The Old Testament Creation: Myth, or God's Word? (And Does It Really Matter?)

PIN THIS, PLEASE! - Is the Bible Creation story literal?

If you belong to certain sects of Christianity, you’ve been taught that Adam and Eve were literal people, and that Genesis 1 should be taken literally. 

I should know. I belonged to one of those sects for around fifteen years of my life. This was despite the same preachers teaching a literal interpretation also explaining a few of the actual, correct Hebrew translations of some of the words.

For years, I believed in Young Earth Creationism, and that Adam and Eve were historical figures. God created the universe in six literal days. To believe in a symbolic or allegorical Genesis was to be under the deception of the devil.

A funny thing happens when you leave the institutional church and stop hearing the same messages week after week, stop getting inculcated with inaccurate interpretations of the Bible, sometimes flat-out wrong translations of certain verses. 

What happens is, when you read the Bible, you start to see what it really says.

That said, I think I was still attending worship services the day that I read the first chapter of Genesis and realized that how the sun, moon, and stars are described as having come into existence is contrary to what we now know. That was the day I began to question the belief in a literal Genesis 1 Creation story.

It was also the day I began to feel like a heretic. 

That was despite having been brought up Catholic, which did not – and does not now, as far as I know – teach that the Bible’s creation story is literal.

If you’re either a non-Christian or a Christian who’s never believed in a literal six-day creation, you might be thinking only backwards hicks and rednecks take that belief. Allow me to gently correct you on that.

First, understand that I have a high I.Q. I was valedictorian of both my high school and college graduating classes. Second, many people more educated than I, in professions varying from psychology to law to medicine, and who live comfortable middle-class lives in large cities, believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible’s Creation story. 

There are several what they believe to be salient arguments in favor of a literal interpretation of Genesis 1.

Arguments for a Literal Interpretation of the Genesis Creation Story.

**1. Proponents of a belief in a literal creation claim that because the first and second chapters of Genesis read as a straightforward historical account, believers should accept it as such. For example, the six-day period of Creation is presented as a chronological sequence of events.

**2. The word “day” in Genesis 1 comes from the Hebrew word transliterated as “yom.” One of the meanings of this word is a twenty-four hour day. Since the author of that chapter chose that word, which is used elsewhere in the Old Testament to refer to twenty-four hour days, it follows that the use of “yom” in the Creation account must be intended to be taken literally. (See: Hebrew word "yom" Genesis)

**3. The genealogies presented later in Genesis trace back to (a literal) Adam and Eve. The genealogies are believed to have a basis in history. Therefore, Adam and Eve must have been historical figures.

**4. In the New Testament, Yeshua and certain authors of the New Testament books seem to be referring to particular Old Testament events and people, including Adam and Eve, as historical realities. (See: New Testament view of Genesis)

Thus, to downgrade Genesis 1 to mere symbolism is to bring into question whether Yeshua was, indeed, the Son of God, even whether He existed.

Image of Adam and Eve after The Fall.

 

 

 

 Related to that, literal Creationists insist that the concept of original sin falls apart without a historical man who committed the first sin. No original sin, no need for salvation, no need for a Savior.

**5. Scripture is inerrant. It represents Absolute Truth, which must be based in fact. Figurative interpretations not being based in fact therefore dilute Truth and compromise the authority of Scripture.

Related to that, if we are not to take the first two chapters of Genesis literally, how do we know which other parts of the Bible record literal historical facts? Bible literalists take the all-or-nothing stance when it comes to interpreting the Bible.

**6. To not accept a literal interpretation of the Biblical Creation story is to embrace the theory of evolution, which is to assume that natural laws and natural laws alone led to the world as we know it today. (See: Evolution vs. Creation)

**7. Some proponents of a non-metaphorical interpretation of the beginning of Genesis claim that early Christians took those chapters literally.

While those arguments might sound compelling, they likely represent not more than forty percent of biblical scholars and experts, possibly closer to twenty-five percent. What follows are the counterpoints to the above arguments.

Arguments Against a Literal Interpretation of Genesis.

**1. The translation from the Hebrew into any other language loses most of the nuance, and to consider the first eleven books of Genesis as “straightforward” history is to ignore the literary genres of ancient Near Eastern texts. The writing of these chapters exhibit characteristics different from later historical narratives in the Old Testament. An experienced Hebrew scholar can see that those texts contain a lot of poetry and figurative speech, and therefore symbolism. They were not written as a chronological or scientific account. The first two chapters of Genesis in particular contain a lyrical structure which more than hints at poetry containing symbolism from which we are to gain a greater meaning.

**2. The Hebrew word “yom” has multiple meanings, including a long period of time (as used in the phrase, “the day of the Lord”) or a general era. Moreover, how can a literal day pass without a sun and moon, which, in the Creation story, aren’t even formed until the fourth day?

**3. Old Testament genealogies are not the same as today’s genealogies. They are neither exhaustive nor strictly biological, delineated with purposes to emphasize certain social structures, theological points, or lineages. You can believe in both a first human and original sin without holding to a literal interpretation of Genesis 1. After all, somebody ended up being the first human, and it only takes a quick glance in a mirror to figure out they didn’t do so hot at resisting the temptation to make themselves the center of the world (hey, I’m talking about myself, too!).(See also: literal Adam and Eve) 

I want to add, too, that the Bible talks about Adam as having lived to 930 years old. That sounds like he was an actual historical figure. I don't question the existence of a single original human as much as I question whether the context in which the author(s) of Genesis put him into at the very beginning.

**4. God inspired the Old Testament authors to infuse their writings with points about His character and His salvation plan. When Yeshua and the New Testament writers refer to early Genesis stories, they are referring to them in this context, knowing that their hearers and readers back then understood the literary techniques of the Old Testament writers. 

**5. Literalists take only one view of errancy: that every word in the Bible has to be seen as having been dictated by God, meaning that every single figure and event must have existed as depicted. But there are various views of biblical inerrancy. Many believe that it applies to the truths taught about faith, salvation, God’s character, and human nature within the book, not to literal interpretations of every single passage. The authority of Scripture lies in the theological message, irrespective of current scientific beliefs, and must be interpreted in light of the cultural context of its writers.

**6. Believing in a figurative, symbolic story of Creation does not necessarily conclude with a belief in evolution. Many biblical scholars believe that God is the ultimate Creator, and that science is a tool (though, yes, flawed in many ways) for understanding mechanisms of His creation. While some see the evolutionary process as part of divine design, many others believe in a kind of progressive creationism.

**7. Finally, to argue that all early Christians interpreted the entire Bible literally is to ignore the facts. A diversity of views on Genesis existed in the years following Yeshua’s resurrection, many – because they either knew or had been told how to interpret Hebrew – believing that it was purely symbolic. Origen and Augustine are two prominent figures who took an allegorical view of the Old Testament Creation story.

“But if Genesis 1 isn’t literal, what does it mean?”

This is exactly where I found myself when I realized I’d been sold a line. Many people, when they get to this point, decide the story of Creation in the Bible has to be a myth. After all, every other culture has their own origin story. Why should we believe the seeming dark fairy tale in the first book of the Bible takes credence over any other?

Some go further, abandoning their faith altogether, deciding that if the beginning of the Bible is a myth, none of the book can be based in reality.

Not me. Having the witness of the Holy Spirit inside of me that something about the Creation story is connected to the whole of the story of God’s relationship with people, and being autistic and therefore having an innate need to research, I decided to dig for an answer. What I discovered was the BibleProject YouTube channel. Rather, their video answering the exact question posed in the above header.

Before I say anything else, and before you watch the following video, I need you to understand that half of the duo that runs that channel, the guy named Tim, is a Hebrew scholar. He can read and speak Hebrew, and has studied both the Hebrew Old Testament as well as scholarly writings about all of the books.

In short, unlike most church leaders today, he can properly interpret the Bible.

In the above video, Tim and Jon show the original Hebrew structure of the text. Though it’s in English, it’s clear that it was written with a lyricism which denies a literal interpretation of Genesis 1. They also talk how “the ancients” described different things, and what those descriptions meant. That’s a subtle indication that they – Tim and Jon – are taking the text in the context of that particular culture, rather than literally interpreting it according to what we understand today. Or assuming that the English translation provides the whole picture.

Which it does not.

They go on to explain how Genesis 1 has a specific structure. Though every line may not rhyme, this structure reveals that it’s not a simple explanation of chronological events. Rather, the text reveals not an exact, step-by-step treatise of how our world came into being, but a metaphorical and figurative picture of God’s dominion over the universe, and how He moves in order to create order out of chaos. The video ends by Tim explaining how the Creation story introduces what the rest of the Bible is about.

They have other videos on their channel that discuss the satan’s temptation and subsequent fall of man, which are equally enlightening. But the one above was enough to make my jaw drop to the floor.

It was clear evidence that the first chapter of Genesis was never meant to be taken literally. And way back when, the Israelites, as well as the Jews back in Yeshua’s day, and the Gentiles who became the first non-Jewish Christians, understood that.

Is this issue worth fighting over?

You can believe whatever you want. You can yell at me in the comments and tell me I’m an apostate. By your fruit I will know where your heart lies.

And that’s the thing. Our Father wants believers to live in unity and harmony, to show love. Yes, certain doctrines are harmful and need to be exposed and shut down. But whether to take the beginning of Genesis literally or figuratively... is that really a battle worth fighting? Do we really want to keep giving outsiders that reason to thumb their noses at our faith?

Look, nobody knows exactly how Earth was formed. Nobody knows how old it is, how long our universe has existed. Nobody living today was there. Nor was anyone alive today - or any of their ancestors for many generations - around to witness the Old Testament authors as God inspired them to write down His story. But what we do know is that evidence of a Creator is everywhere. This is where Christians need to land regarding Creation.

The need to be right is selfishness and self-centeredness, pure and simple. Read the first book of the Bible, ask God what He wants you to glean from it, and go on with  your day quietly and full of His love. A task made easier when you learn how to release negativity from your life, which I teach you to do here.

(For more inspiring content like this, you can follow this blog if you have a Google account, bookmark this blog, follow my blog on Goodreads, and/or check out the books in the sidebar.)