Interpreting Eden: A Guide to Faithfully Reading and Understanding Genesis 1–3
by Vern S. Poythress
Crossway, 2019
400 pages (paperback), $32.99
The opening chapters of Genesis have long been grist for the exegetical mill and remain a source of debate even for those within the same tradition. In Interpreting Eden, Vern Poythress has written a thought-provoking work that addresses hermeneutical issues involved in understanding Genesis 1–3, working broadly from general discussion about interpretive categories toward more specific issues. While most of those who read this kind of book will be anxious to know immediately the conclusions that will be argued regarding hot-button topics, Poythress is careful and makes readers work patiently with him through the entire thought process of interpretation before he offers concrete verdicts about the text’s meaning.
The opening chapters of part one begin by considering what it means to approach this text in light of its divine inspiration. Later chapters consider more specific issues, such as the genre of Genesis and how we should interpret it in relation to other texts from the ancient Near East. Poythress raises several helpful points here: with the discovery of more ancient texts, the study of comparative religion exploded, and biblical scholars became almost obsessively enamored with finding similarities between the biblical texts and literature from Israel’s neighbors.
Without denying that this other literature is useful to gain more understanding about some things in the biblical text, Poythress makes what should be the obvious point (but one that even conservative biblical scholars seem to forget at times): that if we affirm that the Bible is God’s inspired revelation, then this means that its authors were not limited to writing about what they knew by natural means. This is not to say that the biblical texts are utterly disconnected from their time and place, but it reminds us that the biblical authors were able to say additional and different things from what the other nations surrounding them said. Scholars using the comparative method claim, for example, that other ancient cultures believed that the earth was surrounded by a solid dome, with a heavenly sea on the other side of that dome. They claim that Moses (or whoever they claim wrote Genesis) affirmed that view of the physical universe in Genesis 1 when he wrote of the “expanse” or the “firmament.” These scholars then argue that even though Moses affirmed a specific scientific model, since that was not the theological point of the text, we are free to dismiss it and look for the truth of Scripture in other affirmations.
Poythress, however, affirms that Genesis is historical narrative and that all the indicators in the text seem to say that the author intended his accounts to represent real and true events. He also points out that Genesis’s language on this particular topic is sparse and that we should not make more of small things than we can justify according to good exegesis. He then works through some supposedly parallel literature from other societies, showing how there are actually more differences between them and the biblical texts than some have claimed.
Part two deals largely with how Genesis 1–3 relates to what we know about the natural world as it is today. Poythress bases his arguments in the confessional distinction between God executing his decrees in the works of creation and providence. This distinction means that the creation events, as the actual beginnings of the physical universe, are not identical to God’s ongoing providence as we know it now, but there are indeed analogies and continuities between God’s creative and providential works. Poythress documents and discusses many of these analogies well in this second part. The most important contribution here (combined with a related appendix) is the discussion of the language of “expanse” or “firmament,” depending on the translation. Poythress argues that Moses was not affirming a specific scientific outlook in this language, nor was he making a description of the workings of the physical universe, but that he was describing some features of the world from a phenomenological standpoint (meaning he described things as they looked to him).
Drawing on Calvin’s view, Poythress argues that the point of “the expanse” mentioned in Genesis 1 is simply that rain comes from the sky and God used the atmosphere to separate the sky’s source of water from the creation waters, and the “waters above” are simply the clouds or perhaps visible waters. I have to admit that I was at first skeptical of what seemed to be an overly concordist interpretation, but Poythress slowly laid out the argument in a way I found to be ultimately persuasive. This was precisely because he did not articulate a specific relationship between Genesis and science, but because he convinced me that the descriptions of those waters above in Genesis 1 are phenomenological language that accord with general knowledge.
Part three is mostly occupied with one of the most contentious issues in Genesis: the length of the creation days. Poythress has an extended discussion on how we should consider the concept of time, particularly during the creation week. At first, this discussion seems only indirectly relevant to the issue, but Poythress frames the topic in such a way that it demands patient attention to the end of his argument. He concludes that, given the other details in the sparse narrative about miraculous events, the days in Genesis 1 are primarily six cycles of God’s work and rest, which is the unit the text uses (instead of our standard) to measure time. It borders on speculation to insist on more than that from a strictly exegetical perspective, so (while affirming special creation and rejecting human evolution) he remains focused on the biblical text.
The result is a learned work that forces readers to be thoughtful about every aspect of their interpretive approach to the first chapters of Genesis. He demonstrates a high level of biblical scholarship, as well as a thorough grasp of scientific research in physics and mathematics. There are a few quibbles that might be made—the title (which admittedly is not always an author’s choice) is a bit misleading, as the book is more about creation than the events in Eden. Second, he cites his own work frequently, which admittedly is only problematic in certain contexts. Academic publications tend not to appreciate that, and this work is certainly substantial; but more lay-oriented works might like having a guide to extended discussions by the same author. If we read this book as a guide for pastors with theological training, it is not a massive problem.
Third and most significantly, one would have hoped for more detailed treatment of the differences between Genesis 1 and 2. Research into Hebraic writing has shown that “synoptic resumption” is an important tool that intentionally retold the same events from a different perspective, as in Ezekiel 38–39. I think Poythress’s arguments about time and what the early Genesis narrative intended to say would have been decidedly enhanced by a discussion of synoptic resumption. Nonetheless, the book remains an immensely useful resource to guide us through interpreting Genesis 1–3. It doesn’t answer every exegetic question (it doesn’t intend to), but it compels readers to consider thoughtfully their methods, which is always a valuable lesson. The lasting effect is that the Bible addresses the whole world but is not a precisionist, scientific document, and even its first chapters are worth our close meditation.
Harrison Perkins (PhD, Queen’s University Belfast) is the assistant minister at London City Presbyterian Church (Free Church of Scotland) and a lecturer in Christian doctrine at Cornhill Belfast. He is author of Catholicity and the Covenant of Works: James Ussher and the Reformed Tradition (Oxford University Press, forthcoming).
