Sunday, October 07, 2007

Before Genesis?

Kay and I were processing this a week or so ago and just thought I'd throw it out there if anyone wants to comment on it. (It stems from a lecture we heard recently.)

The initial account of creation (Chap. 1) is really just a quick overview introduction to the book of Genesis. It really doesn't say a whole lot, though it does coincide amazingly well with biological and geological history of the world. It also fits beautifully into ancient near east poetic structure. But the point is, it seems like it expects the reader to already be familiar with the idea and events of creation. It is there to make a few points, recap, and connect with it's audience. Then the second account (Chap. 2) is where the story sort of picks up on its characters and goes from there.

Unfortunately, I think a lot of people primarily use the intro to Genesis as the singular biblical reference to the idea and events of creation.

Let me tangent a second. I correlate this to the intro of the Gospel attributed to Matthew where the geneology of Jesus is presented. It assumes one is already familiar with the history of Israel (accounted in the Old Testament) to understand the connection and point that is being made by the names that are used.

But understanding that geneology isn't quite as easy from 21st century experience, mindset and approach to history-telling. Thus we don't as easily make the connections without intentional effort.

How does this relate? Well, we were wondering what else the Israelite people would have had on which to more fully base their understanding of creation.

But what predates Genesis?

Well, theoretically, the first five books of the Bible were given to us by Moses, or in the time of Moses. That's a LONG time after the creation account. And as everyone should know, much of the written record of the Bible was oral tradition for tens to hundreds of years (in this case, thousands) before it was actually written down.

So again, what's before Genesis? The lecture we were listening to was on creation material found in the book of Job. This is it. The book of Job is possibly the oldest story found in the Bible; it is maybe the first one ever written down. This could explain why it reads so, so different from anything else. It actually gives quite a bit of detail to various features of creation, though of course, not aligning it in an organized focused account. Of course, there is much more in the book of Job than merely creation material. In fact, there is a ton that can be taken out of Job. But as it relates, Job was material the Israelite people would have already had in there story-telling repertoire by the time of Moses.

Try it. Go read Job. Pay attention to anything relating to the earth, nature, animals, winds, God creating, etc. Then read the Genesis intro. and see what you get out of it.

5 Comments:

At 8:26 PM , Blogger lizzydew said...

Hm. Interesting. I just might take that up. I was talking just today about a conversation I had with my brother a few years ago. I was being a smart a@# and asked him sarcastically where dinosaurs were in the Bible and he (sure showed me who was smarter, and...) rattled off a verse in Job where it mentions a behemoth which is thought by some to refer what we would call a dinosaur.
Interesting thoughts Pierre...

 
At 10:27 PM , Blogger Pierre said...

Err... yeah. And I'm sure Job rode his triceratops to work, too. :)

(Sorry, now here's me being the smart a$$)

I'm gonna be honest and say that's not at all what I was talking about. Yes, I'm well familiar with those passages. However, your comment assumes humans and dinosaurs were on the planet at the same time (of which there is likely no supporting scientific evidence). Also, I've heard far more convincing arguments that the behemoth and leviathan were something more like a hippopotamus and large crocodile, two of the most dangerous large animals on the planet, especially in a pre-technologically developed society. The point is that they were large, dangerous animals (not what exactly they were).

And my point was more about the idea that Genesis 1 can and ought to be read in correlation with other ancient near east tradition... of which we have right in our own Bible. I think it can give a more full and rich understanding of how the Israelites understood creation.

Sincerely yours,
Fred Flintstone

 
At 8:26 AM , Anonymous Anonymous said...

ok mr. smarty pants i read with cultural context and try to understand the scriptures with the mindset in which it was written when i know that the answer is always going to be Jesus.

you'll be hearing from me later.

no seriously, we're hangin' at deb's tonight and plan on making some calls. get ready!!!

 
At 4:25 PM , Blogger Jesse Malott said...

I thought Genesis 1 was the complete blueprint for the precise 6 day creation 4007 years ago today. Wow, I guess I messed that up. : )

All kidding aside, I totally concur, though we really have to account for the very different genres and time periods in which Job and Genesis were written. What a difficult story to piece together.

Nice work.

 
At 5:44 PM , Blogger Kay said...

I totally agree with you. Genres and context are VERY important.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home