Where in the Bible does it say genesis is a histrical document, and not a parable?

Question

People claim I am "not following the Bible" when I say Genesis is a parable, so that must mean that somewhere in the Bible it says Genesis is a historical document, right?

Can someone show me this qoute? I'm sure it's in there, because if it wasn't, then taking Genesiss to be a historical document is unbiblical, too!

Answer 1

No where.



The Bible is NOT a history textbook. It is a book that conveys religious truth. When reading the Bible, we need to take into account that it's collection of books are like a library - we cannot read each and every book in the same manner. For example, we would not read "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer" with the same attitude that we would read "A History of WWII". Same goes for the Bible. The majority of people's questions about the Bible would be resolved if people would take this thought into account upon their theological study.



The Bible did not just fall down from heaven already printed. It IS God's word, but God did not simply tell the authors what to write, who in turn copied it down on paper. God left the authors the free will to write His Word with elements pertaining to their own time period. So, of course, things that make sense to someone living in 3000 B.C. would not be logical when read by someone living in 2000 A.D. It is still God's Word, however. People just need to take into account that the Bible's scientific and historical elements were based on the knowledge from THAT time period - not ours! Therefore, we cannot assume the scientific and historical elements to be necessarily true!



For example, let's take the ages of some of the famous Old Testament figures. The Bible states that some of these people lived to be several hundred years old! However, we know that this is not possible. This misunderstanding most likely came from a gap in the calendar system between our times and theirs. We follow the Gregorian Calendar, which is a revised version of the Julian Calendar. The inventors of both of these calendars lived long after the Old Testament was written. Therefore, we KNOW that the calendar system used during the Old Testament wasn't the same as today. Thus, with the application of a little logic and reason, we know that the age of Old Testament figures was not actually several hundred years old on the scale of today's calendar system!



The Bible conveys religious truth. Not historical and/or scientific fact. If the Bible was meant for science and history, we'd use it in school classrooms!



By the way: I want to add that scientific evolutionism CAN coexist with theistic creationism. As long as God put the whole thing in motion (but allowed things to evolve from there), there would be no conflict between science and theology. Even the Big Bang Theory can make sense in the picture! Did you know that the Big Band Theory was hypothesized by an ordained Christian minister?

Answer 2

Jewish historians, philosophers, tenants of Judaism and Christian teachings all claim that Moses wrote Genesis as a factual, historical document and first rehearsed to the Israelites after the were taken out of Egypt. The Bible never speaks of Genesis as a parable. Even Jesus and the writers of the New Testament refer to the people of Genesis (Noah, Abraham, Jacob etc) as literal people. If I believe the Bible is true, why should I not believe Genesis is a factual historical document?

Answer 3

I think your definitions are not mutually exclusive/inclusive as you are suggesting. The only part of the Bible that we KNOW for sure are parables, are the parables that were identified as such, (the ones Jesus told). I don't think there is evidence to say the whole book is a parable (we have historical basis to believe there was a flood, the Jews were captive, etc), or any part for that matter.



EDIT : there are stories that are ambiguous, and you may feel that parts of Genesis, like the Valley of Dry bones, are meant as an illustration of God's power. Still, not the same as a parable.

Answer 4

Hebrews chapter 11 lists some of the people of faith mentioned in Genesis, and treats them all as actual people, who did historic things that serve as an example to us today. Chapter 11 starts with God's creation of the universe, then lists Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses and Rahab, detailing events in their lives. It is impossible to read that chapter and not take Genesis as a historic document. Jesus also spoke of the historicity of Adam and Eve with regard to marriage (Mat. 19:4-9). If they had not been actual people, Jesus could never have called upon them to teach God's views on divorce.



The parable bit, however, is tantalisingly hinted at in Genesis itself. There is a sense in which some aspects of the historic narrative can be viewed as teaching us something else - something beyond the historic events that goes deeper. This is no way disproves the historic events detailed, however. It is possible to have a parable based on actual people and events. The apostle Paul, for example, uses the account of Sarah and Hagar as an allegory, one that teaches us spiritual truths about heavenly things. See Galatians chap. 4 verse 21 on. But he still knew Sarah, Hagar and their children were historic characters.

Answer 5

You may find this interesting.

1. The style of these early chapters of Genesis does not suggest a mythical or allegorical approach. Thomas H. Horne, in his classic, multi-volume set, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures, wrote: “The style of these chapters, as indeed, of the whole book of Genesis, is strictly historical, and betrays no vestige whatever of allegorical or figurative description; this is so evident to anyone that reads with attention as to need no proof ” (1970, 5:6).





2. The Genesis narrative is to be accepted as literal history because this is the view adopted by Jesus Christ.



In Matthew 19, a discussion between Christ and the Pharisees is recorded, the topic of which was marriage, divorce, and remarriage. The passage makes it clear that the Pharisees’ intent was to trick the Lord into contradicting the Law of Moses and thereby turn the people against Him, because most of the Israelites viewed Moses with great respect—and rightly so. On that occasion, however, the Lord did not fall prey to the Jewish leaders’ trap because He understood their strategy. Instead, He pointedly asked those hypocrites: “Have ye not read [citing Genesis 1:27 —BT] that He who made them from the beginning made them male and female?” (Matthew 19:4).



3. The Genesis narrative is to be accepted as literal and historical because inspired writers of the New Testament not only referred often to the narrative, but also made doctrinal arguments that depended upon the historical validity of the Genesis account.

Answer 6

theistic evolution ALL THE WAY! Science, like everything else, is a gift from God. I think that many people look at science as something created by human logic, and thereby not divine at all. However, one must remember who gave us logic in the first place, who showed us numbers and gave us the ability to write. I too have questioned just what in the Bible is parable and what is literal. In my opinion, it's possible that nothing is. Is it not possible that God made the Earth in seven days and made it look like evolution existed? Or is it not possible that God truly did tend the Earth like a crop for 2 billion years or whatever it is just to give birth to the human race? Why can't people appreaciate the fact that Science and Evolution are simply gifts from God, answering the questions mankind has been asking Him for 1,000's of years? We are entering an age in which we have a higher awareness of the world around us, and hopefully a higher awareness of God's teachings. What is most important to regard as fact are the direct quotes from God and Jesus. But what we must still remember is that many of these quotes are interelated, changing one another or cancelling the other one out. So the Bible is NEVER a word-for-word book, and yet it holds all the truths of existence just the same. It is people like you that will slowly but surely mend the gap between Science and Religion, two children of the same Father who have just gotten in a little argument. Compromise is the key! God Bless. ps- Don't worry about what the Catholic Church thinks, they're all a bunch of hipocritical old geisers using God to their own benefit. They mold God around their society, not their society around God.

Answer 7

Where does it say in the Bible that Genesis is not a historical document or historical fact?

Answer 8

When Biblical literalists make the claim that it is meant to be taken as literal historical fact, they are using their own intuitions (for lack of a better word) to arrive at that conclusion. You are using your own intuition (as I am) to conclude that it's a collection of stories meant to convey moral points or metaphysical truths. In the end, we are using the same standard to arrive at different conclusions. What we're doing is plugging different assumptions into the decision-making process.



Yes, it reads as a historical narrative, there is nothing in the Biblical narrative that sets it apart in terms of language, style, or structure, from any other ancient allegory, save how disconnected the segments of the narrative are.



To address Capt Atheist's point (which is a valid one), it was also not uncommon to for medieval royalty and nobility to trace their genealogies to Biblical characters like Noah or David as well. That the Gospel writer did it on Jesus' behalf isn't all that imrpessive. What it tells me is that other people took it literally, not that it should be taken literally.

Answer 9

Which part is parable?



Doesn't the archaeological evidence indicate that at least parts are true?



What about the Table of Nations?

Is that allegorical?



Or Joseph/Imhotep going into Egypt?



Or Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboiim being thoroughly burned sulphurous ruins?



Or are just the parts you find hard to believe alleorical?

Answer 10

If the Bible uses proper names and genealogies, then it is being historical. When it is using a parable, it will not give proper names or lineages to the people.

Answer 11

000, Adam age

130, Seth born yr 130, Gen 5:3, age

105, Enos b-yr 235, Gen.5:6, age

090, Cainan b-yr 325, Gen.5:9, age

070, Mahalaleel b-yr 395, Gen.5:12, age

065, Jared b-yr 460, Gen.5:15, age

162, Enoch b-yr 622, Gen.5:18, age

065, Methusaleh b-yr 687, Gen. 5:21, age

187, Lamech b-yr 874, Gen.5: 25, age

182, Noah b-yr 1056, age

600, flood yr 1656, Gen.7:6, Shem Gen.11:10

002, Arphaxad b-yr 1658, Gen.11:12, age

035, Salah b-yr 1693, Gen.11:14, age

030, Eber b-yr 1723 Gn.11:16, age

034, Peleg b-yr 1757, Gen. 11:18, age

030, Rue b-yr 1787, Gen.11:20, age

032, Serug b-yr 1819, Gen.11:22, age

030, Nahor b-yr 1849, Gen.11:24, age

029, Terah yr 1878, age 205 = 2083 died, Gen.11:32;

205, Abraham's covenant, Gen.12:4; age 75, 427 years after year 1656.

430, Moses age 80,Exo.7:7; 12:41; 857 years after year 1656.

040, Moses 120, died, Deut.34:7; 897 years after year 1656.

480, Solomon, 1Ki.6:1; Temple began, 1377 years after year 1656.

036, years to Solomon dies. Year 3069, 1413 years after year 1656, 997 BCE.

391, 18th Judah kings ends, 1804 years after year 1656. Year 3460, 606 BCE.

3460 Total years to Judah kings end in Babylon. Matt.1:1-17, 14 generations.

0606 BCE. No king until King Jesus at 2nd coming [ Daniel's prophecy = 2nd coming ].

2520 of [ 2300, 2500 ], 2520 [, 2580 and 2670 years, 95 of 150 years, at 2009 CE.

1000 year reign, Rev.20:1-6,12,13, no Satan 1000 years, all made as new as before Eden.



Acts 7:1-60, Stephen gives some Old Testament history without time.



THE HISTORICAL PART OF THE BIBLE GETS A THUMBS DOWN AS TABOO?

Answer 12

How do you define "historical document"?



There is no "law" saying that a text must say "I'm a historical document from this point forward."

Answer 13

Everything you say is based on Sola Scriptura, that's the issue.



Here is a fairly representative statement of the historicity of Genesis from Catholic soureces and the Fathers. But, note, that the 3 greatest minds of Catholicism have allowed that the 6 days might be a narrative device suited to Moses' audience and that it was all instantaneous or suchlike. (Newman, Augustine, Aquinas )



*



God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning.

(Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)

*



Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909[1])

*



Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)

*



Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)

*



Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)

*



The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ [Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).

*



The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.

*



Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).

*



Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).

*



After their disobedience of God, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden. But the Second Person of the Trinity would subsequently pay the ransom for fallen man (Nicene Creed).

*



Original Sin is a flawed condition inherited from Adam and Eve (Council of Trent).

*



The Universe suffers in travail ever since the sin of disobedience by Adam and Eve. (Romans 8, Vatican Council I).

*



We must believe any interpretation of Scripture that the Fathers taught unanimously on a matter of faith or morals (Council of Trent and Vatican Council I).

*



All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)

*



The work of Creation was finished by the close of Day Six, and nothing completely new has since been created—except for each human rational soul at conception (Vatican Council I)

*



St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings and all kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)

*



The historical existence of Noah’s Ark is regarded as most important in typology, as central to Redemption. (1566 Catechism of the Council of Trent)

*



Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught.

(Pius XII, Humani Generis)

*



Investigation into human “evolution” was allowed in 1950, but Pope Pius XII feared that an acceptance of evolutionism might adversely affect doctrinal beliefs.

Answer 14

Considering Jesus pretty much only spoke in parables...



Is it so hard to think that maybe Genesis is one too?



For me, I take the stories of Adam and Noah to be almost completely allegorical in nature...

Answer 15

Where does it say in the Constitution that it's only a "historical document"?



But we follow it anyway........

Answer 16

ancient Mesopotamian cultures had no other explanations other than what their religious leaders and elders taught them.



probably most of them believed the genesis story was literally true

Answer 17

I don't think the bible makes any claim of historical accuracy. Only a few un educated bible readers make claims like that.

Answer 18

Jesus refers to it as literal truth somewhere in the book of Matthew, if I remember correctly.



And the lineage from Noah (the character ripped off from the Epic Of Gilgamesh) to Jesus is clearly defined. So Jesus apparently had an imaginary great, great...great...great grandfather.



I guess that means Jesus had some imaginary in him, too, eh?

Answer 19

"Where does it say it's a parable?"



At around the part where this guy builds a hideously large boat and travels on it to escape a global flood. Or if you want to get technical, at around the part where a supreme being creates the universe in six days less than 10,000 years ago.

Answer 20

where does it say it's a parable?

Answer 21

It fails even as a parable.