Print Blog Article

Did God Write the Book of Genesis? Part 3

Sat, Jul. 07, 2012 Posted: 02:20 AM

The most compelling reasons that I believe that the book of Genesis was divinely written are contained in its text.

The narrative of Genesis doesn’t read like the Egyptian or Sumerian myths, which tell of great, unbelievable actions of multiple gods engaged in very human, and sinful acts of cruelty, murder, and things we normally expect inferior beings to do. They don’t reflect the story of a logical and intelligent plan and design for the origin of the universe, and for man, the way that Genesis does. The story of the creation in Genesis follows the science version chronologically.

The more I read Genesis, the more I see intelligence at work that far transcends our own. This is illustrated in the first passages in which man is created.

In Genesis 1:26, He said, “Let us make man in our image…”

According to science, something happened that separated man from the animal kingdom in the far distant past. There is a gene unique to humans called the “language” gene, named FoxP2. It is believed that this gene enables us to construct language in a way that makes us superior to any animal. Genesis 1:27 to 1:30 confirm this.

The “image” mentioned above, doesn’t necessarily refer to our outward appearance. I believe it describes how our DNA was transformed to be more like the divine beings that God was talking to. If any single object can be said to be an “image” of a creature, it is its DNA. In Hebrew, 2:7 man is described as being created “a little lower than the angels”.

Later, in Genesis 2:7 God created Adam.

The one verse that convinces me of the divine origin of the book is Genesis 6:7. “I will destroy mankind, whom I created, from the face of the earth…”

When God dictated these words to Moses, the Hebrew people had no knowledge of science and anthropology as we do. When they read of the destruction of all that was created, they assumed it meant everything in the world, not just Eden and the world of man. They had no knowledge of the greater world outside of the Middle East, or of the age of the universe, and assumed that the Garden of Eden was the beginning of all life.

That’s why, later, when the Torah was translated into other languages, they took the liberty of using words that reflected their view that the world began with Eden.

When God said, “I will destroy mankind, whom I created from the face of the earth, they added a comma between the words “created” and “from”, assuming that it meant “all” forms of man, not just the “man created from the dust of the ground”.

The man created in Genesis 1:26 was not created from the "dust of the ground".

In the original “Torah”, written in Hebrew, you find that the words used for “dust of the ground” are the same as those later translated as “face of the earth”. The same wording was used in both places that describe Adam's creation and the destruction of man. The Hebrew scribes that did the translation assumed that God was simply saying that man would be wiped from the earth by this statement.

The case can be made that because the words are the same in both places that God was saying that ONLY the man that He created from the “dust of the ground” would be destroyed. “Dust of the ground” means the same as “face of the earth”. The first man in Genesis1:26 was NOT made from the dust of the ground, and was not destroyed.

Because of this misunderstanding, we forever assumed that the destruction applied to all creation and all mankind.

This subtle difference in wording, the exactness of the wording, and the command that it never be changed, convinces me that the passage was divinely written for an age that would eventually understand what it meant.

Allen J. Epling