Creation in Context

The early chapters of Genesis are "lost" to many of us precisely because we expect this ancient text to anwer our twenty first century questions. We come to this text asking it to answer all of our questions concerning creation and evolution, even though the text was never written and edited with that specific agenda.

Many want to treat this ancient text like a sceince book and attempt to reconcile it with contemporary sceince, no matter their theological convictions: young earth creationism, progressive creationism, or theistic evolution. Others have understood the text as mere polemic -- that its only value as literature is to oppose the religious texts and thoughts of Israel's neighbors.

We must learn to see how the text would have operated as a theological text within the ANE context. If we fail to do so, not only will our understanding of the text be anachronistic, but we will miss the profound theological reflection of ancient Israel.

It may help to begin with a text that is not quite so controversial in order to illustrate my point. First some background: The Christians that wrote the gospels had a decision to make about how they would engage the classical Greek world with the message of Jesus.

They had continue their tradition in a specific language and they chose the Greek language. They could have continued in the Aramaic tradition like the Jewish rabbis, but since they were trying to make disciples of all nations they engaged the classical world in their native language. They also appropriated Greek ideas. In the gospel of John we read: In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us (John 1:1; 14).

Most readers today might think, “Word? What an interesting metaphor.” But it wasn’t just a metaphor for the evangelist trying to engage the classical Greek world. The word John uses “Word” is the Greek term logos, which in the classical world meant something like “the logic or rationality that holds the world together.” It is the logic, reason, or superglue upon which the world is built. Most importantly, it was an impersonal force (think Yoda and the Force here).

So any Greek reading John’s Gospel might find himself agreeing with John saying "Oh yeah, logos, sure," until he read the “logos” became flesh and made his dwelling among us. For a Greek the physical world is something to be escaped not to “enter into,” and to attribute personality and flesh to the “logos” would have been absolutely revolutionary. He either throws the book across the room in disgust or is so intrigued by this idea for which Christians are so willing to give their lives that he keeps on reading.

This short treatment of John 1 is analogous to the way in which we must encounter and understand the creation narratives of Genesis. The ancient language, metaphors, structure, and ideas of Genesis must be allowed to move around and say what they were intended to say in their historical context before we draw on them for contemporary theological reflection.