We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

3603330964_f4b2b78f11_z

Pre-Modern Readings of Genesis 1

Biologos posted a three part reflection on Pre-Modern readings of Genesis 1 that are worth a closer look. And no matter what your particular way of reading this portion of Scripture, let’s pay attention to what edifies the Church and whether our reading contributes to that.

From Part I of the series:

Key theologians of the early church (such as Origen and Augustine, as we’ve discussed) read Scripture with multiple senses and meanings—with a literal sense and multiple spiritual senses. However, not all fully agreed with this methodology. Though most all would certainly hold to multiple senses of Scripture, some readers insisted upon a more profound attention to the literal sense, and the use of the literal sense to help restrain or hold in check the possible spiritual readings. Such 3rd- and 4th-century Church fathers, as St. Basil the Great, John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, and Theodore of Mopsuestia insisted upon a much more restrained literal reading of Genesis 1.6

Yet even those who insist upon a more literal—or more historical—interpretation of Genesis 1 still contended that the primary purpose of any reading was to edify the Church, which entails setting forth the key theological teachings of Genesis 1, rather than focus on the material specifics. Again, such teachings include that the world is created, that God create the world out of nothing, and that the creation account demonstrates the great order and harmony of creation as a testimony of the God’s glory, beauty, and goodness.7

Image by P K. Sourced via Flickr

Category:
Tags: , , ,

Related Reading

Podcast: What if Science Proved Jesus Did Not Rise From the Dead?

Greg responds to an accusation from Richard Dawkins and considers a hypothetical situation where scientists prove that Jesus did not rise from the dead. He also confesses which worldview he would adopt if he were to leave Christianity. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0085.mp3

New Testament Support for the Warfare Worldview

Warfare in Jesus’ Ministry The theme of God striving to establish his sovereign will (his Kingdom) on earth over and against forces that oppose him is prevalent in the New Testament. In keeping with the apocalyptic climate of the time, there are many references to angels at war with God, demons that torment people, and…

Overflow Episode 7 — Paul Anleitner on Our Crisis of Meaning, Science and Genesis, and MORE (podcast)

Greg considers the evangelism implications of the idea that we are all IN. Why risk someone having an opportunity to opt out? Episode 496 http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0496.mp3 EXTRAS! EXTRAS! EXTRAS! http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0496_EXTRA.mp3

Overview of Crucifixion of the Warrior God

Greg reviewed the content of his new book, Crucifixion of the Warrior God, as a part of the Woodland Hills Church Covenant Partner gathering on March 5, 2017. If you want a fairly succinct synopsis of the thesis of his book, look no further. Ten years ago, Greg set out to write a book justifying the…

Does Analytic Thinking Make You Less Religious?

Andrew Aghapour wrote an article that was posted in Religion Dispatches questioning the findings of studies that concluded that analytical thinking negatively affects religious belief. In the article, Does Analytic Thinking Erodes Religious Belief? Aghapour argues that there are flaws in the studies and that the biggest culprit was the most likely the population used…

Reading the Bible “by Faith”

The cruciform approach to reading the Bible—and specifically the culturally-conditioned and sin-stained portraits of God—requires faith on the part of the reader, which I argue in Crucifixion of the Warrior God. On one level we can discern by faith that often times God broke through the limitations and sin of the ancient authors, for we…