Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Honest Questions - #4


Evidence. This word has been mentioned numerous times in this multi-post recap of Inspiration and Incarnation, but thus far an elaboration has not been forthcoming. Herein lieth the beginnings of said elaboration. This is edge-of-the-seat stuff right here, folks.

I’m not going to touch on all the evidence dealt with in Enns’ book. To do so would be, well, boring. But there are some important points to be made regarding the discovery of ancient literature from times surrounding the world of the Old Testament. Those important points will probably be overlooked, but on the off chance that they are not, bear with me.

Enns’ plan at the beginning of this rather long chapter is fourfold: present the ancient texts, summarize the issues raised by these texts, sew how these issues have been handled in the past, and see how the incarnational analogy (described here) can offer a better grip of things that appear to shake the foundations of evangelical doctrine.

First, to the texts!

Enuma Elish
This is a creation document written on seven tablets dating to the seventh century BC, with the story itself probably originating in the eighteenth century BC at the earliest. It has been called the “Babylonian Genesis” because of the similarities between it and the beginning of the Bible. Those similarities are as follows:
  • The order in which things are created is similar
  • There is darkness before anything is created
  • There is a division of waters above and below the firmament
  • There is light before there is a sun, moon and stars
Enns is careful to note that one cannot simply draw a direct line of dependence from Genesis to Enuma Elish, as if the author of Genesis had a copy of this Babylonian text and adjusted it slightly so as to not be sent to detention for cheating. Nonetheless, the similarities are there, as well as the differences. For example, Enuma Elish presents creation as the result of divine domestic violence, where the slain body of the goddess Tiamat is turned into creation by her great-great grandson Marduk. No such cosmic battle is described in Scripture, with creation being the product of one Supreme Being’s desire. Enns suggests that Genesis may have been written for the purposes of such a stark contrast. Sounds reasonable to me.

Whatever the case, it is clear, as Enns highlights, that the author’s of both these ancient texts were operating within a similar conceptual world. To better understand books like Genesis, it is extremely helpful to get a glimpse at that surrounding thought-world. As noted at the beginning of this series, God generally speaks to people in ways they understand in their context. Fifty years ago, had an omniscient magazine editor asked an employee to write about ways of communication using some of the editors keen insights, we wouldn’t expect the employee to describe the process of emailing and text messaging. It would be gibberish to the employee, and meaningless to the readers also.

But alas, I’m getting ahead of myself. There are a couple more pieces of evidence I will mention next time around before getting to the more interesting implications. As I said, edge of the seat stuff.

No comments:

Post a Comment