Genesis 1 & 2

1. Genesis 1 & 2 Accounting for Creation

2. Hearing Hebrew `#r,a'h' taew> ~yIm;V'h; tae ~yhil{a/ ar'B' tyviareB. ~Aht. ynEP.-l[; %v,xow> Whbow" Whto ht'y>h' #r,a'h'w> `~yIM'h; ynEP.-l[; tp,x,r;m. ~yhil{a/ x;Wrw> `rAa-yhiy>w: rAa yhiy> ~yhil{a/ rm,aYOw:

3. The Question Why two accounts of creation side by side? Seek to understand the canonical & theological reasons

4. Hearing the Whole Story Robert Alter is concerned that certain segments of Biblical scholarship are too quick at: “…proclaiming contradiction wherever there is the slightest internal tension in the text, seeing every repetition as evidence of a duplication of sources, everywhere tuning in to the static of transmission, not to the complex music of the redacted story." (Genesis, xlii - xliii)

5. Assumptions of the Literary Approach • Whole & Coherent • Intentional & On Purpose • The Reasons for Its Final Form Want to be Found!

6. The Stitched Seam - tAdl.At • The account or “tale” of the generations • Richard Hess – used to connect the doubling of the genealogies (5.1 & 10.32) • Also used to connect the doubling of the creation narrative (2.4) • Used in 11.27 to stitch the primordial history to the patriarchal history

7. The Big Picture Gordon Wenham: “…[Genesis 1] declares that the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob is no mere localized or tribal deity, but the sovereign LORD of the whole earth. The apparently petty and insignificant family stories that occupy the bulk of the book are in fact of cosmic consequence, for God has chosen these men so that through them all the nations of the earth should be blessed." (Genesis: 1-15, 10)

8. The Contrasts: P vs. J • The author/redactor allows the contrasts to stand (and maybe even accentuates them) • Contrast between 1.1 & 2.4? • Fretheim’s Chart (handout)

9. It’s Me, Not You • Our worries over the differences between Gen 1 & 2 were probably not a concern for the author/redactor • The author has made a wonderful garment with seams • We prefer seamless productions • Author is apparently quite pleased with both the connections and contrasts

10. Canonical Framing: Forming God’s People • Assumption: Redactor is NOT haphazardly stitching his materials into a patch-work quilt • Israelite community values both creation narratives– the redactor unites them. His community is shaped by his work. • Childs: trying reading P without J • It is the redactional process that gives the text its most comprehensible meaning

11. Brevard Childs • "By continuing to speak of the 'two creation accounts of Genesis' the interpreter disregards the canonical shaping and threatens its role as literature and as scripture.” • (Introduction to the Old Testament as Scripture, 150)

12. Priestly Author: Stitching Seams & Setting Fences? • Theological concerns: Creator God & Humanity (vs. ANE), Dietary and Sabbath laws • Provide fuller background to 2.4—4.26, connect Gen 1—11 to Pentateuch (Arnold, Genesis, 30) • Contrasts of Gen 1 & 2 establish a canonical fence within which the community of faith can play

13. The Competition: Playing in the ANE League • The “waters” everyone was swimming in • The contrasts are harder to explain than the commonalities • “History” with Mythological flavor

14. Summary • Gen 2 alone provides an accurate but incomplete picture of Israel’s God • The author/redactor wants the reader to know and be formed by the fact that God is both: • Almighty/Transcendent • Personal/Immanent • The stories of our lives indicate we desperately need a God who is both!

15. Role of Inspiration in the Redactional Process? • The amazing symphony: • God, authors, community, tradition (oral & written), redactors/editors, canonization