The Scientific Compatibility and Uniqueness of Hebrew Cosmology Among Ancient Near Eastern Literature (original) (raw)
2018, Thesis for Master of Arts in Science and Relgion
In the study of literature from the Ancient Near East (ANE), many scholars, both secular and religious, argue that the creation story of Genesis is mythology akin to, and shaped by, the cultural milieu of the ancient world. The mythology of Genesis, they argue, represents the theory of creation as the Hebrews saw it, but which readers today see as incompatible with a modern worldview. As mythology, the creation account of Genesis has no revelatory insight or authority in regard to scientific understanding for how the Universe came into being. Walton, for example, asserts that to properly interpret Genesis, one must recognize that it “pertains to functional origins rather than material origins and that temple ideology underlies the Genesis cosmology.” In other words, Genesis was written as a late document to validate Israel’s temple worship and has no insight into the material origins of the universe. These two arguments; Genesis is culturally conditioned literature and functionally unscientific mythology, are interconnected in the reasoning of scholars represented by John H. Walton and Kyle Greenwood. This paper addresses both arguments and demonstrate the uniqueness of Hebrew cosmology among ANE literature and its compatibility with modern scientific exploration.
Sign up for access to the world's latest research.
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Related papers
The Genesis Creation Account and Its Reverberations in the Old Testament: A Book Review-Part One
Bible and Spade, 2023
Part One of this book review highlights the comparisons that many critics make between the biblical record of Creation and other ancient Near Eastern (ANE) literature. Does Genesis borrow plot points? Does the terminology actually show that the Israelites believed the world was covered with a solid dome? How should we regard any similarities between pagan mythology and the Bible? Endnotes and Bibliography for part one are here: https://biblearchaeology.org/images/Smith-Documentation-Winter-2023.pdf
Biblical Cosmology: The Implications for Bible Translation
Journal of Translation, Volume 9, Number 2, 2013
We show that the creation account in Genesis 1.1–2.3 refers to a worldview of the cosmos as the ancient Mesopotamians and ancient Egyptians understood it to be. These civilisations left behind documents, maps and iconography which describe the cosmological beliefs they had. The differences between the biblical cosmology and ancient Near East cosmologies are observed to be mainly theological in nature rather than cosmological. However, the biblical cosmology is conceptually different to a modern view of the cosmos in significant ways. We examine how a range of terms are translated in English Bible translations, including ḥōšeḵ, təhôm, rāqîᵃʿ, hammayim ʾăšer mēʿal lārāqîᵃʿ, and mayim mittaḥaṯ lā’āreṣ, and show that if the denotation of these terms is in accordance with a modern worldview then this results in a text that has incongruities and is incoherent in the nature of the cosmos it depicts. We therefore recommend that the translation should denote a biblical cosmology.
A Literary and Cultural Analysis of the Creation Narrative of Genesis 1:1-2:3
[This is a DRAFT paper. In an updated paper to be released, some information will be changed and the presentation refined.] Genesis continues to defy. Centuries of attempts to shape it to conform to the prevailing paradigm have created a theoretical maelstrom, around which swirl literal theories of chaos. So unsettled are the waters that much of the Genesis text is still in darkness due to modern cultural presuppositions, prior creedal beliefs, and conflicting inherited scholarship. The effort in this study is to look afresh and minimize prior theoretical, creedal or genre expectations. The goal is to discover the original intent of the author that is obscured by cultural and literary expectations. The proposed approach is merely a grammatical-historical method with a heightened awareness of original cultural context and literary genre to overcome hindering eisegesis influences. This approach lead to the documentation of a highly detailed literary structure which is beautiful and inspiring. The structure has been outlined by others before, but the present study provides a number of tables detailing the structure to a greater level. In addition, a historical survey of selected Ancient Near East cosmologies near the time of the writing of Genesis, provides the perspective of the original audience which we can temporarily enter to review the discovered structure. It reveals the polemic purposes that motivated the narrative's structure and wording which have often been mistaken for other purposes or derived from other processes that were concomitant to the commenter's worldview and not Genesis.
Tradition and Transformation in Ancient Jewish Cosmology and Biblical Interpretation
Tradition and Transformation: Dissent and Consent in the Mediterranean, edited by Mihail Mitrea (Kiel: Solivagus- Verlag), 2016
This essay will examine how cosmology and biblical interpretation provide a nexus point for tradition and transformation across Jewish literature from early antiquity. Across the ancient Mediterranean world authors recognized and resisted a popular tendency to hold God responsible for trials and therefore to place God himself under indictment. Though the surrounding polytheistic cultures allowed for various divine figures to play the role of judge, defence council, and prosector, within Jewish monolatry however a single God who retains all of these functions within the divine law-court proved religiously problematic. Already in the later sections of the Hebrew Bible this tension is felt (e.g., 1 Chronicles 21:1 as it reworks 2 Samuel 24:1–25), and Second Temple literature would continue to use the divine courtroom to address questions on the equity and propriety of God’s judgements.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.