Fact, Fiction, or Somewhere in Between?

Today I will be discussing my views on the creation story found in Genesis. The first thing I should mention is that I will not be approaching this text as most fundamentalist Christians would. I do not not believe that the Bible was meant to be a scientific manual or historically accurate document to explain to us the exact origins of the world. When the author wrote this text, I'm sure he had no idea what science was, or what the scientific method was, yet Christians feel this desperate need to push this type of analysis on a document that was never meant to be analyzed in this way (IMHO). Thus, I do not take a literal interpretation of the creation story. Trying to fuse Science and Creation is like trying to mix water and oil (I'm an oil worker so that's what came to my head). You just end up with a messy situation that doesn't really work out.

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters."

So the first thing that the Bible says is that God created the heavens and the earth. No problem. Of course he did! How could something come from nothing? We see design everywhere. But, does the Bible mention how he created it? Hmmmmm. I don't see anything about how he did it. Soooooo, could the Big Bang be how he did it? Why not? When the Big Bang theory first appeared, Christians were very excited about it as it denoted an origin point when the universe began which pointed to a creator. However, these days, the Big Bang theory seems to be a taboo in churchs. Why is that? I would say the Bible wouldn't contradict that at all. But, all science and religion aside, I believe this verse is meant to tell us one thing. God is the creator. That's it. Pure and simple.

The next verse is interesting because it says the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. Fundy interpretation=Holy Spirit=proof for trinity. One thing that Fundamentalists love to do is have a theological idea and look for it throughout the entire Bible. In this case, the Trinity. Fundies would say that the spirit in verse 2 is the Holy Spirit. And this very well may be. However, if we are to explore the other options, that word can also be translated as wind. It may just be the wind of God hovering over the waters. To say that this is a definite proof of the existance of the Holy Spirit right from the beginning, is weak.

3 And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and He separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

The only thing I would like to discuss here is the interpretation of the literal 7 days of creation. Most Fundies will tell you that the earth and the universe were created in only 7 days. Now, I wouldn't put it past God to do it in only 7 days, I mean he does have the power. But the term Yom (used for 'day'), can also be translated as "time" or "a division of time". It does not necessarily mean a 24 hour period. If you translate it as a a literal 24 hour period, and continue on with this literal chronology of the Bible, you end up with an earth that is approximately 6000 years old. Now, personally that is a little hard for me to swallow, and anybody else who has grown up learning about dinosaurs that existed millions of years ago etc etc. I would take this portion of text to say that God created the world, but not to say exactly how long it took him to do it and to prove how old the earth is.

6 And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." 7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

Now this is one part that I often get into discussions with people about. The firmament. I mean what is this thing? The sky separating the waters above from the waters below. Creation scientists say that in the beginning of the world there was a layer of water around the earth and this caused people to live longer and grow bigger and basically made a paradise. And then this same layer of water caved in on the earth which caused the flood. Now the flood is another story. But let us address this firmament.

The ancient near eastern picture of the world (Sumerian, Babyloniona, etc) was that the world was a flat disc surrounded with a rim of mountains and floating on an ocean of sweet waters, called the ABZU. Resting on these mountains was the sky in which rested the stars and other astral bodies. Below the earth was the netherworld, where the spirits of the dead lived (sheol in the old testament) And the whole earth was immersed in a giant bubble of boundless primeval ocean of salt water. A picture is worth a thousand words. Below is a diagram taken from Georges Roux's "Ancient Iraq".

So now where on earth would they get an idea like this from? Well, now I'm just speculating here, but this sure makes sense to me. The ancient man is standing on the shores of the ocean looking out on the big blue sea that goes as far as the eye can see. He then looks up and sees the big blue sky as far as the eye can see. What does he think? Well I know what I would think if I didn't have the hubble telescope. Dude, the earth is surrounded by a big old ocean just as blue as the ocean down here. Thus, the model above is formed. Was the earth surrounded by a big old blue salt water sea in the beginning of the world? Not likely in my opinion. The author of Genesis was simply purporting the common belief about the earth of the time and adding his God into the mix.

26 Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, [b] and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."

The name for God used in this text is Elohim, which in and of itself denotes plural God. We also see God using "our" refering to making man in "our image". Again, Fundies use this as a proof for the trinity. However, I would like to propose another idea. Perhaps Judaism was not a monotheistic religion right from the get go. Of course it did turn very monotheistic in the end, but this was more a progression. The other religions of the day definitely had a pantheon of gods and perhaps early Judaism was not so different. If God was truly one, but made of three, He would likely say make man in my image, not our image. The term our really denotes more than one person, in a seperate manner, not fused as in the trinity. If one reads throughout the old Testament, it never really denies that there are other gods out there. It merely says the he is the supreme God and denies the other gods' power. So perhaps early Judaism was not so unique from the religions around it as Fundamentalists suppose.

So, now we come to the title of this post. Is the creation story Fact, Fiction, or somewhere in between. Well, I go with the last option. This story is meant for one thing, I believe. To tell us that God created the world and everything in it. How he did it, we do not know. How long it took, who cares. Did Adam and Eve really exist? (We will get into this in the next post.) Does it really matter? What can we glean from this passage? God created the world. That's it. We are so far removed from the time when this was written, it is impossible to suppose that anyone can have the proper interpretation of exactly what the author was trying to portray. We can not possibly take this passage, make an interpretation, and call it fact.