People of the Ancient Near East (ANE), when the Old Testament was
written, believed in a particular physical cosmology. They believed
that the earth was a flat disk with a solid dome firmament above it,
primordial waters above the sky which were held back by the
firmament, and primordial waters below the earth. This physical
picture of the cosmos was a common belief, as supported by amble
evidence from archeology, from other written sources of that era, and
from the Bible itself. It is clear from many biblical texts that the
Old Testament authors themselves believed the physical picture of ANE
cosmology. Unfortunately, modern English translations usually gloss
over this fact. (The N.I.V., for example, sometimes substitutes
"sky" for firmament and often substitutes "clouds" for the waters
above the firmament.)
Old-earth Concordist interpretations of Genesis 1 reinterpret several
Hebrew words in order to make the chronology of Genesis 1 try to
agree with modern science. Numerous (sometimes conflicting)
concordist reinterpretations of those Hebrew words have been offered
in books, in articles, and on this e-mail list. While concordism can
be appealing, it relies on redefining Hebrew words in ways which are
foreign to the original authors' understandings of the words. Such
redefinition of words, I believe, is a deeply serious hermeneutical
problem.
Paul Seely has an excellent article online at
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/topic/bible-Science/PSCF6-97Seely.html
which explains in greater depth the ANE physical picture of the
world. The article also explains the original meanings of the Hebrew
words which refer to the firmament and the primordial waters.
Seely's article includes numerous references. I also recommend the
book "Portraits of Creation," which includes an excellent chapter on
the same topic.
In this post, I don't want to repeat their careful analysis of the
Hebrew words. Instead, I want to point out these three things: (1)
Besides Genesis 1, there is a great number of biblical passages which
also refer to physical picture of ANE cosmology. (2) Interpreting
these passages in light of ANE cosmology helps us understand their
message. Numerous passages praise God for creating the physical
structures of ANE cosmology --- and some in some of those passages,
God speaks in the first person to take credit for creating them! (3)
There is a hermeneutical danger in attempting to redefine these
Hebrew word, in ways foreign to the original authors' thoughts, in an
attempt to match Genesis chronology to modern science.
--[1]--
Here is an incomplete list of passages which refer to the physical
structures of ANE cosmology (the firmament, the waters above the sky
and/or the waters below the earth):
Genesis 1:1-22, Genesis 7:11-20, Genesis 8:1-5, Genesis 9:13-16,
Genesis 11:4, Genesis 49:25,
Exodus 15:8, Exodus 20:4, Exodus 20:11,
Deuteronomy 5:8, Deuteronomy 33:13, Deuteronomy 33:26,
Judges 5:6,
2 Samuel 22:8-17,
Job 20:6, Job 22:12-14, Job 26:8-14, Job 35:5, Job 36:27-30, Job 38:4-38,
Psalm 9:1-6, Psalm 29:3-10, Psalm 74:13-17, Psalm 89:9-12, Psalm 90:2,
Psalm 102:19-25, Psalm 104:1-9, Psalm 135:6-7, Psalm 136:5-9,
Psalm 139:8-9, Psalm 146:6, Psalm 147:4-8, Psalm 148:1-7,
Proverbs 3:19-20, Proverbs 8:22-29, Proverbs 25:3,
Isaiah 14:12-15, Isaiah 24:18-19, Isaiah 40:12, Isaiah 40:21-26,
Isaiah 42:5, Isaiah 45:8, Isaiah 45:18, Isaiah 48:13, Isaiah 51:6,
Isaiah 51:13, Isaiah 65:17, Isaiah 66:1-2,
Jeremiah 4:23-27, Jeremiah 10:11-13,
Ezekiel 1:1, Ezekiel 1:22-28, Ezekiel 10:1, Ezekiel 32:7-8,
Daniel 4:10-11,
Hosea 10:7,
Habakkuk 3:9-11,
Revelations 4:1-6, Revelations 15:2, Revelations 20:11
I expect there are more passages besides those listed above. Also, I
didn't bother to include in this list other passages which, for
example, refer to the God of Israel as "the God of heaven and of
earth." Today, when we think about the place called "heaven," we
probably think of it in a sort of science-fiction parallel-dimensions
sort of way. In ANE cosmology, "heaven" was physically located above
the earth. So when the Old Testament authors refereed to "heaven and
earth," they were thinking "every part of the cosmos."
Theologically, the claim that Israel's God was God of every part of
the cosmos is a claim that is in sharp contrast to the "gods" of the
surrounding cultures, which were thought to be gods of specific
tribes or gods of specific parts of the cosmos (the sky, the ocean,
the sun, the moon, the underworld, etc). When the Old Testament
authors said that the God of Israel was the "God of heaven and
earth," they were using the same _physical_ picture of the cosmos
(flat-earth, solid firmament, waters above and below the earth) as
the surrounding cultures in the ANE; however, the authors were making
a _theological_ claim which was radically opposed to the beliefs of
the surrounding cultures.
--[2]--
For many of the passages listed above, it could be argued that the
language is poetic. Some of the passages listed above, by
themselves, do not prove that the author believed in the physical
picture of ANE cosmology. However, for many of the passages listed
above, the language of the text itself (even in the English
translation) makes a compelling case that the author really did
believe in the physical picture of ANE cosmology. When your read
those passages with ANE cosmology in mind, it helps you understand
the theological message.
A few examples:
Genesis 49:25. Jacob is blessing his son Joseph. "With bitterness
archers attacked him; they shot at him with hostility. But his bow
remained steady, his strong arms stayed limber, because of the hand
of the Mighty One of Jacob, because of the Shepherd, the Rock of
Israel, because of your father's God, who helps you, because of the
Almighty, who blesses you with blessings of the heavens above,
blessings of the deep that lies below, blessings of the breast and
womb."
Keeping in mind ANE cosmology, Jacob is saying that the Almighty
blesses Joseph with blessing from the very top of creation (the
heavens above) to the very bottom of creation (the deep that lies
below). You can't get more blessed than that.
Exodus 20:4. God says, "You shall not make for yourself an idol in
the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the
waters below."
In ANE cosmology, "heaven above, earth beneath, and waters below"
is both a poetic _and_ a literal way of referring to "the whole of
creation."
Psalm 104:1-9. Praise the Lord , O my soul. O Lord my God, you are
very great; you are clothed with splendor and majesty. He wraps
himself in light as with a garment; he stretches out the heavens like
a tent and lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters. He
makes the clouds his chariot and rides on the wings of the wind. He
makes winds his messengers, flames of fire his servants. He set the
earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. You covered it with
the deep as with a garment; the waters stood above the mountains. But
at your rebuke the waters fled, at the sound of your thunder they took
to flight; they flowed over the mountains, they went down into the
valleys, to the place you assigned for them. You set a boundary they
cannot cross; never again will they cover the earth.
This Psalm clearly refers to the stretching out of the firmament,
the existence of waters above the earth, and the raising up of the dry
land out of the waters below. This psalm literally praises God for
making the solid firmament, dividing the primordial waters, and
raising the land out of the waters..
Prov.8:22-29. Wisdom personified says, "The Lord brought me forth as
the first of his works, before his deeds of old.... I was there when
he set the heavens in place, when he marked out the horizon on the
face of the deep, when he established the clouds above and fixed
securely the fountains of the deep, when he gave the sea its boundary
so the waters would not overstep his command, and when he marked out
the foundations of the earth."
Despite the English mistranslations, you can see ANE cosmology
throughout this passage. Again, the passage is praising God making
the firmament, dividing the primordial waters, and raising up the dry
land out of the waters below.
Is.48:13. The prophet quotes God, "My own hand laid the foundations
of the earth, and my right hand spread out the heavens; when I summon
them, they all stand up together."
Note, this is God himself saying that he made these things.
Job 38:4-10. Again, God is the speaker. "Where were you when I laid
the earth's foundation? Tell me, if you understand. Who marked off
its dimensions? Surely you know! Who stretched a measuring line across
it? On what were its footings set, or who laid its cornerstone -
while the morning stars sang together and all the angels shouted for
joy? Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the
womb, when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick
darkness, when I fixed limits for it and set its doors and bars in
place, when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther; here is
where your proud waves halt'?"
Again, God is referring to the physical elements of ANE cosmology
and taking credit for making them.
Much of this is poetic language. It is also literal language. When
you combine archeological evidence, other ANE literary sources, plus
all of the Biblical texts, it becomes clear that (1) the Old
Testament writers really did believe the physical picture of ANE
cosmology: a flat earth, a solid firmament, and primordial waters
above and below the earth; and (2) the Holy Spirit inspired the Old
Testament writers to praise God for making these things -- sometimes
putting the words in God's own mouth.
--[3]--
The chronology of Genesis 1 makes perfect sense if you have the
physical picture of ANE cosmology in mind. The chronology of Genesis
1 does not match modern science. It _cannot_ match modern science
simply because there is no solid dome firmament, no waters above the
sky, and no primordial oceans below the dry land.
So why shouldn't we redefine these Hebrew words, in ways foreign to
the original authors' thoughts, in an attempt to match the Genesis 1
chronology to modern science? What's wrong with that?
We should discuss that question. And to open discussion, let me ask
the following question: On what basis, then, would we criticize a
theologian who might want to redefine the word "prophet" from "one
who speaks God's words" to "one who calls us to live better lives and
be nicer to the poor;" or redefine the word "prayer" from "speaking
with God" to "attuning oneself to the reality of one's own being and
the cosmos;" or redefine "God's law" to mean "good guidelines for
living in society;" or redefine "resurrection" to mean "a
psychological event in which Jesus' teachings took hold in the
disciples' hearts and emboldened them to become teachers themselves."
All of those redefinitions could be done in the name of making the
Bible more in line with modern science.
I think we should use the same hermeneutical principles on Genesis 1
which we use on every passage of scripture: Taking into account the
background knowledge of the author, the original audience, the
historical context and the type of literature, we ask ourselves what
message the passage would communicate from the author (and therefore
from God) to the original audience. The original author and audience
of Genesis 1 (and all the other passages listed above) believed the
physical picture of ANE cosmology. The original author and audience
would have known the creation myths of surrounding cultures --
cultures which shared the same physical picture of ANE cosmology but
disagreed about the theology. Keeping all that in mind as we read
Genesis 1, the message is clear. The original message had no
interest in teaching, and no interest in correcting, the mistaken
physical picture of ANE cosmology. The original message was a
radical theological message: There is _one_ God, the God of Abraham,
the God of Israel, who made _all_ of creation. (There are more
theological messages in Genesis 1 besides that, but that's the first
obvious message.)
Paul Seely says it well in the above-referenced web article, which I
quote here.
"The biblical approach that I believe better relates science to the
Bible [than concordism] is to accept the historical-grammatical
meaning of Genesis 1. Admit that it reflects the cosmology of the
second millennium B.C.... Admittedly, this does not uphold the
common but unbiblical assumption that the divine inspiration of
Scripture cannot entail concessions to ancient "science." But, there
is no biblical reason why the theological message in Genesis 1 cannot
be eternally valid, while the package in which it came was a temporal
concession to the people of that time. Indeed, it was Jesus who
taught that divinely inspired Scripture can and does include
concessions to hardened hearts, concessions in the area of faith and
morals (Mark 10:5). How much more then is concession possible in the
area of mere science? We might add that, according to Scripture, the
development of scientific knowledge was delegated by God to humankind
(Gen. 1:26-28). The divine purpose of biblical inspiration,
therefore, is not to reveal science but to inform us of God's
standards of faith and morals (2 Tim. 3:16). It is time for
evangelicals to lay aside extra-biblical definitions of biblical
inspiration, and agree with Jesus that inspired Scripture can contain
concessions. Genesis 1 is a concession. Or, as a modern missionary,
aware of the imperative need for divine revelation to be clothed in
the terms of the culture to which it comes, has explained: Genesis 1
is a case of divine contextualization."
Loren Haarsma
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 24 2002 - 13:11:14 EDT