Replies

I should be clear that in Genesis there are in fact no contradictions, only apparent contradictions. The question is whether those apparent contradictions are more consistently resolved by reading the text in a literal way only, or by seeing reading it allegorically and/or symbolically. Or, there is a third option, which is that the text can be read on all of these levels.

Ronald Witherup gives the example of Genesis 1-2, which most scholars view as two separate stories of creation written by different authors in different time periods. "Most biblical scholars accept Genesis 1 as originating around the sixth century B.C. with a group of scribes who were concerned about the preservation of the liturgical traditions of the Jews (thus the concern for the seven-day schema of creation and the notion of the sabbath). Genesis 2, on the other hand, originates from an earlier, more primitive tradition dated to around the tenth century B.C. Fundamentalists, however, do not view the two stories as separate, the first one (Gen 1:1-2:4) being poetic and the second one (Gen 2:4-25) being more anthropomorphic, i.e., describing God in very human terms as a divine sculptor who forms the first human being out of dust. For fundamentalists, this is not a second story of creation but merely 'further detail' about the story of creation. This makes the differences in the accounts only apparent rather than substantive." (Biblical Fundamentalism: What Every Catholic Should Know, p. 26).

These narratives, dating back to the times that they do, were written in a style the people of that time could understand. If those accounts had been written, for example, in terms of modern physics, no one could have believed it, nor grasped it cognitively, because it would have been far too alien to the culture of that time.

For example, in Genesis 4:9, God asks Cain about the whereabouts of his brother, and then in Genesis 18:20,21, God goes to see what is happening. Yet, later Scriptures from a more mature civilization, teach us that God is everywhere and sees everything (Proverbs 15:3, Jeremiah 16:17, 23:24). Are these contradictions? Absolutely not. God is everywhere and does see everything, but for earlier civilization, it was necessary for cognitive understanding, that the narrative include a more anthropomorphic depiction of God, because they could use analogies to other human beings in order to understand what is in principle a mystery. I do believe in an actual Cain and Abel, but also believe that the account of the story should not be read as an exact account of history, as for example a textbook on the Civil War we read in school. It's a different kind of storytelling which the people of that time could comprehend, which contains immutable, theological truths. Historical writing as such did not yet exist.

"Most biblical scholars accept Genesis 1 as originating around the sixth century B.C. with a group of scribes who were concerned about the preservation of the liturgical traditions of the Jews (thus the concern for the seven-day schema of creation and the notion of the sabbath). Genesis 2, on the other hand, originates from an earlier, more primitive tradition dated to around the tenth century B.C.

I haven't done the math but the 'scholars' I read claim that if you add the numbers up; ages of the people in the genealogical record in the scriptures, it puts Adam and Eve on the earth about 6000 years ago...

You wrote:

“I should be clear that in Genesis there are in fact no contradictions, only apparent contradictions.”

On that we agree entirely.

“The question is whether those apparent contradictions are more consistently resolved by reading the text in a literal way only, or by seeing reading it allegorically and/or symbolically. Or, there is a third option, which is that the text can be read on all of these levels.”

Could there be yet another option? Could it be that Genesis 1 and 2 do not contradict one another even in the apparent sense even when literally interpreted? When I read the verses you mentioned, I see no contradictions, real or apparent, whether we take verses only literally or both literally and allegorically.