Interpret Genesis 1 to make sense

[Truthseeker]

It seems to me Christians need an interpretation of Genesis 1 that appears to make sense. It doesn't have to be the RIGHT one, just seems to make sense.

People who have tried to make sense out of Genesis 1 are Oxymixmudd and GRMorton. They had a debate recently, but unfortunately it seems GRMorton is too busy.

A point to keep in mind is that the Lord God is timeless (out of time, if you prefer). Something that from our human perspective occurred in the past and another thing that will soon occur in the future are things that occur all at once from God's perspective. Not a good way to put it, perhaps, but about the best I can explain.

Another point is that God may be frequently anthropomorphized in the Bible, even though that may distort the truth. We humans are simply not able to understand God's nature in human terms.

If you have a favorite interpretation, go ahead, present it here!

[shunyadragon]

It seems to me Christians need an interpretation of Genesis 1 that appears to make sense. It doesn't have to be the RIGHT one, just seems to make sense.

People who have tried to make sense out of Genesis 1 are Oxymixmudd and GRMorton. They had a debate recently, but unfortunately it seems GRMorton is too busy.

A point to keep in mind is that the Lord God is timeless (out of time, if you prefer). Something that from our human perspective occurred in the past and another thing that will soon occur in the future are things that occur all at once from God's perspective. Not a good way to put it, perhaps, but about the best I can explain.

Another point is that God may be frequently anthropomorphized in the Bible, even though that may distort the truth. We humans are simply not able to understand God's nature in human terms.

If you have a favorite interpretation, go ahead, present it here!

Actually I do not attribute any significant religious meaning to Genesis at all. I consider it simply as ancient literature describing the world from an ancient perspective over 2500 years ago.

For those seeking a religious perspective I prefer the allegorical Jewish understanding of Genesis. Genesis 1, nor Genesis as whole, is in reality not an important book for Jews. The following link describes it well. Cited is part of the summary.

Source: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Science/Creationism_and_Evolution/Bible_as_Allegory.shtml?p=3

The religious message is precisely the realm in which science cannot compete, and those devoted to the cause of the Bible would do far better service to their cause by stressing its unique religious message. To the religious person it makes little difference whether the world was created in six days or several billion years.

What counts is the deeper message of the biblical account of creation: The world was made by a wise Creator who seeks man's welfare, who created the world carefully with man's benefit in mind, who created man with Godlike qualities and commanded him to administer the world wisely.

Though we observe the Sabbath every seven days, it is this deeper message which we celebrate each week. The current views of modern science deepen our understanding of this message and renew our confidence in it.

© Copyright Original Source

[Spartacus]

http://www.amazon.com/Creation-Persi.../dp/0691029504

It does some work connecting Genesis 1 with its cultural and historical contexts as well as its relationship to other parts of Scripture.

I took a class that got into this subject a bit, but I'd have to dig back through some notes and texts in order to explain it.

[NormATive]

It seems to me Christians need an interpretation of Genesis 1 that appears to make sense. It doesn't have to be the RIGHT one, just seems to make sense.

People who have tried to make sense out of Genesis 1 are Oxymixmudd and GRMorton. They had a debate recently, but unfortunately it seems GRMorton is too busy.

A point to keep in mind is that the Lord God is timeless (out of time, if you prefer). Something that from our human perspective occurred in the past and another thing that will soon occur in the future are things that occur all at once from God's perspective. Not a good way to put it, perhaps, but about the best I can explain.

Another point is that God may be frequently anthropomorphized in the Bible, even though that may distort the truth. We humans are simply not able to understand God's nature in human terms.

If you have a favorite interpretation, go ahead, present it here!

During one of my orientation classes while converting to Judaism, I took a class in Hebrew that used Genesis as a text. They choose this book because it uses a variety of combinations of plural names for gods. Yes; gods with an "s"

It is believed that G-d is conversing with other deities during the creation of the Earth. I didn't understand this at the time, because they emphasised the Shema (G-d is one) so much.

But, as I have come to understand, Judaism does not make the claim that G-d is the ONLY god - just the "correct" G-d. After all, how can one be jealous of other gods if there are no other gods?

The class did get into a whole symbolic thing about gardens in ancient Jewish philosophy, but it got so esoteric, I kind of tuned it out. Plus, my Hebrew wasn't that good at the time, so I just pretended to understand out of embarrassment.

The take away is that Jews mostly view Genesis as an allegorical book rather than a traditional Creation story. Christians spend way more time with Genesis than Jews, I would say.

For example, Jews do onto use Genesis to bolster the "original sin" theory as Christians do. They do not believe in original sin. They do not believe that mankind is "fallen." They believe that G-d also created evil, and that is why there is evil in the world.

NORM

[Cow Poke]

The class did get into a whole symbolic thing about gardens in ancient Jewish philosophy, but it got so esoteric, I kind of tuned it out.

My Tour Guide in Israel said, on more than a few occasions, "If there is a difficult way to do something, the Jewish [sic] will find it".

[rogue06]

Since I've posted this a couple times before I might as well repeat it here...

everything^[1][2].

Finally, we must keep in mind that the entire concept of reconstructing and recounting events in exact statistical detail (as it actually happened) is a relatively modern development owing a lot to the ideals of the 19th century positivists. The point is that it is ridiculous to hold Genesis, or other parts of the Bible for that matter, to modern standards of scholarship that were unknown to it.

Paul tells us what the purpose of the Bible is, and it is not to tell us how nature functions or came about. Rather, it is "to give you wisdom for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus" (II Timothy 3:15). It is "breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work" (vs. 16-17).

Genesis isn't an attempt to grapple with or answer technical scientific questions, but instead deals with matters beyond the realm of science. It seeks to bring us in touch with the eternal God and to reveal the sacred meaning of His being, His purpose and His dealings with us as He works out His holy will. Simply put, the Bible is not trying to tell us exactly HOW or WHEN God did this or that but rather, it is telling us WHY God did this.










1. And God is responsible not just for the origin of all that there is but the entire being of all that is (As Thomas Aquinas wrote in "De potentia dei" (On the Power of God), the only cause of being is the power of God and all natural causes act as instruments of that power).

2.

And I'll throw this quote from John H. Walton, a professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College in as additional food for thought:

Source: Lost World of Genesis One; p.18-19

If cosmic geology is culturally descriptive rather than revealed truth, it takes its place among many other biblical examples of culturally relative notions. For example, in the ancient world people believed the seat of intelligence, emotion and personhood was in the internal organs, particularly the heart, but also the liver, kidneys and intestines. Many Bible translations use the English word "mind" when the Hebrew text refers to the entrails, showing the ways in which language and culture interrelated. In modern language we still refer to the heart metaphorically as the seat of emotion. In the ancient world this was not metaphor, but physiology. Yet we must notice that when God wanted to talk to the Israelites about their intellect, emotions and will, he did not revise their ideas of physiology and feel compelled to reveal the function of the brain. Instead, he adopted the language of the culture to communicate in terms they understood. The idea that people think with their hearts describes physiology in ancient terms for the communication of other matters; it is not revelation concerning physiology... Throughout the entire Bible, there is not a single instance in which God revealed to Israel a science beyond their own culture.

© Copyright Original Source

[seanD]

It seems to me Christians need an interpretation of Genesis 1 that appears to make sense. It doesn't have to be the RIGHT one, just seems to make sense.

"Makes sense" relative to what though? If you're arguing makes sense against our current understanding of natural laws of the universe, how can that be used as a gauge if our knowledge of the universe is not consummate? History shows our views of the universe constantly change because of this fact.

[KingsGambit]

By "make sense", do we mean internally consistent, or consistent with external evidence? There is no shortage of explanations that fulfill one of these criteria, but not both.

[NormATive]

My Tour Guide in Israel said, on more than a few occasions, "If there is a difficult way to do something, the Jewish [sic] will find it".

LOL! Very true!

NORM

[Truthseeker]

Actually I do not attribute any significant religious meaning to Genesis at all. I consider it simply as ancient literature describing the world from an ancient perspective over 2500 years ago.

For those seeking a religious perspective I prefer the allegorical Jewish understanding of Genesis. Genesis 1, nor Genesis as whole, is in reality not an important book for Jews. The following link describes it well. Cited is part of the summary.

Source: http://www.myjewishlearning.com/beliefs/Issues/Science/Creationism_and_Evolution/Bible_as_Allegory.shtml?p=3

The religious message is precisely the realm in which science cannot compete, and those devoted to the cause of the Bible would do far better service to their cause by stressing its unique religious message. To the religious person it makes little difference whether the world was created in six days or several billion years.

What counts is the deeper message of the biblical account of creation: The world was made by a wise Creator who seeks man's welfare, who created the world carefully with man's benefit in mind, who created man with Godlike qualities and commanded him to administer the world wisely.

Though we observe the Sabbath every seven days, it is this deeper message which we celebrate each week. The current views of modern science deepen our understanding of this message and renew our confidence in it.

© Copyright Original Source

Shuny, thank you for posting the summary. Perhaps this thread did need to have that included as a reminder of what is important. But please don't forget I started the thread in the Apologetics forum.

[Doug Shaver]

It seems to me Christians need an interpretation of Genesis 1 that appears to make sense.

It depends on what you mean by making sense. I don't think there is a sensible interpretation that is consistent with any inerrantist dogma. The only sensible interpretation is one that says, "This might not be true, but it could have been what the authors believed."

[Truthseeker]

To all those posters asking what is meant by "make sense": If, after reading an interpretation of Genesis 1, you feel like saying, "Yeah! That makes sense!"--well, then Does this Wikipedia entry "Allegorical interpretations of Genesis" make sense to you for the most part? If not, why not?

[Jedidiah]

The Allegorical interpretation does not make sense to me. If you want to get some idea of my understanding of Genesis you might look at http://www.reasons.org/. It makes great sense to me.

[KingsGambit]

An example of what especially does not make sense to me is those interpretations that place Adam and Eve way back in time back tens/hundreds of thousands of years (or even further in some cases). The people in the first few chapters of Genesis are portrayed as Neolithic farmers.

[Doug Shaver]

Does this Wikipedia entry "Allegorical interpretations of Genesis" make sense to you for the most part? If not, why not?

It's a long article, and I've had time to only skim it. The writer seems to discuss several interpretations without expressing a preference for any particular one.

For an interpretation to make sense to me, I need a reason to think it was the author's intention that his work be so interpreted. I have no reason to suppose that the authors of Genesis expected their readers to think anything other than "This really happened."