The Creational Mythology of Genesis 1
January 11
There is an interesting discussion going on over at OST regarding different readings of Genesis 1. Check it out if you like. Please pause for a moment and read Genesis 1 before reading the OST article or this piece.
The central argument is that since Genesis 1 was not written in a post-enlightenment rational/scientific context, it would be irresponsible to read it as such.
Instead, Doyle proposes a mythological reading of the text that draws attention to the creational narrative rather than to what some refer to as “the bare facts of the matter.” The argument here is that the author was not writing as a historian or journalist to construct a time line of events so much as he, inspired by God, wrote to construct a mythological frame to explain the origins of the world with respect to the relationship between our Creator God and His creation.
Please understand, of course, that the author is not using “myth” to mean “false” or “untrue” in the manner that a few still speak of “the myth of global warming.” Instead, he’s using the word to describe an overarching story or metanarrative that we find ourselves in today just as the Israelites did as they wandered the ancient Near East. The authority of Genesis 1 is not validated by human rational/scientific attempts to “prove Creationism.” Instead, it is validated by God Himself, a truth accessible to us in the present in that we are able to locate ourselves in the account of creation and fall (and later Jesus, cross, and resurrection) today.
The author proposes five ways of reading Genesis in the character of creational mythology. I don’t believe that any of the five interpretations are valid by themselves or that any of them are without error to the extent that they are useful. However, I do regard this as a productive discussion to have, whatever the outcome.
Especially this quote:
The mythic truth receives its guarantee by the reality of the risen Christ, who in essence has absorbed the everyday world into his own mythic world.
I see a few good things happening here, and a few dangers that we must certainly watch out for as well. I’ll share my thoughts on Sunday.
Until then, if you would like to share your thoughts, I would encourage you to read the article at OST with a proper understanding of the word “myth” and with an open but critical mind and spirit. Then, read Genesis 1. Is this a book recording a scientific, empirically-verifiable, rational, historical account of the creation of a young earth? Or is there something more going on here? Is a faithful reading of Genesis 1 as authoritative mythical narrative possible, and if so, is it productive?
If you feel your blood pressure rising as you read this article, I’d encourage you to go for a walk and perhaps wait a day before sharing your thoughts. I embarrass myself far too often by reacting too quickly.
Cheers,
Scott
January 11th, 2007 at 9:54 pm
Hey Scott,
Just thought I’d go ahead and post some initial thoughts (which you may have alluded to in your mention of concerns) to let you know that your labor isn’t in vain :). Here they are:
1) Well might it be said that we need not focus so much on the historical and empirical evidence which we have to ‘prove’ or ‘disprove’ creation vs. evolution, etc. First of all, we cannot make people see the light of God’s Word without the illuminating Holy Spirit — all such belief in God as Creator does little good if it is not belief fueled by faith in Christ and a love toward Him and all that He has created. Actually, I have a second point but it seems like the first one is sufficient. I would not debate creation with anyone based on historical evidence; I’d share with them that (as you have said) God’s truth is validated by Jesus Christ–he said it, and I believe and trust Him more than I do myself or any ‘expert’.
2) The idea of myth can go awry, however, if we are to begin to apply this kind of thinking to the Gospels and any such narrative in the Bible. If we throw Moses out of the window because we don’t have any evidence that he existed, we may be in trouble (we don’t, though neither do we have empirical evidence that any ancient records are true and not just myth-laden accounts by people with ’simple minds’ as opposed to our own highly rational–and often prideful–systems of thought). Why would we be in trouble? Well, this is where Protestant liberalism in the early 20th century went downhill — they wanted to defend the Christian faith, but cared too much for the world and began to speak of the story of redemption through Christ as a mythic narrative–certainly true in one sense, but utterly unreliable and unhistorical (perhaps even ahistorical). We have from the apostle Paul the unwavering statement, however:
“14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. 15 We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in Christ we have hope [2] in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied.” (1 Corinthians 15)
So it may be said that the historical truth matters as it is a testament to the common experience we call ‘reality’ *through which* God works–Rome did fall, the Jews did come out of Egypt by the hand of the LORD, and Jesus Christ died and rose again on the third day ACCORDING to the Scriptures. Notice how God’s Word stands above all, but does not stand alone; history, as it were, testifies to the reality of God’s redemption–it is not totally hidden! This is the very definition of revelation: God’s unending truth (the real reality) enters into our reality. And Jesus has entered into that reality as well. There are deeper shades of reality which we see by faith which looks into things ‘unseen’ and yet to come–this is the substance of our great hope for the glory of Christ to be fully revealed when He returns in judgment. But if we lose the claim for the historical integrity of the Gospel, of Christ’s death on the cross and His resurrection from the dead, then we have lost Jesus Our Lord and indeed are fools in the most vain sense.
OK, those are my two thoughts for now. Hope you’re doing well.
In Christ,
Paul
January 12th, 2007 at 3:26 am
Hey Scott. I met you (again) today on 3rd street. I like your blog. I submitted mine for the Connexion website. It’s lettersfromsara.blogspot.com. Your writing is insightful and I’m going to think about it a lot.
Sara