Do you dare?

[Akita Suggagaki]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic date. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

 

[chevyontheriver]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic data. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

I would look at the human condition and say that empirically a fall has happened. It seems to be the most obvious of doctrines regardless of origin theories.

 

[David Lamb]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic data. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

God warned and spoke to the post-exilic Jews through prophets, spokesmen He had appointed. Genesis reads as history, not as some sort of parable. The New Testament doesn't regard the account of the Fall as merely a warning to post-exilic Jews. For example:

“And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit.” (1Co 15:45 NKJV)

“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” (1Ti 2:14 NKJV)

Also, if Adam was not an actual man, where does that leave Jesus Christ? He is called "the last Adam":

“And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit.” (1Co 15:45 NKJV)

 

[okay]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic data. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

I do think it could be a warning.

I think you could also see Adam as another telling of Israel’s story. Here the garden would be the promised land. Eating the fruit is idolatry/false worship (disobedience). Getting kicked out of the garden is the exile. Both result in a kind of spiritual death; Adam loses the direct intimacy with God, Israel loses access to the temple. This is not my idea by the way - I got it from The Bible Tells Me So by Pete Enns. He probably explains it better.

I think this kind of stuff is fascinating.

 

[okay]

scholars speculate an a post exilic data.

It is interesting that the exile was in Babylon, and Genesis is often compared to the (most likely older) Babylonian creation myth, the Enuma Elish. Apparently it looks like the same genre.

To me it makes sense that God speaks in language/genres that people can understand. And I doubt that human language can fully describe God directly since human minds cannot fully understand God. I think metaphors, poetry, parables, songs, analogies, myth, etc., are all limited but may be the best ways we have to try and understand some aspects of God - at least to some limited degree.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I would look at the human condition and say that empirically a fall has happened. It seems to be the most obvious of doctrines regardless of origin theories.

That would mean a fall form some kind of idealistic situation. You think there was such a time?

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I do think it could be a warning.

I think you could also see Adam as another telling of Israel’s story.

Here the garden would be the promised land. Eating the fruit is idolatry/false worship (disobedience). Getting kicked out of the garden is the exile. Both result in a kind of spiritual death; Adam loses the direct intimacy with God, Israel loses access to the temple. This is not my idea by the way - I got it from The Bible Tells Me So by Pete Enns. He probably explains it better.

I think this kind of stuff is fascinating.

You dare! We are thinking along the same lines. I never heard of Pete Enns. But that is an interesting parallel.

Enns's book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, proved controversial at Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS). WTS President Peter Lillback said that it "has caught the attention of the world so that we have scholars that love this book, and scholars who have criticized it very deeply…. We have students who have read it say it has liberated them. We have other students that say it's crushing their faith and removing them from their hope. We have churches that are considering it, and two Presbyteries have said they will not send students to study under Professor Enns here."

On my list now. Thanks.

 

[chevyontheriver]

That would mean a fall form some kind of idealistic situation. You think there was such a time?

Part of me thinks the history of life has always been ‘eat or be eaten’. The other part of me thinks there was indeed an idyllic time before sin grabbed hold of our species and the universe. I cannot explain the reconciliation of those two thoughts any better than Genesis did.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic data. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

I'd rather say that the Minimalists can assert whatever they want, but even so, whatever conclusions from critical studies involving the Documentary Hypothesis might be pushed by them, their textual "conclusions" don't rule out the possibility of an earlier, "proto" set of teachings from a historical Moses, whether those teachings, including that of Adam and Eve, were in oral or written form. I think of this in an analogous way to how I think that a "Q" document or set of writings, and oral tradition, may have existed prior to the four Gospels we now have.

What's more, I've only seen assertions that perhaps the 1st chapter of Genesis could be a post-exilic product, but I think it begins to become a bit crass and overboard when skeptical scholars posit that much of Genesis is post exilic in its origin of writing, an issue that is still apart from the actual historical contents, or narrative, of Genesis.

In leaning toward the Maximalist position, I tend to think that Moses could very well have existed, that an event approximating the Exodus took place (even of a miraculous sort), that Moses wrote God's commands, and that Moses set out the initial, rudimentary writings that developed into the Torah/Pentateuch that we now have. I don't rule out the possibility that the Torah/Pentateuch we now have is, for the most part, what the original writings of Moses could have been.

But to assume a post-exilic origin for all of this, as well as for much of the rest of the Old Testament, that idea pulls at the seams for me.

 

[David Lamb]

That would mean a fall form some kind of idealistic situation. You think there was such a time?

God in His Word says there was, for after He had finished creating, we read:

“Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed [it was] very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.” (Ge 1:31 NKJV)

 

[public hermit]

is interesting that the exile was in Babylon, and Genesis is often compared to the (most likely older) Babylonian creation myth, the Enuma Elish. Apparently it looks like the same genre.

The Babylonian flood myths (Atrahasis and Gilgamesh) might also lend credence to a post-exilic, Babylonian influence on the primordial history of Genesis. Of course, these stories were probably circulating long before the exile so it's hard to say.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

You dare! We are thinking along the same lines. I never heard of Pete Enns. But that is an interesting parallel.

Enns's book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, proved controversial at Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS). WTS President Peter Lillback said that it "has caught the attention of the world so that we have scholars that love this book, and scholars who have criticized it very deeply…. We have students who have read it say it has liberated them. We have other students that say it's crushing their faith and removing them from their hope. We have churches that are considering it, and two Presbyteries have said they will not send students to study under Professor Enns here."

On my list now. Thanks.

I don't think Peter Enns (or Kenton L. Sparks) is all that bad. I don't have to agree with everything he posits, bit I think he has some reasonable things to say. On the other hand, where the disciplines of both Archaeology and Historiography are at play with Biblical Studies, I take into account other scholars from various places on the critical spectrum (i.e. Minimalist, Centrist, Maximalist).

 

[okay]

Enns's book, Inspiration and Incarnation: Evangelicals and the Problem of the Old Testament, proved controversial at Westminster Theological Seminary (WTS).

Enns is an academic OT scholar and I find some of his stuff really helpful.

I thought Inspiration and Incarnation was an interesting read. It is a little on the academic side compared to some of his more recent writings, but then again some of his most recent stuff is a little far afield for me (I haven’t bought into Rohr’s universal Christ concept).

If you want to hear Pete talk about OT books, he has a series of ‘Pete Ruins <insert name of OT book here>’ episodes on his Bible for Normal People podcast. There are Genesis Episodes in July and this week. Most folks here would not be helped by his podcast, but I think you might find it interesting. Like his books, some episodes are fascinating and some are too out-there for me. He has a sarcastic sense of humor which won’t be everyone’s cup of tea, but he suppressed that in Inspiration and Incarnation.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

God warned and spoke to the post-exilic Jews through prophets, spokesmen He had appointed. Genesis reads as history, not as some sort of parable. The New Testament doesn't regard the account of the Fall as merely a warning to post-exilic Jews. For example:

“And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit.” (1Co 15:45 NKJV)

“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.” (1Ti 2:14 NKJV)

Also, if Adam was not an actual man, where does that leave Jesus Christ? He is called "the last Adam":

“And so it is written, "The first man Adam became a living being." The last Adam [became] a life-giving spirit.” (1Co 15:45 NKJV)

The authors of 1 Corinthians and Titus may very well have used a literal hermeneutic.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

But to assume a post-exilic origin for all of this, as well as for much of the rest of the Old Testament, that idea pulls at the seams for me.

There is so much we do not know and must speculate.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

I don't think Peter Enns (or Kenton L. Sparks) is all that bad. I don't have to agree with everything he posits, bit I think he has some reasonable things to say. On the other hand, where the disciplines of both Archaeology and Historiography are at play with Biblical Studies, I take into account other scholars from various places on the critical spectrum (i.e. Minimalist, Centrist, Maximalist).

Yes, we need to have an open mind rather than a strictly dogmatic defensiveness.

 

[okay]

I had a long drive to an appointment today and listened to an episode on Genesis. It spends a few minutes early on about the parallels between Adam and Israel, and mentions that he first saw it in a medieval commentary so it is not a new idea!

Most of the episode talks about how Genesis is primarily about Israel’s monarchy told using stories of the deep past, in the same way The Crucible is about McCarthyism told using stories of the past.

Here is the link, which also has a transcript if you’d rather read:

Episode 172: Pete Enns - A Whole Different Way of Reading Genesis - The Bible For Normal People

Pete looks at Genesis from an angle we’re guessing will be new to many of you. What is Genesis as a whole about? For what purpose was it written?

thebiblefornormalpeople.com

 

[Clare73]

Would anyone here dare to see the Genesis Adam and Eve "fall" more as a post exilic warning to the surviving Jewish community to obey the religious elders and their teachings (God)? This would mean seeing it less as a literal historical eating forbidden fruit. I know that is impossible for some here. But scholars speculate an a post exilic data. What motives would the authors have and what points trying to make? There is a cause of our suffering? But also, "Listen to us"?

I have no need to view the word of God other than he presents it to be. . .history, prophecy, doctrine, warning, exhortation, prayer, praise. . .

 

[Rose_bud]

I had a long drive to an appointment today and listened to an episode on Genesis. It spends a few minutes early on about the parallels between Adam and Israel, and mentions that he first saw it in a medieval commentary so it is not a new idea!

Most of the episode talks about how Genesis is primarily about Israel’s monarchy told using stories of the deep past, in the same way The Crucible is about McCarthyism told using stories of the past.

Here is the link, which also has a transcript if you’d rather read:

Episode 172: Pete Enns - A Whole Different Way of Reading Genesis - The Bible For Normal People

Pete looks at Genesis from an angle we’re guessing will be new to many of you. What is Genesis as a whole about? For what purpose was it written?

thebiblefornormalpeople.com

I do enjoy Enns, he does cause one to pause and consider what we are reading.

You can see elements of what he is saying, especially with narrative exegesis where you have to consider what the narrator is conveying to his audience (e.g., point of view, setting, plot, etc.)

Some theologians call this foreshadowing, But Enns appears to see the same concept at play albeit with a different approach. The themes, motifs, and character developments become more apparent as you continue reading. For example some commentaries highlight the fact that Hagar is regarded as Egyptian, and her descendants would be the same that mistreats Sarah's descendants, this is foreshadowing, but Enns regards this as the authors historical approach. Also the fact that God is gracious to Cain, he becomes a wanderer or one in exile... the motifs are consistent.

I think Enns has a point, the information about Adam and Eve and Joseph etc, I believe is true. However the author has selected the materials to convey a message. Similar to the NT, especially when we consider how NT authors selected their materials, teachings and oral traditions available to them (John tells us there is so much more Jesus did, but he selected these). They wrote the gospels and epistles to adress their audience and make a theological point.
The Bible is indeed a wonderful and extraordinary text inspired by God. The creative genius of the authors and their use of literary devices to make a point is awe inspiring.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

The Bible is indeed a wonderful and extraordinary text inspired by God. The creative genius of the authors and their use of literary devices to make a point is awe inspiring.

I am glad to hear your appreciation and observations. I will be looking for more Enns