Creation has been a topic that seems to be in abundance recently. We watched Louie Giglio videos in church. Mal has purchased a couple books that explain science and the Bible. A blog I read had a couple of entries about creation. While I am trying to focus on the cross (and church reformed history), creation and its relationship to science keeps becoming the topic of discussion. So here ya go. Linda Hamill on creation….
First, for you to understand my position you need to understand some of the experiences that have influenced the development of these thoughts. I grew up in the country and there developed a respect for the land and the people. Our land was between two Native American reservations, so I also developed an appreciation for people’s stories.
The native people traditionally told stories to teach relationships; relationships between family, elders, other tribes, the land, and even animals. In the tribe, time, the measure of it, or the dependence on it was not the same as I was taught. I found time to be similarly not measured in the
I am not an anthropologist and just barely a theologian but I reckon Genesis chapter 1 is a story, in the sense of a tribal story explaining important relationships. When I studied Hebrew, I found that there were cultural aspects to the language that resonated well with me because I had grown up in the country and watched a tribe.
I use a bit of liberty in translating the Hebrew; actually, I tried to translate it quite literally and not attempting to put the translation into good English grammar. I also, used a bit of liberty in describing the telling of the story so imagine if you will, a group of people sitting around a campfire. The storyteller is in the middle casting shadows opposite the flame. The gaze of the faces around the fire is transfixed on the storyteller.
The storyteller puts up one hand and begins, “In the beginning,” the teller raises both hands to the sky and says, “God created the heavens and the earth,” thenlowering his arms to point to the ground.
“And the earth vacant and void,” the storyteller announces with a sense of urgency and awe so that the listeners wonder what will happen next. The storyteller does not pause but continues the suspense saying, “And darkness upon the faces of deep.”
Drawing a deep breath and noisily breathing out, whispers, “And God breathed and it fluttered over the waters.” The storyteller’s fingers flutter as if they were over the water.
The storyteller continues telling the actions of God in loud booming voice. “And God said “Be light” and light was. And God saw the light was good,” is pronounced with pride.
“And God divided between the light and between the darkness.” Then as if calling out to someone or something, the storyteller acts as if he were God calling, “And God called to the light, ‘day’; and to the darkness called, ‘night’.”
Then the dramatic actions cease and the storyteller stands tall and still and quietly proclaims, “And it was evening and it was morning, day first.” (Gen1:1-5)
The storyteller pauses before he continues telling the events of the next six days. I will not continue the story here but it seems to me that this is not a scientific explanation of the creation event.
This story is designed to give God the credit for creation. It introduces the Spirit of God, in the introduction of the ‘breath that fluttered over the waters.’ It introduces the Word, when God “called’ and ‘it was’ as if it were the Word itself that creates. Yes, I interpret this through the lens of the New Testament.
I understand this first chapter of Genesis as introducing important aspects of the God that is worshiped by the tribe that tells the story. The debate whether or not this is a scientific 24 hour day or a day as measured by God that to humanity could span year, is not relevant. If God is indeed God he could have created in seven 24 hour period or in seven set of God days that spanned years, the choice was/is God’s.
To try to pin down the science of creation is an interesting endeavor. I enjoy the reading and believe that God does reveal himself to people including myself through science but to get bogged down in that when telling the story misses much of the mystery and awe the people had for their God. So my comment on creation, “WOW!!.”
3 comments:
There's an article at Creation on the Web examining whether Genesis is poetry or a figurative story. I'm not nearly theologically as educated as either you or them, but it presents a different view.
Thanks John,I read the article. I have to say that it has not changed my stance. As a young adult, I wholeheartedly believed that the days were 24 hour periods. I can no longer say that with integrity, to do so limits God to our understanding and I believe that God will be God. Scripture demonstrates over and over even in the crucifying of the Messiah, that God will not conform to human expectations but exceeds them.
To get caught up in the time issue of this passage misses much of the awesome relational theology of a God that desires relationship with his creature. I am happy to sit on the fence regarding the time periods, they may be 24 hour days, they may not be for me understanding the relations is important.
When I think of how the world has reduced the creation account to a good "story", I think about Postmodernism Architecture. For the sake of having it our way, we wanted buildings to look a new way, the old way just wasn't doing it for us. Here is a good description of what it is:
"Postmodernism has its origins in the perceived failure of Modern Architecture. Its preoccupation with functionalism and economical building meant that ornaments were done away with and the buildings were cloaked in a stark rational appearance. Postmodernists felt the buildings failed to meet the human need for comfort both for body and for the eye. Modernism did not account for the desire for beauty. The problem worsened when some already monotonous apartment blocks degenerated into slums. Post Modernism sought to cure this by reintroducing ornament and decoration for its own sake. Form was no longer to be defined solely by its functional requirements; it could be anything the architect pleased."
What you have are buildings with staircases to no-where, hallways with no doors, etc. It makes for a good conversation, but in the reality of the whole thing, there was one area that postmodernism wasn't allowed to alter...and that was the buildings foundation.
Genesis is the foundation of the Bible. Parts of it are even quoted by Jesus. If we take away the foundation, we find a Bible that reads the way we want it to read, with no foundation.
Post a Comment