesis fitted into the picture, some saying God revealed it to Moses on Sinai, others holding that Moses compiled it in Egypt from writings left by the Patriarchs, with an account from Adam providing details on the Creation.[33] The tradition of Mosaic authorship was adopted by the earliest Christians and is still held by many believers today, most notably among Orthodox Jews and Evangelical Christians.[34]

Today virtually all scholars accept that the Pentateuch "was in reality a composite work, the product of many hands and periods.”[35] In the first half of the 20th century the dominant theory regarding the origins of the Pentateuch was the documentary hypothesis. This supposes that the Torah was produced about 450 BC by combining four distinct, complete and coherent documents, known as the Yahwist (“Y” or “J”, from the German spelling of Yahweh), the Elohist (“E”), the Deuteronomist (“D”), and the Priestly source (“P”). Genesis 1 is from P, and Genesis 2 from J.[36]

Some scholars believe that the Genesis account is a single report of creation, which is divided into two parts, written from different perspectives: the first part, from Genesis 1:1–2:3, describes the creation of the Earth from God's perspective; the second part, from Genesis 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).

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 and the first half of the fourth verse 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). 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.

Some of the issues involved in the single vs. dual account debate include:

Proponents of the single account argue that style differences need not be indicative of multiple authors, but may simply indicate the purpose of different passages. For example, Kenneth Kitchen, a retired Archaeology Professor of the University of Liverpool, has argued (1966) that stylistic differences are meaningless, and reflect different subject matter. He supports this with the evidence of a biographical inscription of an Egyptian official in 2400 B.C., which reflects at least four different styles, but which is uniformly supposed to possess unity of authorship.

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

Theology and interpretation

The theology of Genesis

According to Professor Klaus Nurnberger,[38] the motive of the biblical authors was not to put forward a coherent statement of their theology, but "to reassure fellow believers...of the strict, but benevolent, commitment of their God to his people." The rationale which holds together the "vastly divergent" biblical materials can therefore only be understood through studying the evolutionary process by which the texts were created. [39]

The vast majority of modern scholars agree that "primeval history" within the Torah (Genesis 1-11) is composed of two distinct sources, the Yahwist and the Priestly (best understood today as bodies of texts with distinctive markers, rather than as distinct documents). The Priestly source "emphasizes the continuity of God's care for Israel as demonstrated in its history." This is expressed in certain pervasive themes: God's blessing (Genesis 1:28 provides the first of four important blessings within the overall Priestly narrative: "And God blessed them, and God said to them, 'Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.'"); God's word (God's important involvements with the world are expressed through his spoken words, throughout the "And God said" Creation sequence of Genesis 1, and through the three subsequent major covenants with Noah at Genesis 9, Abraham at Genesis 17, and Israel at Exodus 20); and God's continuing presence among the Chosen People.[40]

The Yahwist writer tends to express his theology through speeches of Yahweh placed at decisive points in the story. Six of the eight major speeches in Genesis occur in the "primeval history," the first being the speech at Genesis 2:16-17 prohibiting the fruit of the Tree of knowledge of good and evil. The import of these stories is that man will fail if he tries to become as God (the Eden story, repeated in the Flood story and again in the Tower of Babel story). But God is merciful, (each attempt produces a progressively more merciful response from God), and selects a people who will be his own (the promise to Abraham at Genesis 12, which is the fulcrum of the Yahwist history - Abraham is the ancestor of David, the culmination of God's promise). "Abraham, and hence David and all Israel, were chosen to be an instrument of blessing: 'Through you all families of the earth shall bless themselves/be blessed.'" The universal promise was planted when the Yahwist prefaced the national story of Israel with the "all-world" Primeval history.[41]

Dietrich Bonhoeffer and other theologians suggest that the disobedience of Adam and Eve (taking the knowledge of good and evil for themselves) was the beginning of judgmentalism and remains an obstacle to our intended unconditional love for others. [42]

Interpretative approaches

Part of a series on
Creationism

The Creation of Adam.jpg

History of creationism
Neo-creationism
Types of creationism

Young Earth creationism
Old Earth creationism
Day-Age creationism
Progressive creationism
Gap creationism
Theistic evolution
Intelligent design
Other religious views

Hindu · Islamic · Jewish
Deist · Pandeist
Creation theology

Creation in Genesis
Genesis as an allegory
Framework interpretation
Omphalos hypothesis
Creation science

Baraminology
Flood geology
Intelligent design
Controversy

Politics of creationism
Public education
History
Teach the Controversy
Associated articles
Creationism Portal ·
See also: Creationism and Creation-evolution controversy

Biblical literalists believe that the seven "days" of Genesis 1 correspond to normal 24-hour days of history during which God created the world in eight divine acts, or "fiats" - hence the view is also referred to as "fiat creation."[43] Young Earth creationism holds that the creation week occurred a mere six to ten thousands years ago.[44] Other literalists have attempted to reconcile their literal reading with the findings of modern geology regarding the age of the Earth. Gap creationism inserts a "gap" between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2 into which geologic time can be inserted, during which the world of a presumed pre-Adamite race was destroyed and then rebuilt – a position called the "Ruin-Reconstruction Interpretation".[44] Arthur C. Custance[45] has documented numerous precursors to "gap creationism" centuries before literalists found themselves debating scientists, and has suggested that it may be more accurate to think of this view as a textual debate among literalists first, and a debate topic versus evolution second. Another response, the day-age theory, holds that each "day" (Heb. yom) of Genesis 1 represents an "age" of perhaps millions or even billions of years.

The "framework interpretation" of Genesis 1, advanced by biblical scholars Meredith G. Kline[46][47] and Henri Blocher,[48] and with antecedents in St. Augustine of Hippo,[49] argues that the "Creation week" should be read as a monotheistic polemic on creation theology directed against pagan creation myths. Klein and others have pointed out that Genesis 1 is built upon a literary framework where the sequence of events is topical rather than chronological, and builds to the establishment of the Sabbath commandment as its climax - the Sabbath being a prime concern of the Priestly source of the Torah.

A similar spectrum of views is encountered in relation to Genesis 2-3. Many biblical literalists and fundamentalist Christians read this as strictly literal and historical - that God literally breathed into the nostrils of a being formed out of dust, turning it into a living man; there was a literal Garden of Eden with a literal Tree of Life; a literal couple (Adam and Eve) ate a literal forbidden fruit at the urging of a talking serpent; Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden and barred from re-entering it by a literal flaming sword. Other conservative Christians and Jews read it as a record of real events, but consider that the actual details are re-cast as symbols - thus the forbidden fruit, the serpent, the fig leaves and so forth, possibly even the Garden itself, are metaphors for religious or spiritual concepts that underlie the original sin of Adam, and/or an allegory describing the creation and sin of each individual human being. Many modern commentators note that "architecture" and depiction of the Garden of Eden resembles that of the Temple in Jerusalem, suggesting religious symbolism.[5]

References

  1. ↑ Grudem, Wayne, ed. (2008). ESV Study Bible. Crossway Bibles. pp. 52. 
  2. ↑ Young, E.J. (1953). An Introduction to the Old Testament. The Tyndale Press. pp. 55. 
  3. ↑ Gen. 1:1 English Standard Version
  4. ↑ Frank Moore Cross, "The Priestly Work," in Canaanite Myth and Hebrew Epic, 1973.
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Gordon J. Wenham. Genesis 1-15 (Word Biblical Commentary). Word Books, Texas, 1987. 
  6. ↑ The argument is based on several grounds, notably the fact that Genesis 1 uses the phrase "heavens and earth" to introduce and close the Creation, while the account in Chapter 2 is introduced by the phrase "earth and heavens." Advocates of the other view argue that 2:4 is designed as a chiasm (Wenham, 49).
  7. ↑ The lack of punctuation between 4a and 4b in the Hebrew creates ambiguity over where sentence endings should be placed in this passage. This is reflected in differing modern translations, some of which attach this clause to Genesis 2:4a and place a full stop at the end of 4b, while others place the full stop after 4a and make 4b the beginning of a new sentence. Still others combine all verses from 4a onwards into a single sentence culminating in Genesis 2:7.
  8. ↑ some translations, "streams"
  9. ↑ God later is called the "helper" of people: cf. Psalm 10:14 and Psalm 54:4
  10. ↑ Hebrew tsela`, meaning side, chamber, rib, or beam (Strong's H6763). Some feminist scholars have questioned the traditional "rib" on the grounds that it denigrates the equality of the sexes, suggesting it should read "side": see Reisenberger, Azila Talit. "The creation of Adam...." in Judaism: A Quarterly Journal of Jewish Life and Thought, 9/22/1993 (accessed 09-12-2007).
  11. ↑ The lack of punctuation in the Hebrew makes it uncertain whether or not these words about marriage are intended to be a continuation of the speech of the man or of the narrator.
  12. ↑ For a schematic representation of the structure of the "primeval history", see table iii of this document from McMaster University (table i contains a breakdown of the "history"according to the documentary hypothesis); for a more detailed discussion, see "Pentateuchal Research", Encyclopedia of Christianity.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 For a description of Near Eastern and other ancient cosmologies and their connections with the Biblical view of the Universe, see Paul H. Seeley, "The Firmament and the Water Above: The Meaning of Raqia in Genesis 1:6-8", Westminster Theological Journal 53 (1991), and "The Geographical Meaning of 'Earth' and 'Seas' in Genesis 1:10", Westminster Theological Journal 59 (1997).
  14. ↑ For a discussion of the roots of Biblical monotheism in Canaanite polytheism, see Mark S. Smith, "The Origins of Biblical Monotheism"; See also the review of David Penchansky, "Twilight of the Gods: Polytheism in the Hebrew Bible", which describes some of the nuances underlying the subject. See the Bibliography section at the foot of this article for further reading on this subject.
  15. ↑ "Genesis' Genesis, The Hebrew Transformation of the Ancient Near Eastern Myths and Their Motifs.
  16. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Enuma Elish", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/CH1/CH1_1A3C.HTM .
  17. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Enuma Elish", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/CH1/CH1_1A3C.HTM .
  18. ↑ T. Jacobson, "The Eridu Genesis", JBL 100, 1981, pp.529, quoted in Gordon Wenham, "Exploring the Old Testament: The Pentateuch", 2003, p.17. Se also Gordon J. Wenham. Genesis 1-15 (Word Biblical Commentary). Word Books, Texas, 1987. 
  19. ↑ There are also a few more inversions between Genesis and Mesopotamian myth that do not necessarily deal specifically with Creation: For example, while the Babylonian serpent-god Ningishzida is a friend of mankind who helps the human hero Adapa in his search for immortality, the serpent in Genesis 3 is man's enemy, seeking to trick Adam out of the chance to attain immortality. Cf. "Genesis' Genesis, The Hebrew Transformation of the Ancient Near Eastern Myths and Their Motifs. See the end of the article for a full list of the inversions in Genesis 1-11.
  20. ↑ "Genesis' Genesis, The Hebrew Transformation of the Ancient Near Eastern Myths and Their Motifs.
  21. ↑ Harry Orlinski's Notes to the New JPS Translation of the Torah, Genesis 1.
  22. ↑ F.B. Huey, vol. 16, Jeremiah, Lamentations, "The New American Commentary" (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c1993), p. 85; Holladay, Jeremiah 1, p. 164; Thompson writes, "it's as if the earth had been ‘uncreated.’", Thompson, Jeremiah, NICOT, p. 230;
  23. ↑ The Message and NCV say, "God's Spirit." The NRSV is the only notable exception, translating this as "a wind from God" but still offering a alternate translation of "the spirit of God" Genesis 1:2.
  24. ↑ Orlinsk's notes to the New JPS translation of Genesis
  25. ↑ Noted by Hermann Gunkel - see Ernest Nicholson, "The Pentateuch in the Twentieth Century", 2002, p.34.)
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Victor P. Hamilton. The Book of Genesis (New International Commentary on the Old Testament). William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, 1990. 
  27. ↑ Vocabulary of Biblical Hebrew, Texas A&M University.
  28. ↑ Gordon Wenham (1987). Genesis 1-15 (Commentary). Word Books. pp. 6. 
  29. ↑ Footnotes to Genesis translation at bible.ort.org
  30. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Priestly Creation Story", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/CH1/CH1_1A1.HTM .
  31. ↑ David Carr, “The Politics of Textual Subversion: A Diachronic Perspective on the Garden of Eden Story”, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 112, No. 4 (Winter, 1993), pp. 577-595.
  32. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Thematic Unity", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/CH1/CH1_13B.HTM .
  33. ↑ For a description of rabbinic thinking regarding the process by which the Torah was composed, see Gil Student, "On the Authorship of the Torah" (Gil Student is a noted Orthodox Jewish scholar, working from within the framework of traditional Rabbinicism).
  34. ↑ For an Evangelical Christian defense of Mosaic authorship couched in terms of the book of Deuteronomy (the last book of the Torah), see Daniel I. Block, "Recovering the Voice of Moses", Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, September 2001
  35. ↑ Speiser, E. A. (1964). Genesis. The Anchor Bible. Doubleday. pp. page XXI. ISBN 0-385-00854-6. 
  36. ↑ Documentary Hypothesis (notes from from John Barton, "Source Criticism," Anchor Bible Dictionary) describes both the documentary hypothesis and the Mosaic authorship tradition.
  37. ↑ Stone, Names of God, 1944, p. 17
  38. ↑ Klaus Nurnberger, Professor of Theology and Ethics at the School of Theology, University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg (South Africa).
  39. ↑ Klaus Nurnberger, "Theology of the Biblical Witness: An Evolutionary Approach" (2002), p.3
  40. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Table C: Priestly Document", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/PART1/PT1_TBC.HTM 
  41. ↑ Bandstra, Barry L. (1999), "Table A: Yahwist Narrative", Reading the Old Testament: An Introduction to the Hebrew Bible, Wadsworth Publishing Company, http://web.archive.org/web/20061212054040/hope.edu/bandstra/RTOT/PART1/PT1_TBA.HTM 
  42. ↑ Gregory Boyd: "Repenting of Religion: Turning Away form Judgment to the Love of God", Baker Publishing, 2004, ISBN 0-8010-6502-2
  43. ↑ "Fiat" derives from the Latin for "Let there be..." Defines fiat creation
  44. ↑ 44.0 44.1 Jordan, James B. Creation in Six Days. Canon Press, 1999. ISBN 1885767625. Jordan describes other views, but holds to the traditional plain historical and narrative sense of the text – six consecutive 24-hour days. He discusses other theories in considerable detail.
  45. ↑ References to Gap creationism
  46. ↑ Meredith G. Kline (May 1958). "Because It Had Not Rained". Westminster Theological Journal 20 (2): pp. 146-57
  47. ↑ Meredith G. Kline (1996). "Space and Time in the Genesis Cosmogony". Perspectives on Science & Christian Faith (48): pp. 2-15.
  48. ↑ Henri Blocher. In the Beginning: The Opening Chapters of Genesis. InterVarsity Press, 1984. 
  49. ↑ Davis A. Young (1988). "The Contemporary Relevance of Augustine's View of Creation". Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith 40 (1): 42–45. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topics/Bible-Science/PSCF3-88Young.html. 

Bibliography

See also

External links

Sources for the Biblical text

Other resources