Q&A: Mythology as an Explanation for the Book of Genesis
Mythology as an Explanation for the Book of Genesis
Question
The description of the six days of creation seemingly contradicts science, which claims that the world began developing 13.8 billion years ago—what is called the Big Bang. Beyond the question of the age of the world and time, the order of creation and the manner of creation as described in the Torah (for example, that man was created as a man and did not develop from creatures that preceded him) also does not fit the evolutionary view of development.
Many have tried to combine the two views with various explanations and reconciliations: the days of creation were long and not like our days, the Flood changed things, or the world is not really that ancient but was created a little less than 6,000 years ago already “aged”—with buried skeletons and objects, plants, and animals that were already developed. None of these explanations (and others) has conclusive proof, and each is basically an excuse or a theory meant to explain the conflict.
There is another view, that the Book of Genesis was written allegorically. One could also say that the description of creation was not written as the way the world actually developed, but is only a kind of “line drawn” between what existed before 5,785 years ago and what happened afterward. What happened before is not relevant from the Torah’s perspective, and only from the time the Torah marks does it begin to be significant—because then God decided that we should begin counting the years and our lineage in the world, and afterward as a people, our obligation in the commandments, and so on.
Is it reasonable to explain it this way—that the Torah is essentially giving us some later legendary-mythic description, in which each day really is considered a 24-hour day, the Flood (if it happened) did not change the world or the seasons, the world was not created “aged” but had existed for billions of years, except that the Torah delimits a period of time relevant to us, gives us a mythic tale to hang onto—mainly in order to neutralize what preceded the first day of creation and turn what came before into a reality that is irrelevant, while the Torah does not intend to contradict the reality in which the world was created/formed and developed over billions of years until 5,785 years ago?
If so, why? Why wouldn’t the Torah tell us the truth?
Answer
I do not deal with biblical interpretation. You presented several possibilities here, and you are welcome to choose whichever one seems right to you.
Discussion on Answer
Myths are not committed to factual truth. We are talking about some myth whose purpose is educational, not historical or scientific. In Greek mythology too, they did not necessarily have to be worried that one day people would discover that there was no Zeus, no Aphrodite, or no Trojan War.
Therefore, in my view this is purely a question of interpretation. But there is no need to apologize; you are allowed to ask, and even to look for answers. I just don’t find this interesting and don’t deal with it.
But isn’t that exactly supposed to be the difference between a divine Torah from God, who knows the future, and Greek mythology invented by human beings—who were not granted crystal-clear sight to see to the end of all generations and therefore did not worry that their falsehood would be exposed in the distant future?
In other words, just as this claim undermines false Greek mythology, shouldn’t it also undermine the credibility of the Torah?
I am not apologizing for asking—after all, the Rabbi created this platform for exactly that purpose (more power to you!). My apology is about the Rabbi’s statement that he does not deal with biblical interpretation, and my insistence that this is a theological question and not necessarily an interpretive one; and again, if I am mistaken in this understanding, then please, out of respect for you, do not trouble yourself to reply.
Thank you very much, and all the best.
I did not bring a proof from Greek mythology. I brought an example from there for the claim that mythologies are not supposed to be concerned with factual truth, or with what may turn out factually in the future.
Thank you, Rabbi.
Without getting into biblical interpretation, isn’t it only logical to assume that the Torah would not tell us apparent falsehoods that are destined to be uncovered?
Just to distinguish between two kinds of mythological stories—for example, the story of the Flood, which exists in hundreds of cultures. One can understand that the Torah refers to it in order to convey some message through it—whether it actually happened or not, we will never be able to prove whether it did or did not happen. My question is whether it makes sense for the Torah to give us a foundational description that contradicts existing reality, something that is destined to be revealed as a falsehood.
I think this is a philosophical/theological question and not necessarily biblical interpretation; interpretation would come afterward.
If in the Rabbi’s opinion this is still a question of biblical interpretation par excellence, then I can only apologize for the trouble.