| 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. |