A
Ark Guy
Guest
Is Genesis Literal?
You often hear claims from Christians who support evolution or an old earth position proclaim that Genesis is nothing more than an allegory.
In the following I will present another way of demonstrating that Genesis is meant to be taken as a literal historical witness.
So what about Genesis? Is it strictly an allegory? Some parts may have a allegorical or prophetic meaning such as Gen 3:15, but, is Genesis strictly allegorical with no literal historical representation as claimed by the old earth or theistic evolutionary Christians? Is just the early primeval historical parts of Genesis (chapters 1-11) considered as allegorical and the latter Patriarchal portions of Genesis (chapter 12-50) considered as literal and historical?
Parables and allegory are a part of the bible, but it should also be pointed out that parables presented in the bible drew reference from and point out every day occurances or situations that have actually and do occur.
I do believe that Genesis does contain some allegorical references, but just as in the rest of the bible it draws upon the literal.
When one reads the bible it often lets us know if what it is talking about is an allegory or parable. For example in Ezekiel and Matthew we read where this is the case:
EZE 17:2 "Son of man, set forth an allegory and tell the house of Israel a parable.
.....and
MAT 13:3 Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed.
The question needs to be asked, if Genesis is an allegory or a parable does it say it is? If not, does it say anything at all about what Genesis is? Does it say that Genesis is not a parable?
Lets look at the accounts found with in Genesis and its literal aspects;
GEN 2:4 This is the - account - of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens--
Notice Genesis mentions that the story presented is an - account - of what happened. It should be noted that Moses (or who ever the author was) did not call Genesis a parable, myth, fable or allegory,
The word - account - used in Genesis 2:4 and the following verses is TOLDAH (Strongs 8435) and has a figurative reference to history.
So to continue with the "account" concept, lets look at:
GEN 25:12 This is the - account - of Abraham's son Ishmael, whom Sarah's maidservant, Hagar the Egyptian, bore to Abraham.
The same word and sentence structure is used to describe the situation in both Genesis 25:12 and Genesis 2:4. Considering that, why is it Abraham is looked upon as a real life, factual, historical person, YET the creation account is considered as allegory by some Christians? Both stories are presented in the same fashion using the same word.
So, speaking of Abraham...who is considered as a literal person, why then is he associated with a so-called fictitious, allegorical person such as Noah in the book of Hebrews?
HEB 11:7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
HEB 11:8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going.
Just the association of Noah with Abraham in the book of Hebrews should establish Noah as literal person. There is still further support for a literal Noah .
Noah, and lets not forget Adam, is considered as an allegorical character by the old earth and theistic evolutionary christians. One can continue with the same line of reasoning. When we look at Genesis 6:9 the record of Noah is found once again using the same sentence structure, This is the account of. When presenting the record of Adam once again we find Genesis presenting an - account - of what happened. The simple conclusion, If Abraham is literal, then logic reasons that Noah is literal, along with Adam and the creation account.
GEN 5:1 This is the written - account - of Adam's line. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God.
GEN 6:9 This is the - account - of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.
Genesis presents the creation story, Adam, Noah and Abraham as an account, or a historical narrative of record and events. If Moses when writing Genesis was presenting a parable then why use the term - account - for the creation story? If it truly is a parable, then why not call it a parable?
In Genesis we find more that the 4 accounts presented above. In actuality there are 11 occurances where This is the account of is used to explain the history, genealogy of certain individuals along with other people in their society.
One can easily ask the question, beginning with the 11th historical account in Genesis 37:2 and working backwards to Adams account, where do the people mentioned turn from the literal to the figurative?
These accounts are each presented as a part of a series that built upon each other to tell a completed story. Considering that each account builds upon the proceeding account, one can easily draw the conclusion that if the latter accounts are literal, then so should all of the previous accounts be considered as literal.
You often hear claims from Christians who support evolution or an old earth position proclaim that Genesis is nothing more than an allegory.
In the following I will present another way of demonstrating that Genesis is meant to be taken as a literal historical witness.
So what about Genesis? Is it strictly an allegory? Some parts may have a allegorical or prophetic meaning such as Gen 3:15, but, is Genesis strictly allegorical with no literal historical representation as claimed by the old earth or theistic evolutionary Christians? Is just the early primeval historical parts of Genesis (chapters 1-11) considered as allegorical and the latter Patriarchal portions of Genesis (chapter 12-50) considered as literal and historical?
Parables and allegory are a part of the bible, but it should also be pointed out that parables presented in the bible drew reference from and point out every day occurances or situations that have actually and do occur.
I do believe that Genesis does contain some allegorical references, but just as in the rest of the bible it draws upon the literal.
When one reads the bible it often lets us know if what it is talking about is an allegory or parable. For example in Ezekiel and Matthew we read where this is the case:
EZE 17:2 "Son of man, set forth an allegory and tell the house of Israel a parable.
.....and
MAT 13:3 Then he told them many things in parables, saying: "A farmer went out to sow his seed.
The question needs to be asked, if Genesis is an allegory or a parable does it say it is? If not, does it say anything at all about what Genesis is? Does it say that Genesis is not a parable?
Lets look at the accounts found with in Genesis and its literal aspects;
GEN 2:4 This is the - account - of the heavens and the earth when they were created. When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens--
Notice Genesis mentions that the story presented is an - account - of what happened. It should be noted that Moses (or who ever the author was) did not call Genesis a parable, myth, fable or allegory,
The word - account - used in Genesis 2:4 and the following verses is TOLDAH (Strongs 8435) and has a figurative reference to history.
So to continue with the "account" concept, lets look at:
GEN 25:12 This is the - account - of Abraham's son Ishmael, whom Sarah's maidservant, Hagar the Egyptian, bore to Abraham.
The same word and sentence structure is used to describe the situation in both Genesis 25:12 and Genesis 2:4. Considering that, why is it Abraham is looked upon as a real life, factual, historical person, YET the creation account is considered as allegory by some Christians? Both stories are presented in the same fashion using the same word.
So, speaking of Abraham...who is considered as a literal person, why then is he associated with a so-called fictitious, allegorical person such as Noah in the book of Hebrews?
HEB 11:7 By faith Noah, when warned about things not yet seen, in holy fear built an ark to save his family. By his faith he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.
HEB 11:8 By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going.
Just the association of Noah with Abraham in the book of Hebrews should establish Noah as literal person. There is still further support for a literal Noah .
Noah, and lets not forget Adam, is considered as an allegorical character by the old earth and theistic evolutionary christians. One can continue with the same line of reasoning. When we look at Genesis 6:9 the record of Noah is found once again using the same sentence structure, This is the account of. When presenting the record of Adam once again we find Genesis presenting an - account - of what happened. The simple conclusion, If Abraham is literal, then logic reasons that Noah is literal, along with Adam and the creation account.
GEN 5:1 This is the written - account - of Adam's line. When God created man, he made him in the likeness of God.
GEN 6:9 This is the - account - of Noah. Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.
Genesis presents the creation story, Adam, Noah and Abraham as an account, or a historical narrative of record and events. If Moses when writing Genesis was presenting a parable then why use the term - account - for the creation story? If it truly is a parable, then why not call it a parable?
In Genesis we find more that the 4 accounts presented above. In actuality there are 11 occurances where This is the account of is used to explain the history, genealogy of certain individuals along with other people in their society.
One can easily ask the question, beginning with the 11th historical account in Genesis 37:2 and working backwards to Adams account, where do the people mentioned turn from the literal to the figurative?
These accounts are each presented as a part of a series that built upon each other to tell a completed story. Considering that each account builds upon the proceeding account, one can easily draw the conclusion that if the latter accounts are literal, then so should all of the previous accounts be considered as literal.
