Customer Reviews

Genesis Unbound: A Provocative New Look at the Creation Account

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Dr. Sailhamer is one of the world's foremost Hebrew Scholar's. His scholarship is only surpassed by his devotion to the Biblical text. Dr. Sailhamer is committed both to the authority and the inerrancy of the original manuscripts. His book is an honest, in depth, scholarly study of the Biblical texts of creation geared toward the layman. He views the creation account as a literal, historical account and the days of creation as literal 24 hour days. The essence of Dr. Sailhamer's book is that Genesis 1:1 describes the creation of the universe during an indeterminate amount of time; Genesis 1:2-2:4a describe the preparation of the land (the Garden of Eden/Promised Land) over six literal days. This is NOT a variation on the GAP Theory, nor is it an attempt to twist the Scriptures into compliance with contemporary views of science. It is the attempt of a brilliant and godly man to wrestle with the Scriptures in order to gain a better understanding of the meaning of the text. His interpretation is always based on the Hebrew text, its grammar, syntax and, most important of all, its context. Any honest scholar will admit that no interpretation of the Genesis account is entirely satisfying; all are to a greater or lesser degree problematic. Dr. Sailhamer's work comes closest to providing a satisfying solution, a solution that is consistent with the context of Genesis 1:1-2:4a, as will as the context of the entire book of Genesis, the Pentateuch and the whole of the Scriptures. If you would like a more in depth study of Genesis I would highly recommend Sailhamer's commentary on Genesis in the "Expositor's Bible Commentary" and his book "Pentateuch as Narrative". Sailhamer's works on Genesis and the Pentateuch have replaced Umberto Cassuto's writings as my most valued secondary sources for the study of the Pentateuch.

this is definitely one of the more memorable theological books i've read. i'm sure sailhamer has gotten some flack for his departure from the "orthodox". basically he suggests that Genesis 1 may be more a descrition of God's prepararion of the promised land rather than simply a literal (if not brief) synopsis of the creation of the universe. whether one believes, hates, or passively accepts the various assumptions of "evolution", one must at least wonder how we (as Christians) are to view scientific facts and theories that conflict with the biblical message (or at least our perceptions thereof). sailhamer's suggestion is not a new one. this can be found as well in earlier work by j lightfoote as well as some older rabbinic writings. anyway, this is a fast read and will be worth the time!

This book challenged almost everything I have been told or thought about the Genesis account of creation. The author asserts that modern translations, including the King James Version, suffer from cosmological presuppositions that bias our reading of the ancient account. Very compelling.

This book is a must-read for everyone. If you feel torn between science and religion, or if you *think* you know exactly what Genesis 1-2 is all about, this book'll change your mind and perhaps even your way of thinking about the whole Bible.

The general thesis of this book is to examine the creation account from within the Scriptures themselves with as little reference to any outside scientific concepts as possible. The author reaches back to commentaries written before the shift towards a long age view of the universe, in order to attempt to recover the way these passages were read.

Dr. Sailhamer presents the view that there is a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2; in fact, he places the possibility of billions of years, including the dinosaurs and all we see of the age of the universe, within this gap. He goes further in stating the record of Genesis could be stretched to around 10,000 years, so that the Genesis record can fit within current scientific thinking. While these might seem a sop to current scientific thinking, he doesn't present or deal with any sort of scientific or historical data points within this book; his focus is on the Scriptures, specifically the proper understanding of the first chapter of Genesis.

Dr. Sailhamer starts with an overview of the controversy around the reading of Genesis 1:1. He presents the various possible readings of the text, and then answers why the problem matters. The author's answer is the problem matters because of the challenge current science poses to the Scriptural record.

I am convinced that once we understand the original author's perspective in Genesis 1, we will discover that little in this chapter truly conflicts with modern science.

After covering the controversy itself, Dr. Sailhamer deals with specific phrases within the Genesis narrative, using commentaries and comparisons to other texts within the Scriptures where these phrases are used to build a definition. The definitions he specifically considers are, "in the beginning," "the land and the sky," "formless and void," and "the Garden of Eden." In the following section, each specific day of the Creation Account is considered in greater detail, given the underlying definitions and context developed previously in the book. Several alternate readings of each day are provided. For instance:

==
When Genesis 1:3 says, "God said, 'let there be light,'" it means, in effect, "God said, 'let the sun rise.'" The phrase "let there be light" doesn't have to mean "let the light come into existence." Elsewhere in the Bible, this same phrase is used to describe the sunrise (Exodus 10:23; Nehemiah 8:3, Genesis 44:3).
==

Finally, the author considers what he calls the classical reading of Genesis 1, and compares it to his view of Genesis 1.

While the arguments given by Dr. Sailhamer are strong in the face of alternate readings from the Scriptures themselves, he doesn't present quite a strong of an argument for all of his assertions. For instance, his argument that reading Genesis 1:1 as a title eliminates creation ex nihilo is very strong, and well developed. He understanding of the Hebrew text, and ability to draw in other passages with the same wording, build a strong case that there could be, or even probably is, a gap between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2.

Where his arguments fail to convince is in specifically those places the author initially started out stating he was going to avoid --the interactions with modern scientific thought. Dr. Sailhamer consistently returns to the theme of how the modern scientific view of the ages of the Earth will fit into the creation account contained in Genesis 1.

==
The many biological eras would also fit within "the beginning" of Genesis 1:1, including the long ages during which the dinosaurs roamed the earth. By the time human beings were created on the sixth day of the week, the dinosaurs could have already flourished and become extinct --all during the "beginning" recorded in Genesis 1:1.
==

While the arguments against the meaning of "good" within Genesis are convincing, the author doesn't deal with the connection between sin and death, and the problem with death apparently existing before the creation of humans.

Overall, a strongly argued book in many respects, but not so strongly argued in other instances. Well worth reading.

Review of Genesis Unbound

Dr. John Sailhamer, Ph.D. Semetic Languages UCLA; ThM Dallas Theological Seminary, Old Testament Scholar with emphasis on the book of Genesis and the Pentateuch

Summary

In this book on Genesis 1 and 2, Sailhamer focuses on interpretation of the text itself. He does not attempt to reconcile it with modern science. He labels his view "Historical Creationism" and believes that the author of Genesis intends this account to be literal history. Further, he finds common ground with Bible scholars of past ages. He is a foremost Hebrew scholar and interacts with the Hebrew text, syntax, grammar and context.

He begins with a discussion on the word "beginning" in Genesis 1:1. He states the word means "an indeterminate period of time, not a single moment of time." This allowed the author of Genesis "to say that God created everything, without going into details." It was "in the beginning" that the universe was created, the earth, sun, moon and stars. This is also when the creatures of the sky, land and sea were created, and also vegetation.

He next turns his focus to the words "heaven" and "earth." He states that these are more accurately translated "sky" and "land." He concludes that the creation account is more accurately the preparation of the Promised Land as a dwelling place for man and woman. In Genesis 1:1 the phrase "heaven and earth" is properly translated as it is a figure of speech (merism) referring to the entire created universe.

What about the meaning of "formless and void?" Sailhamer contends that this translation is not conformed to the text, but to "Greek conceptions of the origin of the universe." "Viewed from the perspective of the Hebrew text, the phrase `formless and void' means simply `uninhabitable land' or "not good for human beings."

Further evidence for this understanding is that the land and the people are a major theme throughout the Pentateuch and the Old Testament. Genesis 1 and 2 are an introduction to the Pentateuch and should be understood in this context.

Using this interpretation allows us to understand the six days of Genesis 1 and 2 to be six literal 24 days in which God prepared the land--the Garden of Eden--for the people--Adam and Eve. "On the first day of the week, God is shown preparing the land as a proper place for the man and woman to dwell." It is clear that God created the sun "in the beginning. "To imagine that God created the light on this day would be a misunderstanding."

On the third day, God created only the fruit bearing trees in preparation for the man and the woman. Other trees were created in "the beginning."

The sun, moon and stars were also created in the beginning. On the fourth day, God proclaimed his purpose in making the lights--to show God's power and to mark years and seasons and days. Sailhamer asserts that God did in fact "make" things on most of the days, but more importantly, on everyday, God spoke/

God's focus on the fifth day was "simply to populate the promised land with the various creatures that were created `in the beginning.'"

The creation of mankind was distinct. Everything was created by God, but mankind alone was created in God's image.

Sailhamer summarizes: "During the period of a single human week, God "made" the land (similar to way that we `make' our bed.) With the exception of the human beings on the sixth day, God did not `create' the land or anything in the land during the week. He `ordered' the land, making it a place where the man and woman could dwell. On the night he began his work, the land was uninhabitable. As he began to speak, however, the land took on those characteristics which would make it a `good' place for God's human creatures."

Sailhamer sees the first and second chapters of Genesis as identified as a part of the same event. The second chapter also tells us that man and woman enjoyed language and culture from the very first as a part of the creation; they did not develop over time. These first two chapters are to be "understood both as preparation and a preview of the Sinai Covenant." This view is "connected to a long line of scholarly interpretations that span the centuries" and which are also "faithful to the biblical text."

The author suggests that "past interpreters can block the bright light of the present issues from blinding our eyes to the actual meaning of the text" while also cautioning that older (like newer) is not necessarily better. We need to let the biblical view of creation speak for itself rather than "reading the Bible through the lens of contemporary world views." Sailhamer asserts that his book, Genesis Unbound, "seeks to explore the relationship between science and the Bible within the context of the meaning of the biblical text alone." He decries that various Bible translations, particularly the King James Version, "have had an enormous (negative) influence on how we understand the Genesis creation account." But although Sailhamer has participated in some of the contemporary translation teams for Genesis, I have seen none that exhibit his influence in changing what he sees to be the problematic translations.

In his first appendix Sailhamer addresses the question of whether we should understand Genesis 1 and 2 as "literal, figurative, or something else." He concludes that these two chapters do not exhibit the characteristics of poetry or myth, but are rather "intended to be read as literal accounts of God's activity in creation." He further concludes that the "first week was a real and literal week" but not like any other week. He maintains that the "Genesis narratives are to be understood literally and realistically."

The second appendix deals with the issue of creation out of nothing and the use of the Hebrew word "create." He states his position supports the" theologically essential notion of creation ex nihilo"

This brief summary leaves many questions unanswered, but the book generally does not. Sailhamer's presentation merits serious consideration. It has several strengths. It is consistent with many of the pre-scientific interpretations of scripture. It does not tell us which scientific position is accurate, but is rather consistent with a wide variety of positions. Its strongest point from my vantage is that it allows for a literal seven day week in Genesis 1 and 2, which seems strongly supported by the text.

What weaknesses do I see for his position: There are not many scholars that follow the Historical Creationism position. Sailhamer has not allowed a reprint of the book as he wants to update it--but has not done so in the past 14 years. What is he dissatisfied with, and why has he still not completed the revision? A used copy costs $60 and up.

Also, his summaries of the various scientific positions are understandably somewhat dated. The book was written in 1996. But this is largely inconsequential, as his argument is from the biblical text and not dependent on any particular scientific viewpoint of origins, a significant strength of his "Historical Creationism" position.

Sailhamer's presents his position well, and it merits serious consideration. This book is one of the few that I have read more than once--in this case four or five times over the past 10 years.

This book has caused quite a stir, and not without reason. It turns our theology, which is often built on translations (not necessarily a bad thing), on its head. It is carefully, but not tediously, argued for any serious Bible student to understand. It answers many of the lingering questions about the creation account of Genesis 1, like the sun and moon being created on day four when light had already been created on day one. It should be read alongside Dr. Sailhamer's commentary on Genesis, in the Expositor's Bible Commentary Set (vol.2) because it leaves some of the more detailed questions unanswered. The commentary, and Pentateuch as Narrative, should fill in the details well.

You know when you discover an answer to a puzzle that seems so obvious in retrospect that you can't believe you didn't think of it before? That's what this book did for me with respect to the Biblical Creation narrative. Finally, a view that makes all the pieces fit!

The thesis is that *ha-eretz* in Genesis 1 refer to "the promised land," hence the days of creation refer to "palestine" not the the Cosmos. He cites several sages (most notably Rashi and Ibn Ezra) and 17th century biblical scholar John Lightfoot.

He cites a text in Jeremiah, which alludes to the earth becoming "void and without form" etc... This is a "proof text" for Sailhamer's thesis that "ha-eretz" is Israel, however the text refers to Israel and *surrounding* countries.

Personally I think it more likely that "ha eretz" in the mind of the author of Genesis is the fertile crescent, while the desert was (as it is) "void and without form" (tohu wa bohu). In bronze age Palestine, *this* probably *was* the "earth." As knowledge of Geography, interpreters kept making the text more "universalistic." (You see a similar development in Greek Mythology--in the Fifth century B.C. the "ends of the earth" was Sicily, in the First Century is was Spain.)

Nonetheless the book holds many interesting theological insights, especially with regard to the parallels with the tabernacle and it is a substantial contribution. Also recommended are his PENTATEUCH AS NARRATIVE and INTRODUCTION OF OLD TESTAMENT, which are more scholarly works.

Provocative in every sense of the word, Genesis Unbound presents the thesis that the "land" in Genesis 1 actually is the "promised land". The arguments are interesting, but his own translation which is weak on exegesis and highly interpretive -- even paraphrastic -- becomes the shakey foundation on which the thesis rests. The authors' integrity is undermined by general and unsubstantiated comments about named and unnamed scholars whose arguments are dismissed. Nevertheless, the book is a must-read for anyone who wants to look at Genesis 1 with a fresh perspective.