| Understanding Christianity A monthly forum on the third Saturday of each month from 6:30 to 7:30 P.M. following Evening Prayer at 6 Topic
Tonight: “Intelligent
Design: What Are Its Merits and Its Drawbacks?” |
Prepared for Study in
Congregations by The Committee on Science, Technology and Faith
of The Executive Council of The Episcopal Church in the United
States of America
|
First Edition, Revised June,
2005
|
The Catechism of Creation
was initially prepared by the Subcommittee on Creation of the Committee
on Science, Technology and Faith. An electronic version is available
at www.episcopalchurch.org/science/.
|
INTRODUCTION
|
The Catechism of Creation
is written in a traditional question-and-answer format, like the “Outline
of the Faith, or Catechism” in the Book of Common Prayer.
Part I outlines the doctrine of creation, drawing upon the Bible
and the theology of the early Church. Part II presents basic information
about modern scientific discoveries and theories about the history
of the universe and of life. It also gives examples showing how science
has informed and inspired a new theological understanding of God’s
relationship to the creation. Finally, Part III presents the biblical
basis for the church’s commitment to an ethic of caring for
creation, and suggests ways in which individuals and congregations
might live out this ministry.
|
WHY DO WE BELIEVE THAT GOD
IS “MAKER OF HEAVEN AND EARTH ”?
|
1) The Bible declares throughout
that God is the creator. In one of many places the Old Testament
prophet in Isaiah 44:23 speaks for God: I am the Lord who made all
things, Who alone stretched out the heavens, Who by myself spread
out the earth. In the New Testament St. Paul (Acts 17:24) refers
to the God “who made the world and everything in it, he who
is the Lord of heaven and earth….”
|
2) Are the creation stories
in Genesis, chapters 1 and 2, meant to convey how God originated
the universe?
These majestic stories should not be understood as historical and scientific accounts of origins but as proclamations of basic theological truths about creation. “Creation” in Holy Scripture refers to and describes the relationship between God and all God’s wonderful works. |
WHAT THEOLOGICAL TRUTHS ABOUT
CREATION DOES GENESIS 1 CONVEY?
|
Genesis 1 teaches that the
one true God calls the universe into existence, and all of creation
responds to God’s call. The creation has order and structure.
It is transfigured and reveals God’s presence, yet it is natural,
not divine. It is dependent upon its Creator for its continuing existence
and for all of the powers and capacities it possesses. Each element
is declared to be good and the whole of it very good. Finally, Genesis
1 teaches that the Sabbath, God’s holy day of celebration and
rest, is anchored in the act of creation.
|
WHAT TRUTHS ABOUT CREATION
DOES GENESIS 2 DECLARE?
|
While Genesis 1 emphasizes
God’s [independence and holiness]. Genesis 2, in poetic and
metaphorical language, emphasizes God’s intimate relationship
with creation. In the story of the making of the garden and of the
first man and woman, God is present to every creature in creating
it and giving it sustenance.
|
WHAT DOES THE BIBLE REVEAL
ABOUT GOD’S RELATIONSHIP TO HUMANITY?
|
Genesis 1:26-28 teaches that
God brought forth man and woman in the divine image and likeness,
enabling them to enter into an intimate relationship with God and
one another. And God gave humankind the responsibility to tend and
serve the garden (Gen. 2:6), i.e., to care for “this
fragile earth, our island home” (Eucharistic Prayer C). God
also has given human beings creative powers. We also participate
in creation through works of human thought, art and scientific invention
(cf. Ex. 31:35). God invites humanity into a covenantal relationship
of love for God, for all humankind and for the whole creation.
|
WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO SAY THAT
GOD CONTINUES TO CREATE?
|
It means that God continually
calls forth, dwells in, preserves, directs, and provides for creation.
|
Part II: Creation
and Science
|
DOES THE BIBLE TEACH SCIENCE?
DO WE FIND SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE IN THE BIBLE?
|
Episcopalians believe that
the Bible “contains all things necessary to salvation” (Book
of Common Prayer, p. 868): it is the inspired and authoritative
source of truth about God, Christ, and the Christian life. But physicist
and priest John Polkinghorne, following sixteenth-century Anglican
theologian Richard Hooker, reminds us Anglicans and Episcopalians
that the Bible does not contain all necessary truths about everything
else. The Bible, including Genesis, is not a divinely dictated scientific
textbook. We discover scientific knowledge about God’s universe
in nature not Scripture.
|
HOW ARE WE TO TREAT CONCEPTS
IN THE BIBLE THAT APPEAR TO BE SCIENTIFIC?
|
Theologians throughout the
history of the Church have explained these concepts this way: God
inspired the ancient writers to describe the world in concepts and
language they and their audiences could understand, not in our concepts
and language. The ancient world-picture—a “three-storied” creation
of the heavens above, the earth beneath, and the waters under the
earth (Exodus 20:4)--though meaningful in its own time, was replaced
by succeeding models and most recently by our modern portrait of
a vast universe with billions of galaxies. The Bible’s theological
declarations about God and creation remain true because they are
not dependent upon the ancient world-picture in which they appear.
|
ARE NOT SCIENCE AND THE BIBLE
IN CONFLICT WITH ONE ANOTHER, AS MANY CHRISTIANS BELIEVE?
|
Both some non-believers and
some Christians promote this Conflict approach. The former group
claims that the universe is all there is and therefore the concept
of God is outdated and irrelevant. Some conservative Christians perceive
modern scientific theories to be hostile to their Christian faith
and reject them as contrary to their beliefs about the Bible. There
is a middle way, which some call a Complementary approach. Its supporters
say that while they are separate fields of study with different sources
of knowledge, science and Christian theology can complement one another
in the quest for truth and understanding. Together they can create
a more complete understanding of and give greater meaning to our
world.
|
WHAT ARE THE MAJOR FEATURES
OF OUR CONTEMPORARY COSMOLOGY?
|
Scientific evidence shows
that we live in a universe so enormous that it is difficult for the
human mind to grasp. This universe has no “up” or “down,” no
center and no edge. It has been expanding for about 14 billion years
from an event called the “Big Bang.” From that singular
event, space and time and various forms of matter and energy have
emerged. Billions of galaxies each made up of billions of stars and
countless numbers of planets have come into existence. Scientists
still seek to understand many mysterious features of the universe.
|
IS IT PROPER TO SPEAK OF AN
EVOLVING CREATION?
|
Yes. When astronomers look
out into space they look back in time. Thus, they are able to see
our universe at many stages of cosmic evolution since its beginning
in the Big Bang. Here on earth biologists, paleontologists, geneticists
and other scientists are showing that life has evolved for nearly
four billion years, and are reconstructing evolution’s history.
None of these scientific discoveries and the theories that explain
them stands in conflict with what the Bible reveals about God’s
relationship to the creation.
|
ISN’T EVOLUTION JUST
A THEORY?
|
Theories are not mere guesses
or hypotheses, as people often suppose. When enough evidence supports
a hypothesis that has been created to explain some facts of nature,
it becomes a theory. A theory is a well-established concept that
is confirmed by further scientific discoveries and is able to predict
new discoveries. The Big Bang theory and cosmic evolution are confirmed
by discoveries in physics ranging from the smallest known particles
of matter to the processes by which galaxies are formed. Biological
evolution is a web of theories strongly supported by scientific observations
and experiments. It fits in with what we know about the physical
evolution of the universe, and has been confirmed by evidence gathered
from the remains of extinct species and from the forms and environments
of living species.
|
WHAT IS BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION?
|
Biological evolution means
that living things change over time. A great variety and diversity
of organisms have come into existence over the past four billion
years from one or a few original life forms. All living things—bacteria,
archaebacteria, protists, fungi, plants and animals, including human
beings—are descendants of pre-existing life forms, most of
which are extinct. The evidence for evolution shows that all life
on earth is related and interconnected, and is often depicted as
a great “Tree of Life.” Evolution happens gradually,
sometimes at a rapid rate and sometimes slowly, but never with discontinuities.
Evolution happens because of natural selection, that is, some features
of organisms lead to higher survival rates in their environments
than others. Charles Darwin was the first to bring together all these
ideas. Scientific researchers since Darwin have refined and added
to them, but never thrown out his basic theoretical framework.
|
WHAT EVIDENCE HAS NATURE PROVIDED
TO SUPPORT BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION?
|
1) There are three major areas
of evidence: the fossil record, biogeography, and genetics. Fossils
of hundreds of thousands of now extinct species show that life has
evolved from simpler to more complex forms over millions of years.
Thousands of transitional fossils help us to understand how the changes
took place. Scientists use techniques based on the rate at which
radioactive elements decay to date fossils and the rock layers in
which they are found. In this way layers of fossils from one part
of the world can be related to fossils 11 of a similar age from another
continent. These studies, combined with comparing the structures
of various fossilized creatures, provide evidence for the relationships
over time among living things.
|
2) While paleontologists study
fossils and their relationships over time, biogeographers study the
relationships and changes in species from one place to another. The
distribution of species provides clues to how they evolved. For centuries
naturalists have noted that similar creatures living in separate
locations show differences in appearance and behavior, particularly
when they do not interbreed. The unique plants and animals of islands
have provided some of the most dramatic examples of evolution. The
finches of the Galapagos Islands that inspired Darwin are one famous
example. Studies in genetics provide the third major field of evidence.
Genes carry instructions for making proteins, basic to all life.
An analogy to language is helpful in explaining how genetics helps
us understand evolution. Genes speak a universal language using only
four chemical letters. The structure of the DNA molecule, which carries
the genes, is identical in all life; that is, it uses the same grammar.
But the arrangement and number of genes varies widely among species.
Thus each species has its own evolutionary story. Individuals have
different versions of that story. Similarities and differences in
genetic make-up, then, help scientists identify how closely or distantly
related individuals and species are.
|
Beginning in the twentieth
century, genetic research has added tremendously to the knowledge
gained from fossils and biogeography. Together they show the astonishing
diversity of life to be evolved, not a series of separate acts of
creation.
|
WHAT EVIDENCE IS THERE THAT
HUMAN BEINGS ARE ALSO EVOLVED CREATURES?
|
Fossil discoveries show that
human beings and monkeys, chimpanzees, and other primates can trace
their lineage to a common ancestor living seven millions years ago.
We humans share almost identical DNA and key protein molecules with
chimpanzees. We also are the most recent descendents of a line of
hominid creatures now extinct. The earliest fossils of our human-like
ancestors are about 6.7 million years old. The first modern humans
appeared 100,000 and 200,000 years ago.
|
DOES THIS PICTURE OF HUMAN
EVOLUTION CONFLICT WITH THE BIBLICAL STATEMENT THAT WE HUMANS ARE
MADE IN THE IMAGE AND LIKENESS OF GOD?
|
In Genesis, “image of
God” is a theological notion. It refers to our ability
to enter into an intimate relationship and communion with God, other
human beings and the whole of creation. Theologians have interpreted
it to refer also to those divine gifts of unconditional love and
compassion, our intellectual and moral reasoning and imagination,
our freedom, or our creativity. To think that these gifts may have
been bestowed through the evolutionary process does not conflict
with biblical and theological notions that God acts in creation.
|
HAS THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH SPOKEN
OFFICIALLY ON EVOLUTION?
|
No. However, clergy and scientists
from both the Catholic and Evangelical traditions in Anglicanism
have accepted evolution from Darwin’s time to the present.
In a resolution passed by General Convention in 1982, the Church
affirmed the ability of God to create in any form and fashion, which
would include evolution. Several Anglicans and Episcopalians, some
of whom are both theologians and scientists, are contributing to
the development of new theologies of an evolving creation.
|
WHAT ARE THEOLOGIANS SAYING
ABOUT GOD’S CREATING ACTIVITIES IN LIGHT OF MODERN SCIENTIFIC
DISCOVERIES AND THEORIES?
|
1) While theologians have
proposed different models of how God acts in an evolving world, they
agree that God is best understood as interacting with the
world rather than intervening in it—a God intimately present
in the world (as Scripture also reveals) rather than a God “out
there.” According to Anglican priest and biologist Arthur Peacocke,
God acts as Creator “in, with and under” the natural
processes of chance and natural selection. Theologian Elizabeth Johnson
writes that God uses random genetic mutations to ensure variety,
resilience, novelty and freedom in the world. At the same time, the
universe operates by certain natural laws or “secondary causes” by
which God, the Primary Cause, ensures regularity and reliability
in nature. Physicist Howard J. Van Till has written that God has
creatively and generously given the creation all of the powers and
capacities “in the beginning” that enable it to organize
and transform itself into the variety of atoms, molecules, chemical
elements, galaxies, stars, and planets in the universe, and species
of living things on this earth.
|
2) In this evolving universe,
God does not dictate the outcome of nature’s activities, but
allows the world to become what it is able to become in all of its
diversity: one could say that God has a purpose rather than a fixed
plan, a goal rather than a blueprint. As the nineteenth-century Anglican
minister Charles Kingsley put it, God has made a world that is able
to make itself. Polkinghorne states that God has given the world
a free process, just as God has given human beings free choice. Divine
Love (1 John 4:8) frees the universe and life to develop as they
are able to by using all of their divinely given powers and capacities.
The universe, as Augustine of Hippo said, is “God’s love
song.” Because God’s Love is poured out within the creation,
theologian Denis Edwards asserts that “the Trinitarian God
is present to every creature in its being and becoming.” These
are but some of the concepts that contemporary theologians are offering
to account for God’s relationship to an evolving creation.
|
HOW DO THESE THEOLOGICAL MODELS
OF GOD’S RELATIONSHIP SQUARE WITH THE BELIEF THAT GOD’S
SOVEREIGN POWER CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE?
|
Knowing the creation as evolving
also helps us to think of God’s relationship to the cosmos
in another way. In Phil. 2:5-11, Christ is said to “empty himself” of
divinity and take in human form the role of a servant. The Greek
word for emptying is kenosis. A kenotic theology of creation
expresses the notion that the Triune God freely and 13 graciously
withdraws absolute power in order to “let the world be” (Genesis
1). A loving parent is faithful to her child, guides and protects
him, but allows him to become his own self. In a comparable but more
profound way, God the Divine Lover loves God’s own creation,
faithfully holding it in existence, calling it to greater levels
of complexity and beauty, but allowing the physical laws that govern
the galaxies, and those of chance, environment, and selection that
govern life, to take cosmic and biotic evolution in whatever directions
the gifts given to creation permit. God’s kenosis gives the
universe its freedom and opens up its future; God’s covenantal
faithfulness and natural laws ensure its cohesion and regularity.
|
IF EVOLUTION IS SAID TO HAVE
TAKEN BILLIONS OF YEARS, HOW IS THIS CONSISTENT WITH THE BIBLICAL
SIX DAYS OF CREATION?
|
Early Church theologians like
Basil of Caesarea (330-379 AD) and Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD)
said that the six days should not be understood as scientific chronology.
Rather, they provide a literary framework that the inspired
writer used to organize and present the various elements of the creation.
They express a topical not a temporal order. Most biblical scholars
now recognize that the six days also perform an important symbolic
function: they convey that the commandment for a Sabbath day of rest
was established at the very beginning of creation.
|
WHY ARE MANY CHRISTIANS OPPOSED
AND HOSTILE TO EVOLUTION?
|
Many Christians have been
taught to believe that evolution is opposed to creation, and that
a believer cannot accept evolution and also believe in God. Neither
of these assertions is true. Two alternatives to biological evolution
put forth by some Christians are called “Young Earth Creationism” and “Intelligent
Design.”
|
WHAT IS “INTELLIGENT
DESIGN”?
|
The proponents of the Intelligent
Design Movement assert that it is possible to discern scientifically
the actions of God in nature. They claim that certain features of
living organisms are “irreducibly complex,” too complex
to believe that they could ever have developed through biological
evolution. Therefore, they can be accounted for only by the direct
action of an Intelligent Designer. Most advocates oppose biological
evolution, which they equate with what they call “Naturalism.” They
define “Naturalism” as a philosophical belief system
that claims that nature is all that exists, and therefore there is
no God who acts in nature. To scientists, however, “naturalism” has
a far different meaning: they seek to study and understand nature
using methods that make no claims either for or against the existence
of God.”
|
{RTN: Discuss “theological
naturalism.”} “Theological naturalism” is “the
view that a rational conception of God is not only consistent with,
but an integral part of, the natural world” according to the
entry “Philosophy of Religion” in A. Pablo Iannone, Dictionary
of World Philosophy (London and New York: Routledge, 2001), p. 435.
For theistic naturalists God is compatible with complex, vast natural
existence and not ontologically "wholly other" (super-natural).
This view is harmonious with ancient Hebrew (biblical) conceptions
of the personal Creator.
|
"Theistic
naturalism" or "naturalistic theism" is noted in
the following publications: David Ray Griffin, Religion and
Scientific Naturalism: Overcoming the Conflicts (Albany, N.Y.:
SUNY, 2000); David Ray Griffin, Reinchantment Without Supernaturalism:
A Process Philosophy of Religion (Ithaca and London: Cornell,
2001); Randolph C. Miller, The American Spirit In Theology (Philadelphia:
United Church Press, 1974); Randolph C. Miller, ed., Theologies
of Religious Education (Alabama: Religious Education Press,
1995); Harold H. Titus, Living Issues in Philosophy (New
York: American Book Co., 1946); and, Henry N. Wieman and Bernard
E. Meland, American Philosophies and Religions (New York:
Willett, Clark & Co., 1936). The term is also found within “Naturalism” in
the Encyclopaedia Britannica (2001 Deluxe Edition CD and
at www.britannica.com).
Additionally, similar classifications may be found within papers
of the Conference on Naturalism, Theism, and the Scientific Enterprise,
University of Texas, 1997) at http://www.leaderu.com/offices/koons/menus/conference.html.
|
HOW HAVE THE SCIENTIFIC AND
THEOLOGICAL COMMUNITIES RESPONDED TO THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN MOVEMENT?
|
A few within the scientific
community are persuaded by the arguments of Intelligent Design advocates,
particularly by their writings on the various levels of complexity
in organisms. Many Christians accept their arguments because they
believe they confirm their faith in a creating God. However, the
great majority of scientists agree that “Intelligent Design” advocates
have not produced valid scientific research and evidence to back
up their claims. Christian critics reject the notion that God should
or can be brought in as a part of scientific explanation.
The “Intelligent Design” argument implies that God has
to step in from time to time to keep creative processes going because
living things lack powers and capacities God did not give the universe
earlier. Many critics assert that Intelligent Design advocates fail
to distinguish between “evolutionism” as a philosophy
and “evolution” as a science with a web of theories based
upon a great deal of scientific evidence.
|
HAS THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH SPOKEN
OFFICIALLY ON THE CLAIMS OF THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN MOVEMENT?
|
No. Although some Episcopalians
are attracted to this concept, many Anglicans and Episcopalians who
are scientists oppose the Intelligent Design Movement for the same
reasons the vast majority of other scientists do. They also reject
the way Intelligent Design advocates meld together and confuse science
and theology. Nature and Scripture present different kinds of truths
about creation. It is not science’s task to discover God in
Nature; it is theology’s task to proclaim the revelation of
the creating God in Scripture.
|
WHY CANNOT ONE SPEAK OF GOD’S
CREATION AS THE WORK OF A DESIGNER WHO MANIFESTS INTELLIGENCE IN
THE FEATURES OBSERVED IN THE UNIVERSE?
|
One can maintain that God’s
creation shows design without agreeing with the arguments of the
Intelligent Design Movement. Instead of implying a “Designer
God” who from time to time intervenes in the creation, one
may speak of a Creator who has built capabilities and processes for
design into the very structure of the universe from its beginning.
For example, many scientists have noted a remarkable set of coincidences
in the values of the forces that hold atoms, molecules, stars and
galaxies together. If any of these values were different by even
the tiniest amount, our universe and life could not exist. These
facts give Christians reasons to believe that we live in a created
universe that has been given the capacities for design. But, this
is a theological conclusion based upon an interpretation of scientific
data and not a scientific argument for the existence of a Designer.
|
IF NEW SPECIES ARISE THROUGH
EVOLUTION, THEN WHY DO CREATURES EXHIBIT FEATURES THAT LOOK LIKE
THEY ARE DESIGNED?
|
Theologians once argued that
the structures of the heavens and the designs of living creatures
provide evidences for the existence of God. We now know that the
structures of matter and living things are actually the outcome of
evolutionary processes. Design in living organisms is now understood
to be an internal rather than an external process, their forms arising
within the creatures themselves rather than being imposed from without.
Theologically speaking, we can understand the powers and capacities
in nature that produce evolving and emerging design in creatures
as a sign of the giftedness of creation, and give glory to God for
it.
|
IF GOD CREATES THROUGH EVOLUTIONARY
PROCESSES, HOW MAY THIS AWARENESS ENHANCE MY SPIRITUAL LIFE?
|
The God of evolution is the
biblical God, subtle and gracious, who interacts with and rejoices
in the enormous variety, diversity, and beauty of this evolving creation.
When we contemplate the tremendous gift of freedom God has bestowed
upon the creation, and how the Holy Spirit preserves in covenantal
faithfulness the physical laws, powers and processes that enable
such variety and beauty, these thoughts may move our hearts to a
deeper admiration, awe and gratitude for God’s works. They
may inspire a curiosity to know God’s creation more deeply,
celebrate it with thanksgiving, and devote ourselves to caring for
it.
|
[See also “Science
and Philosophy” in LIVING ISSUES IN PHILOSOPHY (Oxford,
1995). Access www.philosophy-religion.org/.
Click “textbooks” subsite. Click “other.” Insert
password P1010. Click “click here to continue.” Access “Science
and Philosophy” chapter in the index.]
|
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT |
The teleological argument, or the
argument from design or purpose in the world, is among the most popular
of the theistic arguments. The order and the progress in the universe
disclose an immanent intelligence and purpose. Take, for example, the
long process of development leading to the human brain and mind. The
process has produced minds that begin to understand the world, and
it has produced thought and understanding. How could this occur unless
the course of evolution were directed by an infinite mind? |
The teleological argument
was elaborated by William Paley (1743–1805). He argued, for example, that the
human eye must represent an intelligent creator’s design; it
would be absurd to attribute the biological development of the eye
to “chance.” Paley’s analogy of the watch conveys
the argument well: I may explain the existence of a rock lying on the
ground by references to natural forces such as volcanic action, wind,
and rain. However, if I see a watch lying on the ground, I cannot explain
its existence in the same way; the complex arrangement of the watch’s
wheels, springs, and other parts, all operating together accurately,
requires the postulate of an intelligent mind responsible for its being.
Paley argued for the existence of God based on the complex and orderly
functioning of the world; there must be a Creator just as there must
be a watchmaker. |
Criticisms of the Argument. |
The teleological argument has had
many able supporters who argue from the presence of order and design
in the world to the source of that order in a purposeful God. Kant
pointed out that at most the argument from design points to a designer
who is not necessarily an omnipotent creator of the world. Other critics
have thought that the Darwinian doctrine of natural selection has weakened
the force of the teleological argument. Another more severe criticism
is that the argument assumes an order and design. The position can
be offered that there is disorder, chance, or even chaos; human perceptions
of reality are generally unaware of fundamental disorder in the universe. |
from Living Issues in Philosophy (9th
ed., Oxford) |
Cicero made one of the earliest teleological
arguments. He was writing from the cultural background of the Roman
religion. In Roman mythology the creator goddess, Gaia was borrowed
from Greek mythology. The Romans called her Tellus or Terra. |
When you see a sundial or a water-clock, you see that it tells the time by design and not by chance. How then can you imagine that the universe as a whole is devoid of purpose and intelligence, when it embraces everything, including these artifacts themselves and their artificers? (Gjertsen 1989, p. 199, quoted by Dennett 1995, p. 29) |
A version of the teleological
argument was the fifth of Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence
of God in his Summa Theologiae (or Theologica): |
"The fifth way is taken from the governance of the world. We see that things which lack knowledge, such as natural bodies, act for an end, and this is evident from their acting always, or nearly always, in the same way, so as to obtain the best result. Hence it is plain that they achieve their end, not fortuitously, but designedly. Now whatever lacks knowledge cannot move towards an end, unless it be directed by some being endowed with knowledge and intelligence; as the arrow is directed by the archer. Therefore, some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God." [1] |
“Teleological argument” From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia GENESIS 1:1 – 2:3 The First Creation Story [read tonight in the Service] |
1In
the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, 2the
earth was a formless void and darkness covered the face of the deep,
while a wind from God swept over the face of the waters. 3Then
God said, ‘Let there be light’; and there was light. 4And
God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from
the darkness. 5God called the light Day, and the darkness
he called Night. And there was evening and there was morning, the
first day.
6 And God said, ‘Let there be a dome in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.’ 7So God made the dome and separated the waters that were under the dome from the waters that were above the dome. And it was so. 8God called the dome Sky. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day. 9 And God said, ‘Let the waters under the sky be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear.’ And it was so. 10God called the dry land Earth, and the waters that were gathered together he called Seas. And God saw that it was good. 11Then God said, ‘Let the earth put forth vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees of every kind on earth that bear fruit with the seed in it.’ And it was so. 12The earth brought forth vegetation: plants yielding seed of every kind, and trees of every kind bearing fruit with the seed in it. And God saw that it was good. 13And there was evening and there was morning, the third day. 14And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, 15and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.’ And it was so. 16God made the two great lights—the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night—and the stars. 17God set them in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth, 18to rule over the day and over the night, and to separate the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19And there was evening and there was morning, the fourth day. 20And God said, ‘Let the waters bring forth swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the dome of the sky.’ 21So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, of every kind, with which the waters swarm, and every winged bird of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 22God blessed them, saying, ‘Be fruitful and multiply and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.’ 23And there was evening and there was morning, the fifth day. 24And God said, ‘Let the earth bring forth living creatures of every kind: cattle and creeping things and wild animals of the earth of every kind.’ And it was so. 25God made the wild animals of the earth of every kind, and the cattle of every kind, and everything that creeps upon the ground of every kind. And God saw that it was good. 26Then God said, ‘Let us make humankind
in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion
over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over
the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over
every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.’ Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all their
multitude. 2And on the seventh day God finished the
work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all
the work that he had done. 3So God blessed the seventh
day and hallowed it, because on it God rested from all the work
that he had done in creation. 4aThese are the generations
of the heavens and the earth when they were created. 10A river flows out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it divides and becomes four branches. 11The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12and the gold of that land is good; bdellium and onyx stone are there. 13The name of the second river is Gihon; it is the one that flows around the whole land of Cush. 14The name of the third river is Tigris, which flows east of Assyria. And the fourth river is the Euphrates. 15The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. 16And the Lord God commanded the man, ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.’ 18Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good
that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.’ 19So
out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field
and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what
he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature,
that was its name. 20The man gave names to all cattle,
and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field;
but for the man* there was not found a helper as his partner. 21So
the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept;
then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. 22And
the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a
woman and brought her to the man. 23Then the man said, |
| Methods of Bible Study |
When individuals are examined
for ordination in The Episcopal Church, what methods of studying
the Bible are they expected to utilize? “Current biblical scholarship
... is concerned to determine the given literary genre of a biblical
book or most often a given section of it (form criticism). Further,
it may be possible to discover how this genre was handed down (transmission
history), and came to be incorporated by a collector or editor (redaction
criticism) into a continuous narrative, and ultimately became part
of a written document (literary criticism). The methods do not exclude
one another; in fact, they are mutually complementary. But they are
not merely methods; they are not intellectual exercises for an elite.
Every perceptive reader of the Bible can profit from the several
approaches. ...readers will find Bible reading more challenging,
as well as more informative, if they study the text along these lines.” [from
the Summary in “Modern Approaches to Biblical Study,” The
New Oxford Annotated Bible (1991), pp. 391 and 392] Moreover,
candidates for ordination, other laypersons, and clergy may rely
on current Bible commentaries and annotations to the biblical texts
prepared by specialists in the relevant languages, history, and other
analytical resources. After the study of a passage
is completed (its historical and literary context probed), one may then reflect
on an informed meaning of the text for one’s life and prayers,
or perhaps prepare a sermon. |
Faithful and informed Episcopalians
do not read the Holy Scriptures simplistically and entirely as literal
history, science, or as a series of absolute mandates for behavior.
The Episcopal Church is not a fundamentalist Church “that affirms
the absolute and unerring authority of the Bible, rules out a scientific
or critical [i.e., analytical] study of the scriptures, denies the
theory of evolution, and holds that alternate religious views within
Christianity or outside are false.” [from “Fundamentalism,” The
HarperCollins Dictionary of Religion (1995), p. 369] In addition to
the conscientious study of the Bible, Episcopalians also draw upon
reason, tradition, and the ongoing corporate experience of the Church
as we “continue to grow in His love and service.” |
Upholding Scripture as
primary and honoring tradition, the Anglican Way is for individuals
to reason carefully, proceed prayerfully, and agree to differ -
all within a community of faith that continually evolves in doctrinal
and moral wisdom. A perennial difficulty for some lay and ordained
communicants is an unwillingness to respect - and even celebrate
- informed, diverse understandings of the Anglican/Episcopal heritage. For
committed Episcopalians, fundamental unity is experienced not in
intellectual agreement, but in our common Baptism and corporate
acts of worship, particularly the Holy Eucharist. |
| From HARPER’S BIBLE COMMENTARY
1:1-11:32 The Beginnings |
The narrative of Genesis 1-11 begins
with the creation of the good world and of humanity as its blessed
resident and regent. The divine intention was frustrated by human evil,
however, in a story of progressive deterioration and alienation: from
the primal act of disobedience (chap. 3) to another act of hubris
(chap. 11) in which the boundaries that separate the divine and human
worlds
are challenged. Since Genesis 1 showed creation to be a process of separation and distinction, the ignoring or blurring of these distinctions
reverses the very process of creation and brings about the return to
chaos in the Flood. |
The growth and spread of sin from
disobedience (chap. 3) to murder (chap. 4) to total corruption (chap.
6) to universal destruction (chaps.
7-8) show humanity under the curse as the consequence of sin. But there is a parallel history of divine
blessing and grace as well, a history that begins with the creation
of a blessed humanity, wherein God continues to show his care for his
sinful creatures and in which is renewed the blessing of all humanity
(in chap. 9) and of a particular family (in chap. 12), which will become
a source of blessing for all. |
1:1-2:24 The Two Creation Accounts |
1:1-2, In the Beginning. |
As
most modern translations recognize, the P creation account (1:1-2:4a)
begins with a temporal clause (“When, in the beginning, God
created”); such a translation puts Gen. 1:1 in agreement with
the opening of the J account (2:4b) and with other ancient, Near
Eastern creation myths. The Hebrew verb bara’, “create,” is
used exclusively of divine activity; “heavens and earth” are
a merism (an expression of totality by the use of two polar expressions)
meaning “everything” (--> Creation). |
The
description of the precreation state in v. 2 probably is meant
to suggest a storm-tossed sea: darkness, a great wind, the watery
abyss. God’s superiority over the sea here and in vv. 9-10
may be a reminiscence of the ancient Near Eastern mythic portrait
of creation as the victory of order over hostile, chaotic forces
like the divinized sea (--> Polytheism; Sea). The tripartite form and
downward movement from “heaven” to “earth” to “sea” is
frequent elsewhere in the OT (e.g., Pss. 135:6; 146:6; Amos
9:6). |
1:3-31, The Six Days of Creation. |
The six days of P’s creation
week are described in solemn, repetitive language and are arranged
in two sets of three, in which days 1 and 4 correspond, as do days
2 and 5, and 3 and 6. The first three days describe the divine work
of separation (light from darkness, water above from water below, sea
from land) that prepares a habitable world, while the last three days
describe the inhabitants. Day 1 describes the creation of light, and
day 4 the sources of light (sun, moon, stars); in day 2 the creation
of the dome of the sky (“firmament” in the older translations)
provides an air space and waters for the creatures of day 5, fish and
birds; in day 3, dry land and plants are provided for the land animals
and human beings of day 6 (--> Firmament). |
The climax of the six days
of creation is the creation of humankind on day 6, which differs
from the other
days in God’s prior consultation of the heavenly court, Israel’s
demythologized version of the ancient Near Eastern pantheon (v. 26: “Let
us make humanity”; cf. Isa. 6:8) and in the designation of humanity
as the image of God (--> Image of God). The context suggests that humanity
is the image of God in the dominion it exercises over the rest of creation;
ancient Near Eastern parallels suggest that “image of God” is
a royal designation, emphasizing the godlike nature of the ruling monarch.
In the imageless religious tradition of Israel, the only acceptable
image of God is the human being. |
The
divine command to humanity in v. 28 to reproduce prepares for the
Genesis genealogies, the continuation of God’s initial act
of creation, and reaches its climax in the fruitfulness of Israel
in Egypt (Exod. 1:7, 12). |
2:1-4a,
The Divine Sabbath. |
The
P week of creation closes with God’s resting on the seventh
day and his blessing that day, which will be the Israelite Sabbath
(Exod. 20:8-11). The language here is remarkably similar to that
found at the end of the account of the construction of the desert
tabernacle in Exod. 39:32, 42-43; 40:33 (--> Tabernacle). The creation
stories of the ancient Near East often conclude with the construction
of a dwelling for the victorious deity. In the Israelite use of this
motif, human beings participate in the divine work of creation by
extending and completing it. While most scholars consider 2:4a to
be the end of the P creation account, echoing 1:1, some understand
it rather as the heading of the second creation account. |
2:4b-24,
The Second Creation Account. |
Like P, the J creation account
begins with a temporal clause, this time one that describes the precreation
state as a waterless, lifeless desert. There may be echoes here of
the Canaanite myth of Baal’s struggle with a demonic adversary
Mot (Death), as there are similar reminiscences of the combat myth
of the creator-god Baal versus the Sea in 1:1-2 (--> Baal). The Israelite
adaptation and reuse of the Canaanite myths of Baal versus the Sea
in Genesis 1 and of Baal versus Death in his desert domain in Genesis
2 recall Yahweh’s victory over the sea (Exod. 14-15) and the
desert (Exod. 16-17) in the creation of Israel. |
The
water from the earth transforms the desert into a garden filled with
the bounty of the earth; in the center of the garden stand the tree
of life, a common ancient Near Eastern motif, and the tree of knowledge
( ---> Tree of Life, The). |
Yahweh’s
first act of creation in J is the creation of a man from the clay
produced by the mixture of the water and dry earth of Gen. 2:6, enlivened
by the divine breath (--> Adam; Adamah; Flesh and Spirit). The
man’s responsibility in Eden, whose abundance comes from Yahweh
and not from any of the fertility gods of polytheism, is to cultivate
the garden and to obey the divine prohibition of eating from the
tree of knowledge (--> Eden). The naming of the animals by the
human being (vv. 19-20) is J’s way of indicating human dominion
over the created world (as in 1:28-30); it recalls the divine name
giving in Genesis 1. |
The
J creation account reaches its climax in the creation of woman as
a helping counterpart to the man; the creation of woman from man
does not imply subordination, any more than the creation of the man
from the earth implies subordination. The subordination of woman
to man is effected by the frustration of the divine intention of
equality. |
v. = verse |