Looking at the Book (2015) Genesis: History, Fiction or Neither? (Part 7 of 38)
0021 In the previous blog, the relation, genres of the ancient Near East, serves as a antithesis to the relation that both parties in the religion-science controversy are in agreement, the separation of nature and grace.
What does this imply?
The modern period begins, as Charles Halton recounts, with Galileo’s thesis as the antithesis of Aristotle’s framing of the reading and interpretation of the Bible. The resulting controversy hinges on the dichotomy of nature and supernature. They are separate. Either Genesis is history (and natural knowledge is not pertinent) or fiction (and natural knowledge is irrefutable).
0022 The postmodern synthesis begins with the admission that the literature of the ancient Near East expresses genres, that do not match the modern genres of history or fiction. Genre offers a path to bring reading into relation with interpretation.
0023 The recovery and translation of cuneiform texts from the ancient Near East offers both science and religion new opportunities. Science may observe and measure genres as phenomena. Religion may compare written origin stories of the ancient Near East to Gen 1-11.
0024 The latter inquiry produces an observation that is hard to ignore.
All origin stories of the ancient Near East (with the exception of the Genesis Creation Story) depict a recent creation of humans. For example, in one ancient Mesopotamian myth, humans are created to do the work of the gods.
How far is that from God creating Adam and giving him a garden to tend?
This observation is consistent with the hypothesis of the first singularity.