Genesis: Literal vs. Allegorical (ritual, Earth, Torah, mystic, tradition)

[Cartoonist4X]

As a Christian, I've held to six days of creation my whole life. However, new information has lead me to concider a more allegorical understanding of Genesis. I figured I should ask some Jews how they approach the subject. After all, we got our whole creation theology from your book. I'd assume you would hold to six days of creation as well, exept that many famous Jews appear to be evolutionists, such as Steven Spielberg. So is it literal? Is it allegorical? Is it as much of a controversy among you as it is among us?

[Jayhawker Soule]

From an exceptional Wikipedia entry:

Judaism and evolution

Medieval rabbinic teachings

The medieval philosophical rationalists, such as Maimonides held that it was ignorant to read Genesis literally. In this view, one was obligated to understand Torah in a way that was compatible with the findings of science. Indeed, Maimonides, one of the great rabbis of the Middle Ages, wrote that if science and Torah were misaligned, it was either because science was not understood or the Torah was misinterpreted. Maimonides argued that if science proved a point, then the finding should be accepted and scripture should be interpretated accordingly. Rabbi Yitzchak of Akko (a 12th-century student of Maimonides, agreed with this view. Even Nahmanides, often critical of the rationalist views of Maimonides, pointed out (in his commentary to Genesis) several non-sequiters stemming from a literal translation of the Bible's account of Creation, and stated that the account actually symbolically refers to spiritual concepts. He quoted the Mishnah in Tractate Chagigah which states that the actual meaning of the Creation account, mystical in nature, was traditionally transmitted from teachers to advanced scholars in a private setting. A literal interpretation of the biblical Creation story among classic rabbinic commentators is uncommon (yet there is universal agreement regarding the literal understanding of the time of the creation of Adam). One of several notable exceptions may be the Tosafist commentary on Tractate Rosh Hashanah, where there seems to be an allusion to the age of creation according to a literal reading of Genesis. The non-literal approach is widely accepted within Modern Orthodox Judaism and some segments of Haredi Judaism.

[Victor]

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

A literal interpretation of the biblical Creation story among classic rabbinic commentators is uncommon

You confuse me. Why do you push the the issue of Christianity changing with the tides. When you quote things like this?

~Victor

[standing_on_one_foot]

I say it's allegorical. The universe is a very impressive place (kudos to G-d for it, as it were), and to think that G-d would have to set up the place in the way that say, a human like me would go about it is a very self-centered point of view. It's an attempt to understand the world from a human point of view (which is what we have to go from), but the idea that it's limited to our understanding seems to me to not give G-d nearly enough credit. Mind you, I don't interpret the Torah literally, so I can certainly understand why someone who does would strongly disagree.

Victor, I don't quite see where Jayhawker is pushing that issue?

[Victor]

Here is sarcasm for example:

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

... a wise place for flexibility to reside.

This is one of many.

~Victor

[fromthe heart]

Personally I believe it took 6 days in that time and that the Lord rested on the 7th. It is very hard to tell how fast the earth was spinning at the time of creation as to just how long a day was at that point. Currently they are saying we are gonna skip a nano second because the earth is slowing down. I feel one day we will know the answer to that question.


The reason I take it literal is because such a point was made of what was done on what day. What other reason would it be put that way? Perhaps some feel it's not literal because there are so many things where science and Biblical accounts don't seem to match up or the things that the Bible says such as a day is as a thousand in the eyes of the Lord; but I feel God will tell us when He feels it's necessary for us to know...otherwise we are to have faith He knows what to tell us and when for our own good and to test our faith as well.

[Mike182]

i think its allegorical, however that does not mean that i disregard the story! if you look at the story, you see that the creation is broken down into days - my question is this, if this was the dawn of time, how long was a day? well, by todays standard a day is 24 hours, but what do hours mean when there is nothing? so in the begining, time was meaningless, so a "day" was meaningless - so if we look at the days in genesis as being vast "periods" of time, we can see a lot of similarities between the "periods" of time and the stages of the big bang theory.

[fromthe heart]

Originally Posted by Mike182

i think its allegorical, however that does not mean that i disregard the story! if you look at the story, you see that the creation is broken down into days - my question is this, if this was the dawn of time, how long was a day? well, by todays standard a day is 24 hours, but what do hours mean when there is nothing? so in the begining, time was meaningless, so a "day" was meaningless - so if we look at the days in genesis as being vast "periods" of time, we can see a lot of similarities between the "periods" of time and the stages of the big bang theory.

UUHHH

[Mike182]

Originally Posted by fromthe heart

UUHHH

lol, i did some work on this for my Religious studies coursework, i will explain my point tonight as i have to go shopping right now

[Jayhawker Soule]