George wrote:
The question that should be asked
is how much historicity there is in Genesis, not how much we need to put
into it.
And, of course, that is the question I have put over twenty years
into. Those who haven't invested that amount of time on this issue
can either take my word for it or do their own research. The
entirety of Genesis 2-11 can be viewed as Adamic/Semitic history from
about 7,000 to 4,000 years ago. Nearly every phrase in Genesis 2-11
can be correlated to Accadian/Sumerian history in Mesopotamia.
So that leaves us Genesis 1 which suffers from misunderstanding.
Plant life on day three precedes animal life on day five, and animals
need plants to eat. The sun, moon, and stars on day four are not
created on that day only designated as timekeepers for the sighted
creatures who appear later. Birds (fowls in the KJV) are also
flying creatures, or insects. Also the days could overlap
somewhat. And so on. I'm not saying I can reconcile every
phrase in Genesis 1 with science, but my guess is that it could be done
if we knew enough.
But to throw up our hands and declare that the entirety of Genesis 1-11
must be allegory, or poetry, or mythology, or tradition because it is at
seeming variance with scientific discovery is unwarranted. Did they
think the sky was a solid dome out beyond the planets and stars?
Maybe. Did they think the earth was flat? Possibly.
But the history of their people which was recorded from the time of Adam
seems to be pretty much on target with the surrounding culture of that
period. Adam was the first of the patriarchs. The garden of
Eden was irrigated off the Euphrates river located likely at the ancient
city of Eridu. Eridu is named as the first city in the Sumerian
king list and is the home of Adapa, who correlates to Adam.
Noah saved the faithful remnant in a local flood that destroyed the
Adamite population, decimated the Sumerians, and left more remote
populations unscathed. The tower of Babel was a ziggurat
constructed at Babylon. One of many in the region constructed to
survive future floods. Abraham left Ur and headed West.
What's to not understand?
So as history, early Genesis looks to be as good as the rest of OT
history. It's just not human history, something we seem reluctant
to admit.
Dick Fischer -
Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Thu Mar 31 17:08:00 2005