Genesis 1-7 in Review

These first few chapters of the Bible are some of the most difficult to understand, and perhaps cause some of the most controversy amongst Christians. I have taken what I have learned in regard to the historical and cultural context of Genesis and tried to use those things to decipher the meaning and themes behind these passages. The train of thought which I have pursued led to conclusions which most conservative fundamentalist Christians would deem uncomfortable at best, and heresy at worst.

What are the options regarding the interpretation of these first few chapters of Genesis? The fundamentalist evangelicals would say it must be interpreted literally, and can be used as a scientific historical document which can be proved. The post-modern version would suggest that these stories are myth, taken from surrounding cultures and modified to suit the ancient Israelite belief system.

Let's assume for a moment that the latter is the truth. Would this option really change the gospel as we know it? Would it change what Jesus said to us in the gospels? Would it mean that God doesn't exist? Hardly. In fact, it would almost make the gospel more accessible to people living in our current culture. It seems to me that most people in our current culture who are looking at Christianity from the outside in, see us as an isolated, strange, weird sub-culture that have strange beliefs and practices. Why we hold on so dearly to our literal interpretation of the Genesis story, in the face of evidence and proof to the contrary, is something that non-Christians cannot understand. This can be an incredible barrier for someone who wishes to join a Church, yet does not want to have to believe something that makes them seem close-minded.

At this point, some of you may be thinking that not believing in a literal Genesis is watering down the truth, that we don't have to be like the culture we are in. However, if one looks at the history of Christianity, it is filled with examples of how Christianity adapted to fit the culture it was in. We have even shown examples in the Bible itself, of how the religion of the Israelites changed in order to suit the culture in which it was situated. Even our current idea of fundamentalist evangelicalism and creation science was born out of modernity at the end of the late 1800's. At that time, the scientific method became very public, as did science in general, and Christianity, as it always does, adapted to the culture it was in. It adopted the scientific method and applied it to the Bible and with great success. The fundamentalist version of Christianity flourished and many people came to Christianity because of their adaptation to the culture.

Well, I would propose that it is again time to adapt. If we don't, we risk becoming an obsolete religion that still keeps women out of leadership and in roles where they are only allowed to teach our children; while that same woman is the CEO of a multi-million dollar company. We risk being viewed as a people who, like ostritchs, stick our heads in the sand in order to avoid facing the truth and facts about the Bible. Of course these times of transition are very uncomfortable. When the first organs were brought into the church, there were many who believed it to be an instrument of the devil due to its uses in popular culture. Hymns were thought to be evil because they were not directly from scripture. These days, a non-literal interpretation of the Bible is dubbed as heresy and a watering down of the gospel. Of course one is free to believe how they want to, but to condemn another "version" of Christianity simply because it is adapting to the culture and speaking to the next generation is to deny Christianity's progression.

One of Post-modern Christianity's greatest strengths is that it has the ability to unify all Christians. What better testimony to God's greatness would there be than to look past our petty differences in theology to show a united front. Today, I attended a city-wide church service that was meant to bring all the churches in the city together. Together at this service, a collective offering was taken towards the Canadian foodgrains bank. I found this to be very encouraging. Post-modern Christianity has the potential to expand that circle of unity.

I believe that it is not a matter of if Christianity will change and adapt, but merely when. I believe it is already in the progress of changing now. I don't think I'm the only one who thinks the way I do. I'm sure there are many others out there who think the same way, but maybe are afraid to voice their opinions for fear of rejection. I know that is how I have been for about 4 years. I put on the fundamemtalist mask, tried to pretend that I believed how they did, but I found that it just made me sad. That wasn't who I was anymore, and its not who I want to be anymore. I, for one, am no longer content to disregard the evidence surrounding the Bible. I would rather be a part of the progression of Christianity than trying to live in a Christianity that is rapidly becoming obsolete.