Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sorely Needed Wisdom: Wrestling With Genesis
BreakPoint ^ | 22 Sep 03 | Chuck Colson

Posted on 09/22/2003 4:06:31 PM PDT by Mr. Silverback

At a recent conference in Washington, D.C., the questions were asked: “Why Genesis? Why Now?” The event, sponsored by the Ethics and Public Policy Center, was a discussion of the new book The Beginning of Wisdom: Reading Genesis by Professor Leon Kass.

Both Kass’s book and the conference it inspired raise a question that Christians ought to welcome: What is the role of the Bible, in particular, Genesis, in twenty-first century American life? Do words written more than three millennia ago have anything to tell us about how we ought to live our lives today? The answer, according to Kass, a great scholar and the chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics, is “absolutely.”

Kass’s book is the product of twenty-five years of studying Genesis and teaching it to his students at the University of Chicago. Those experiences led Kass to appreciate the “moral sensibilities and demands of the Torah,” although he confesses that his practice is still “wanting.” But he is no longer confident in the sufficiency of “unaided human reason” to answer life’s most important questions.

Genesis’s impact isn’t limited to the personal. What Kass, who is Jewish, calls the “crisis in modern thought,” especially in the moral and ethical realms, stems from our culture’s disregard for the lessons taught in Genesis. We have a “need for wisdom” in this area, one that requires a “serious examination” of the Bible, starting with Genesis.

And what better place to start than at the beginning? Even a reader who doesn’t believe in the inspiration of Scripture has to admit that Genesis chapters 1 through 11 are without peer in their accurate depiction of the “human predicament”: our strengths and our weaknesses, our nobility and our folly.

As Kass puts it, the stories in chapters 1 through 11, tell “what always happens”—whether the subject is the relationship between spouses, between siblings, or between man and God.

For instance, Kass’s chapter on the story of Cain and Abel, “Fratricide and Founding,” is a powerful antidote to our culture’s sentimental and even utopian view of human nature. Genesis’s account of how pride, jealousy, and anger cause us to prey upon one another is much more true to life than what we hear from contemporary “experts.”

Given Genesis’s insight and accuracy regarding the human condition, it’s reasonable to think that its insights on what it means to be human are likewise worth examining. Its account of what makes man unique and the dignity that flows from that status, like its portrayal of our faults, rings far truer to human experience than secular alternatives.

Genesis’s understanding of human nature and human dignity has implications for nearly every aspect of our culture: bioethics, human rights, religious freedom, war, and peace. That answers the question: “Why Genesis?” And the answer to the second—“Why Now?”—is that the alternatives to the biblical worldview have all failed. They have left us with the “crisis” Kass mentions, unable to find answers because we no longer remember the real questions: Who are we? How are we supposed to live?

To remember those, we, like Kass, need to start at the beginning—in this case, “The Beginning of Wisdom.”


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: beginningofwisdom; bookreview; charlescolson; genesis; leonkass; origins
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last
To: SchrödingersCat
The issue is Christ, not an interpretation of Genesis.

And what do we have recorded as Christ's view of Genesis?

21 posted on 09/23/2003 4:27:50 AM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
In Matthew 5:17-18, He says that He came to fulfill the law and not to overturn it and that every part of the law will be fulfilled without exception. Also, he was a rather serious student of scripture as a young man. You may conclude from this that he regarded Genesis as trustworthy. This makes sense as Genesis is regarded by Christians and Jews to be divine revelation, not just some fiction written by Moses to answer questions he could not answer.
22 posted on 09/23/2003 5:00:43 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt
Yet Moses was not an eyewitness to Creation. He was writing by Inspiration.
23 posted on 09/23/2003 5:05:25 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If You're Not A Part Of The Solution, There's Good Money To Be Made In Prolonging The Problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Silverback
The theme of Genesis is not "Creation." That is only the first page. Rather, Genesis is about one man (Abraham) who chose G-D, who dedicated his life to G-D and passed this legacy on to his children.
24 posted on 09/23/2003 5:11:40 AM PDT by Alouette (The bombing begins in five minutes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 17th Miss Regt
Precisely!

To claim the important thing is Christ, while actually ignoring Christ's clear regard for Genesis, is a circuitous means of denying Christ while maintaining a fiction of Christianity.

Call it the theological version of "my boyfriend likes someone else...so I'll blame her."

25 posted on 09/23/2003 5:14:59 AM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy
Yet Moses was not an eyewitness to Creation. He was writing by Inspiration.

The double account of creation is thought to be an incorporation of the story passed down by Adam in some circles.

26 posted on 09/23/2003 5:17:43 AM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
Those are some pretty rosey glasses you are looking at Abraham through.

about one man (Abraham) who chose G-D, who dedicated his life to G-D and passed this legacy on to his children.

is rather...um...charitable.

27 posted on 09/23/2003 5:22:19 AM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: SchrödingersCat
"The issue is Christ, not an interpretation of Genesis"

Genesis is the foundation of the Christian faith. If Genesis is open to interpretation, then the entire Bible is nothing more than a story book, and Jesus Christ ranks right up there with Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. Do I sometime find it hard to believe that there is an all powerful God that created the heavens and earth? Yes, of course. But I also believe that Jesus Christ was the perfect Son of God, died on the cross, was buried, rose again on the third day, and all this was done for my salvation. My faith does not allow me to seperate the parts of the Bible that I want to believe from the parts that I want to think are a nice story.
28 posted on 09/23/2003 5:33:59 AM PDT by vt_crosscut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: vt_crosscut
Also, without Genesis, the rest of the Bible becomes unecessary. If we are not created in God's image because he loved us and wanted us for companionship, why would he send his perfect son to die for our salvation. Why would God make that type of sacrifice to save some things that evolved out of the primordial ooze. To call yourself a Christian, but believe in evolution, is to believe that Jesus Christ died to save a group of cells that exists by chance and natural selection.
29 posted on 09/23/2003 5:41:33 AM PDT by vt_crosscut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
Those are some pretty rosey glasses you are looking at Abraham through.

They the same "glasses" that G-D "saw through" (kavayochal). Do you have a problem with that?

And I will make of you a great nation; I will bless you, and make your name great, and you shall be a blessing. I will bless those that bless you, and those that curse you I shall curse; and all the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you. Genesis 12:1-3.

And the Lord said, "Shall I conceal from Abraham what I do, now that Abraham is surely to become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves by him? For I have loved him, because he commands his children and his household after him that they keep the way of the Lord, doing charity and justice, in order that the Lord might then bring upon Abraham that which He had spoken of him. Genesis 18:17-19.

30 posted on 09/23/2003 6:21:20 AM PDT by Alouette (The bombing begins in five minutes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: vt_crosscut; 17th Miss Regt; Woahhs
Excellent responses to SchrödingersCat.
31 posted on 09/23/2003 6:29:17 AM PDT by agrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: vt_crosscut
"If we are not created in God's image because he loved us and wanted us for companionship"

___________

In your immediately preceding post, you claim "If Genesis is open to interpretation, then the entire Bible is nothing more than a story book." But "interpretation" is precisely what you have done in your explanation of the meaning of Genesis 1, 26! There is nothing in the text of Genesis 1,26 that moves the mind immediately to understand that verse in the way that you explain it. Now, I happen to AGREE with you regarding the meaning of that verse; my point is that "Interpretation" is necessary. It is not wise to disparage Interpretation in principle. What is needed, though, is a method of Interpretation that respect the meaning which the sacred author intended to communicate and that stands in continuity with a believing community. I know I just said a mouthful, but that's the main idea.

32 posted on 09/23/2003 6:39:02 AM PDT by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: goodseedhomeschool (returned)
Bump!
33 posted on 09/23/2003 6:52:19 AM PDT by avenir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
Bump!
34 posted on 09/23/2003 6:52:38 AM PDT by avenir
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Remole
I agree that interpretation is necessary to understand the Bible. But there is a difference between making an interpretation based on other Scripture references and further study, and making and interpretation based on "Creation isn't possible, so God must have ment something else when he wrote Genesis"
35 posted on 09/23/2003 9:56:07 AM PDT by vt_crosscut
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Alouette
They the same "glasses" that G-D "saw through" (kavayochal). Do you have a problem with that?

Yes I do.

Call me a mystic, but I don't think the Almighty intended for us to overlook the discrepancies between Divine attribution to Abraham, and what the text actually says about Abraham.

36 posted on 09/23/2003 11:50:13 AM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Remole
Perhaps you could elaborate on your "mouthful," because at first glance it looks like alot of caviling on your part.
37 posted on 09/23/2003 12:02:02 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: SchrödingersCat
"The problem with Creationists is that they insist on a hyperliteralist view of Genesis as an acid test of faith. I have very little problems holding to a high view of Scripture and a 15 billion year old theistic evolutionary view of the universe."

The problem with YOU is that you believe God created everything (al beit by starting everything with the first single-celled creature, then guiding all through evolution), but you talk about creationists as though they were nutcases to be dismissed.

Hate to tell you this, but YOU are a creationist. You just think God did it differently than others might.

38 posted on 09/23/2003 12:08:28 PM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SchrödingersCat
"The literalness of the second Adam may not necessarily imply a literalness to the first adam."

Just want to point out that Jesus spoke of Adam and Eve as though they were historical figures.

39 posted on 09/23/2003 12:09:51 PM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
I really don't mean to quibble with your or the other interlocutor. It's just that whenever there is a FR thread on the interpretation of the Bible, some posts seem to suggest that the text of the Bible is immediately understandable, without any need for mental effort or interpretation; and some posts disparage interpretation as a godless activity. My point was to show that any explanation of a text is an instance of interpretation. The challenge is to interpret a text in such a way that the method chosen is the best way to get at the meaning which the sacred author wanted to communicate; and that the process should take place within the context of a believing community (and so interpretation is not a mere solitary action).
40 posted on 09/23/2003 12:40:02 PM PDT by Remole
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-142 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson