Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

The Theology of Genesis 1-11

Introduction

The first eleven chapters of Genesis are foundational for the whole of
scripture, and indeed the whole of human history. It is here that the deepest
questions about our origins and purpose, the nature of humanity, and our
relation to the creator are answered. Virtually every key theme in the Bible
can be seen to originate in these chapters. Without them much of scripture
would lack the context for proper interpretation. It is hard to exaggerate the
importance of Genesis 1-11 for Christian theology.

In this essay I will seek to determine the primary purpose and theological
message of Genesis 1-11. This endeavour assumes that the text can be
taken as a coherent whole with an intended unified theological message of
the author.1 Many commentators, in their eagerness to get into detailed
exegesis and source criticism, are guilty of missing the big picture and
underestimating the role of the author of the final text as we now have it. 2
Frequently no consideration is even made of whether such a message even
exists, or the message is reduced to that of “informational prolegomena”3 for
the rest of Genesis and the Pentateuch. All commentators are agreed that
Genesis 1-11 form a distinct literary unit. Keiser demonstrates that there is
an intentional unity and coherence of the text based on various structural and
literary indicators.4 This unity implies that there is a deliberate unified
message of these chapters to be identified.

In what follows I will assess and draw out the most significant theological
themes and messages of Genesis 1-11. I will first assess the idea that
Genesis 1-11 is primarily intended as ideology critique. I will then consider
1
I use the term “author” throughout this essay without wishing to enter here into the debate
about the authorship of Genesis. The reader may substitute “redactor” without affecting the
argument in any way.
2
Thomas A. Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message
(Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2013), 8
3
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 3-4
4
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 14-25; See also
Victor P. Hamilton, The Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17 (The New International Commentary
on the Old Testament; Grand Rapids, Michigan: Eerdmans, 1990), 29-30

1
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

the themes of the spread of sin, and of creation – uncreation – re-creation.

The key theological concepts of humanity in the image of God, the creation
mandate, and the nature of sin will also be examined. I will conclude by
proposing a summary statement of the unifying theological message of these
chapters.

Genesis 1-11 as Ideology Critique

Many scholars have proposed that Genesis 1-11 is designed to intentionally

and deliberately critique Mesopotamian and other contemporary surrounding
ideologies.5 As Wenham puts it: “Gen 1-11 is a tract for the times,
challenging ancient assumptions about the nature of God, the world, and
mankind.”6 There are many valuable insights to be gained into the emphasis
of the text by considering it in this way.

Starting with the creation account, in sharp contrast with other creation
accounts, there is no attempt at theogeny in Genesis. We are presented in
the very first sentence with a single God who has no rivals. There is not even
a hint of any cosmic battle.7 As Levenson says: “It is true and quite
significant that the God of Israel has no myth of origin.”8 Collins provides
various discourse grammatical reasons for reading Genesis 1:1 as: “a
background event prior to the main storyline.”9 This verse then refers to the
creation of the entire universe and implies that God created it from nothing, 10
thus further emphasising his complete sovereignty and lack of rivals.

This God creates by divine command, a concept which is found elsewhere in

Egyptian literature, though not in Bablyonian.11 Creation by word emphasises

5
E.g. J. Richard Middleton, The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1 (Grand
Rapids, Michigan: Brazos Press, 2005), 185-231; Gerhard F. Hasel, "Polemic nature of the
Genesis cosmology," Evangelical Quarterly 46 (1974)
6
G J. Wenham, Genesis 1-15 (Word Biblical Commentary; Dallas, Texas: Word, 1987), xlv
7
Hamilton, The Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17, 130
8
Jon D. Levenson, Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of Divine
Omnipotence (Pinceton University Press, 1988), 5
9
C. John Collins, Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary
(Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 2006), 54
10
Collins, Genesis 1-4, 55
11
James K. Hoffmeir, "Some Thoughts on Genesis 1 & 2 and Egyptian Cosmology," Journal
of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 15 (1983): 45

2
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

divine omnipotence,12 and demonstrates that creation is, as Fretheim says,

“not an accident, but a deliberate act of divine will.” 13 Waltke articulates the
distinctiveness of this concept:14

It rejects the idea that God is an impersonal force without rational

cogitation, and debunks the mythic idea that the different parts of the
world are emanations of deities. Though creation is not part of the diety,
it depends on him and is bound to him by his word.

The sun, moon, stars, and sea monsters are all created by God and
therefore not rivals to him for worship and attention. The sun and the moon
are not even named so as to avoid any association with deities of the
surrounding cultures.15 They are simply given quite lowly functions of
providing light. The stars are almost an afterthought in the Genesis
account.16 Whereas men are created in Mesopotamian mythology in order to
provide the gods with food, in Genesis God provides man with food.17 Man is
created in the “image of God,” employing a phrase used in Egyptian and
Mesopotamian literature to describe kings.18 In Genesis, however, the image
is passed on to all humanity (5:3; 9:6) in a clear democratisation of this
concept.19 Humans are given rulership over the animals, but not over each
other in another democratising move from Genesis.20 Even women are
included in the image of God in a striking delegitimisation of male
hierarchy.21 There is also an implied critique of idolatry here.22 As

12
Middleton, Liberating Image, 66
13
Terrence E. Fretheim, God and the World in the Old Testament: A Relational Theology of
Creation (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005), 37
14
Bruce K. Waltke, An Old Testament Theology: An exegetical, canonical, and thematic
approach (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2007), 183
15
Hasel, "Polemic nature of the Genesis cosmology," 89; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis
Chapters 1-17, 127-128. Contra: Collins, Genesis 1-4, 82-83
16
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 21; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17, 128
17
Hasel, "Polemic nature of the Genesis cosmology," 90; Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 33
18
Phyllis A. Bird, ""Male and Female He Created Them": Genesis 1:27b in the Context of the
Priestly Account of Creation," in "I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood" (eds. R. S.
Hess and D. T. Tsumura; Winona Lake, Indianna: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 341-45; John H.
Walton, Genesis 1 As Ancient Cosmology (Winona Lake, Indianna: Eisenbrauns, 2011), 78-
82
19
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 31; Middleton, Liberating Image, 204; Hamilton, The Book of
Genesis Chapters 1-17, 135
20
Middleton, Liberating Image, 204-205
21
Middleton, Liberating Image, 206
22
Middleton, Liberating Image, 207

3
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

Brueggemann puts it: “There is one way in which God is imaged in the world
and only one: humanness!”23

There is a repeated emphasis on the goodness of creation (1:9, 25, 31),

every part of which comes into being at God’s initiative. As Brueggemann
notes: “the world has been positively valued by God for itself. It must be
valued by the creatures to whom it has been provisionally entrusted.” 24
Things get worse from here due to the sinfulness of mankind. This is the
opposite way round to the Mesopotamian version where things have
progressively improved.25 God rests after his work of creation, further
demonstrating his satisfaction in the finished product. As Brueggemann says:
“In contrast with the God’s of Babylon, this God is not anxious about his
creation but is at ease with the well-being of his rule.”26 Wenham notes that
“the seventh day is not a day of ill omen as in Mesopotamia, but a day of
blessing and sanctity on which normal work is set aside.”27 The creation
mandate to “be fruitful and multiply” (1:28; 9:1) can be seen as deliberately
contradicting the Babylonian belief that the deities wanted to limit population
growth.28

The first city is built by a human, and not by a God (4:17), humans are also
sociocultural innovators (4:20-22), thus emphasising the role of humanity in
creation, in contrast to the emphasis on the role of the gods in
Mesopotamian literature.29 Even the genealogies can be read as ideology
critique. Hess points out that the movement of these genealogies is forwards
in time: “from the earliest ancestor to the latest, the opposite of the other
genealogies in the Ancient Near East.”30 This pushes the reader forwards in

23
Walter Brueggemann, Genesis (Interpretation; Louisville, Kentucky: John Knox Press,
2010), 32
24
Brueggemann, Genesis, 13
25
Thorkild Jacobsen, "The Eridu Genesis," in "I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood"
(eds. R. S. Hess and D. T. Tsumura; Wiona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 142
26
Brueggemann, Genesis, 35
27
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 37
28
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, xlix, 166
29
Middleton, Liberating Image, 217; Patrick D. Jr. Miller, "Eridy, Dunnu, and Babel: A Study
in Comparative Mythology," in "I Studied Inscriptions From Before The Flood" (eds. R. S.
Hess and D. T. Tsumura; Wiona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 156
30
Richard S. Hess, "The Geneaologies of Genesis 1-11 and Comparative Literature," in "I
Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood" (eds. R. S. Hess and D. T. Tsumura; Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1994), 67

4
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

history, and away from ancestor worship. Most of those named are not given
any title or occupational description, which emphasises the common
humanity of the history rather than ascribing status to heroes.

Genesis 6:1-8 can be seen as a polemic against fertility cults, which would
include sexual relations between Gods and men.31 There are numerous
parallels between the Genesis flood story and other flood traditions, but the
character of the Genesis God stands out, not just for being in sole control,
but also for not being capricious, jealous, ignorant or fearful.32 Noah is much
less of a hero than the leading characters in Mesopotamian myths. He is not
a king, and his story ends in disgrace - an implied critique of royal hero
worship. In fact there is no monarchy at all in Genesis 1-11, a radical
departure from surrounding ideology and a stunning implied critique of it.33
The table of nations emphasises the common humanity of all peoples, and
God’s rulership over all nations.34 The tower of babel can be seen as
mocking Babylon’s claims to be the centre of civilisation and the gate of
heaven.35 It also presents the confusion of languages as God’s judgement,
not a product of inter-divine rivalry.36

Middleton is surely right to note that Genesis 1-11 “may be fruitfully

understood as intentionally subversive literature.”37 The intentionality of this
subversion is questionable, however. Scholars debate the dependence and
priority of the different traditions.38 All cultures have a creation myth of some
kind, and Genesis can be seen as an implied critique of all of them. There
are also numerous flood traditions from all over the world, 39 each of which
the Genesis account can be seen as correcting. Reading the text as

31
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 141
32
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 165
33
Middleton, Liberating Image, 216-17
34
Hess, "The Geneaologies of Genesis 1-11 and Comparative Literature," 68; Claus
Westermann, Genesis 1-11 (A Continental Commentary; trans. J. J. Scullion; Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1994), 529
35
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, xlix
36
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 237
37
Middleton, Liberating Image, 186
38
W. G. Lambert, "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis," Journal of
Theological Studies 16, no. 2 (1965): 126-28; A. R. Millard, "New Babylonian 'Genesis'
Story," Tyndale Bulletin 18 (1967): 114
39
Bill Cooper, The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis (Creation Science Movement, 2011),
212-327

5
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

intentional critique must insist that the competing traditions were available to
the original author and that the intended meaning is not readily available
without recourse to these additional texts. Without wishing to write off the
insights gained by such comparative analysis, I doubt if all of it is quite so
intentional. Genesis 1-11 stands on its own as a literary unit, and has much
to say without these comparisons. Cassuto points out that the language “is
tranquil, undisturbed by polemic or dispute.”40 The fall finds no parallels in
Mesopotamian literature.41 Even Wenham notes that the polemic thrust is
muted there,42 though it can still be seen as a critique of an optimistic view of
human nature. The story of Cain and Abel lacks any close parallels,43 and so
also does not easily fit the ideology critiquing model. The ideology critique
message is therefore not a unifying message, and may not be an entirely
intentional message of these chapters. I conclude that we must look
elsewhere for the primary unifying intentions of the author.

A Spread of Sin Theme

There are five key episodes in Genesis 1-11 which exhibit the nature of sin
and its consequences: the fall, Cain and Abel, the sons of God, the flood,
and the tower of Babel. Clines shows that each of these episodes conforms
to a pattern of: a) human sin, b) divine speech, c) divine mitigation or
forgiveness, and d) divine punishment.44 There is a clear thematic
significance in this repeated structure which emphasises sin’s consequences
and God’s character as a righteous and yet merciful judge. This theme
cannot be regarded as a unifying message, however, because it fails to
relate to the inclusion of the creation account, the genealogies, and the table
of nations.45

40
U. Cassuto, A commentary on the book of Genesis (Part 1: From Adam to Noah; trans. I.
Abrahams; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1989), 7
41
Lambert, "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis," 126
42
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 53
43
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 100
44
David J. A. Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch (Journal for the Study of the Old
Testament Supplement Series; vol. 10; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2004), 67-68
45
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 69

6
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

An alternative approach is to consider Genesis 1-11 as developing a spread

of sin, spread of grace theme. The nature and extent of sin gradually
increases from lack of trust in God in the fall, violence in Cain, widespread
lust with the sons of God, to almost total corruption of humanity in the flood.
The punishments increase in severity too, from expulsion from the garden to
the near annihilation of human life. There are also elements of grace in each
of these with the clothing of Adam and Eve, the promise of a seed who will
crush the serpent, a protecting mark for Cain, the preservation of the human
race through the flood, and the promise never to flood the earth again. The
tower of Babel, though, is not an escalation from the flood in its sinfulness or
in the severity of its punishment. Clines tries to argue that the tower building
is an attempt at “self-divinization,” forming an inclusio with the nature of the
fall, and is thus directly rebelling against God and more heinous than
violence on a “purely human plane” which he sees as the sin of the flood.46
He also argues that the confusion of languages is of lasting impact and thus
more severe than the flood.47 I find these arguments unpersuasive. The sin
of Genesis 11 is best viewed as rebellion against the creation mandate to
spread out and fill the earth.48 The people do not want to be dispersed (v. 4),
perhaps fearing another flood in spite of God’s promise to “never again”
(8:21) destroy the earth in this way. The judgement, then, is appropriate, an
enforced dispersal by the confusion of language resulting in the fulfilment of
the creation mandate. The tower of Babel cannot naturally be seen as a
further escalation in sin and punishment from the flood.

While the spread of sin, spread of grace theme may not fit into a continually
escalating trend, it is still able to unify the material in these chapters. The
creation account can be viewed as God’s initial act of grace and blessing
within this theme. The genealogies can also be integrated in two ways. First
they can be regarded as fitting with the spread of grace theme in that they
demonstrate fulfilment of the creation mandate to multiply and fill the earth.49
Second, sections of these genealogies conform to the spread of sin theme.

46
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 75
47
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 76
48
Brueggemann, Genesis, 99
49
Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 66; Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 72

7
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

4:17-25 exhibits a spread of sin as much as in civilisation. The highlighting of

Nimrod in the table of nations also fits with the spread of sin theme.50 The
positioning of the table of nations ahead of the tower of Babel serves to
enable the reader to view it both as a fulfilment of the renewed creation
mandate of 9:1, and as the result of the judgement of the tower of Babel. 51
The repeated, and functionally redundant phrase “and he died,” in the
Genesis 5 genealogy emphasises that death passes through the generations
as a continued consequence of sin.52 Diminishing life spans also emphasise
this point, so serving to highlight the continued pervasiveness of sin and its
effects.

While a spread of sin, spread of grace theme may not be a comprehensive

description of the purpose of Genesis 1-11, the extent to which it can be
regarded as unifying suggests that it is central to the intended message of
the author.53

A Creation – Uncreation – Re-creation Theme

The flood narrative stands out in Genesis 1-11 as a climatic, and cataclysmic
event. Many scholars have noted the parallels between Noah and Adam.
These may be outlined as follows:54 (1) Adam and Noah are both uniquely
associated with the image of God (1:26-28; 5:3; 9:6), (2) both walk with God
(3:8; 6:9), (3) both interact with animals (Adam names, Noah preserves), (4)
both receive divine “law” intended as fixed (2:16-17; 9:4-6), (5) both receive
the creation mandate to be fruitful and fill the earth (1:28; 9:1), (6) both work
the ground (3:17-19; 9:20), (7) both ingest the produce of the earth, Adam by
eating, Noah by drinking, (8) nakedness is an issue for both of them, (9) both
are clothed by someone to cover their nakedness, (10) both their failures
50
See Douglas Petrovich, "Identifying Nimrod of Genesis 10 with Sargon of Akkad by
Exegetical and Archaeological Means," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 56,
no. 2 (2013)
51
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 74
52
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 72-73
53
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 80
54
Adapted from: Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 17-
18, 134; Andrew J. Schmutzer, Be Fruitful and Multiply: A Crux of Thematic Repetition in
Genesis 1-11 (Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2009), 163-64; Waltke, An Old Testament Theology,
293, 296

8
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

result in curses, (11) both have three named sons, (12) both their actions
have consequences for others, (13) both their sons are divided into blessed
and cursed. There are additional parallels in the narratives of creation and
the flood to be noted too:55 (1) the spirit/wind of God moves over the waters
(1:2; 8:1), (2) the waters are restrained and dry land appears, (3) the earth is
populated by animals and humans, (4) the image of God is repeated in both
accounts, (5) the creation mandate is repeated in both accounts. These
multiple similarities demonstrate some literary interdependence between the
two narratives,56 and an intentional repetition for emphasis. This clearly
serves to characterise the flood as a re-creation of the earth.57

Viewed from this perspective, chapters 3-6 can be understood as describing

how the effects of human sin increase in effect and scope, and ultimately
serve to undo the work of creation.58 The sin and punishment of the flood is
climatic as the narrative suggests, and the table of nations and the tower of
Babel serve to show how the creation mandate was fulfilled in the dispersion
of the nations after the new creation. A progressive alienation can be seen in
chapters 3-6. In the account of the fall, humans59 are first persuaded to doubt
God (3:1), then to become like God (3:5), then they want to hide from God
(3:8), and finally Adam blames Eve, thus alienating himself from his wife
also.60 The curse results additionally in man’s alienation from the ground.61
This alienation progresses in chapter four to hatred between two brothers,
leading to the first murder, and further alienation from the ground (4:11-12).62
Lamech is the first polygamist, destroying the intended intimacy between a
man and his wife, and boasting of murders for light offences (4:23). Death
reigns over the descendants in chapter five (Enoch excepted), and the

55
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 17
56
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 19
57
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 134; Clines, The
Theme of the Pentateuch, 80; Waltke, An Old Testament Theology, 292-294
58
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 81
59
The verbs used in 3:1-6 are all plural as if Adam is being addressed alongside Eve. Alan
Jon Hauser, "Genesis 2-3: The Theme of Intimacy and Alienation," in "I Studied Inscriptions
from Before the Flood" (eds. R. S. Hess and D. T. Tsumura; Winona Lake, Indianna:
Eisenbrauns, 1994), 389-390
60
Hauser, "Genesis 2-3: The Theme of Intimacy and Alienation," 394
61
Hauser, "Genesis 2-3: The Theme of Intimacy and Alienation," 395-397; Clines, The
Theme of the Pentateuch, 81
62
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 82

9
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

humans are progressively alienated from each other culminating in violence

filling the earth (6:11).63 After the flood, the alienation continues, with the
implied sexual indiscretion of Ham again undermining the intention of sexual
intimacy, and the confusion of tongues causing humans to be alienated from
each other in a new way. Man’s heart remains as corrupt after the flood as it
was before (8:21) due to the continued effects of sin.

This creation – uncreation – re-creation theme is clear and unifying, though

still not comprehensive. God’s grace is emphasised in that even though
human sin brings creation to the brink of complete destruction, God delivers
humanity from the full consequences of their sin, and enables a fresh start. 64
God’s favour towards humanity and his intention to bless them remain intact
throughout and are reaffirmed in the recreation (9:1ff). Any account of the
message of these chapters should take into account this theme.

Humanity in God’s Image

The idea that man is created in God’s image is highly significant in these
chapters. It is used to define how and why man is created (1:26-27),
repeated in a brief recapitulation of creation (5:1), and in explaining that the
image is passed on to Adam’s descendants (5:3). It is then repeated again
as justification for the punishment of life for life for any murder (9:6). The
exact meaning of the “image” is hotly debated. The semantic range of ṣelem
(image) includes cult idols, but also includes three-dimensional statues that
are not idols, and even shadow or phantom images (Ps 39:6; 73:20).65
Visible form is included in all these meanings. The meaning of dĕmût
(likeness) tends to be more abstract in its use to compare two things as
similar.66 The meaning of the image concept cannot therefore be determined
by semantic analysis alone. The notion of the image of God is strongly linked
with rulership (1:26), and Middleton suggests that this function is central to

63
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 82
64
Clines, The Theme of the Pentateuch, 83
65
Middleton, Liberating Image, 45-46
66
Middleton, Liberating Image, 46-47

10
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

the purpose of the image.67 One can also see the image as portraying
humanity’s role and vocation to be modelled on God’s character as displayed
in Genesis 1.68 Rulership is then again a key function, with the idea that
humans are God’s representatives or delegates on earth.69 This idea of the
image of God as God’s representative also ties in with the use of this phrase
in Egyptian and Mesopotamian literature.70 Humanity is therefore created to
represent God on earth by ruling over creation. Genesis 1-11 then tells the
story of how humanity failed in this role through the expansion of sin and its
consequences. The concept of humans as God’s representatives on earth is
central to the purpose of these chapters.

The Creation Mandate

Reference has already been made to the significance in these chapters of

the creation mandate to multiply and fill the earth, and rule over the
creatures. The mandate is given in the creation narrative (1:28), and
repeated in the re-creation after the flood (9:1). The genealogies can be
read, in part, as demonstrating the fulfilment of this mandate. 71 Reference is
made to the multiplication of mankind in 6:1, and the filling of the earth
(negatively with violence) in 6:13. The sin of the tower of Babel is best
understood as rebellion against the creation mandate.72 The conclusion of
the table of nations refers to the nations spreading out over the earth (10:32).
Schmutzer describes the function of the image of God as: “the judicial and
royal authorisation for humankind to perform the requirements of the creation
mandate (1:28) on behalf of God as the Cosmic King.” 73 The mandate can
also be seen as more of a blessing than a command.74 It certainly includes,
as Wenham notes, divine enablement as an “implicit promise.”75 There is

67
Middleton, Liberating Image, 55
68
Middleton, Liberating Image, 60
69
Middleton, Liberating Image, 88
70
Middleton, Liberating Image, 118-122
71
Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 66
72
Brueggemann, Genesis, 99; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17, 353
73
Schmutzer, Be Fruitful and Multiply, 178
74
Schmutzer, Be Fruitful and Multiply, 77-79
75
Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 24, 33

11
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

also a commissioning here to rule over the creatures, with a caring and just
concern implied. Noah’s preservation and care of the animals serves to
illustrate this role in dramatic form.76 The creation mandate has also been
described as the “cultural mandate,”77 since filling the earth and subduing it
implies the creation of social structures and institutions. It is also the first job
description,78 and is a clear articulation of God’s intention or purpose for
humanity. It must therefore be seen as core to the message of these
chapters.

The Nature of Sin

We have already noted that the spread of sin and its effects are central to the
narrative. We should also consider how the passage describes the nature of
sin. At one level, sin is presented as disobedience to God’s commands.
Adam and Eve disobey God’s clear instructions. The serpent’s strategy in
persuading them to disobey is to question God’s promises, causing Eve to
doubt God. As Moberly points out: “the serpent never tells the woman to
transgress God’s prohibition.”79 He just gets her to question God’s character.
This shows the disobedience as originating in distrust, or lack of faith.80
Other factors involved are pride (“you will be like God” 3:5), and lust (“it was
a delight to the eyes” 3:6), both of which are self-serving motivations.
Keiser’s literary analysis of the passage highlights the way in which the
passage presents the fall as primarily: “the failure of man to properly fulfil his
divinely appointed role in creation.”81

Later, Cain is criticised mainly for his self-serving motivations,82 which also
cause him to fall short of God’s expectations for humanity. Lamech is proud

76
Schmutzer, Be Fruitful and Multiply, 134
77
Nancy Pearcy, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from its Cultural Captivity (Wheaton,
Illinois: Crossway Books, 2005), 47; Waltke, An Old Testament Theology, 220
78
Pearcy, Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from its Cultural Captivity, 47
79
R. W. L. Moberly, "Did the Serpent Get It Right?," Journal of Theological Studies 39
(1988): 7
80
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 105-106; R. W. L.
Moberly, The Theology of the Book of Genesis (Old Testament Theology; Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2009), 86
81
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 102
82
Keiser, Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological Message, 115

12
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

and boastful in a clearly self-centred manner. The lust, violence and evil
before the flood continue along the lines of this self-centred rebellion
motivation. The tower of Babel could partly be motivated by lack of trust in
God’s promise never to flood the earth again, and also continues to be self-
centred in its ambitions. Each example of sin fits into this self-serving
autonomous motive, with lack of trust also being highlighted at the fall and at
Babel. Sin is thus presented as disobedience to God’s commands, rooted in
lack of trust in the goodness of God’s character.83 Key to the message of
these chapters therefore is that humanity has through self-serving autonomy
and distrust of God, failed to fulfil his divinely appointed role.

The Unifying Theological Message of Genesis 1-11

Following the conclusions of the above analysis, my summary of the unifying

message of Genesis 1-11 is as follows:

Humans were created to function as God’s representatives on earth,

filling the earth, and ruling over it. Humanity has failed to fulfil this role
through self-serving autonomous motivations and lack of trust in God,
resulting in progressive judgements from God, mitigated by acts of
grace, but culminating in a renewal of creation after a worldwide flood.
God’s intention remains for humans to act as his representatives, and
demonstrate faith and obedience towards God in fulfilling his purposes.

This statement captures the key themes and theological messages that I
have discussed above. Key to it is the role and function of humanity and the
consequences of their failure to fulfil their divinely appointed role. Genesis 1-
11 answers the questions of why we are here, what we are to do, and what
has gone wrong with the world. It leaves the reader wondering what God is
going to do next to ensure that his purposes for creation are fulfilled.

83
Waltke, An Old Testament Theology, 275

13
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

Bibliography

Bird, Phyllis A. ""Male and Female He Created Them": Genesis 1:27b in the
Context of the Priestly Account of Creation," Pages 329-361 in "I Studied
Inscriptions from Before the Flood". Edited by Richard S. Hess and David
Toshio Tsumura. Winona Lake, Indianna: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Brueggemann, Walter. Genesis. Interpretation. Louisville, Kentucky: John

Knox Press, 2010.

Cassuto, U. A commentary on the book of Genesis. Translated by I.

Abrahams. Part 1: From Adam to Noah. Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1989.

Clines, David J. A. The Theme of the Pentateuch. 2nd ed. Vol. 10, Journal
for the Study of the Old Testament Supplement Series. Sheffield: Sheffield
Academic Press, 2004.

Collins, C. John. Genesis 1-4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological

Commentary. Phillipsburg, New Jersey: P&R Publishing, 2006.

Cooper, Bill. The Authenticity of the Book of Genesis. Creation Science

Movement, 2011.

Fretheim, Terrence E. God and the World in the Old Testament: A Relational
Theology of Creation. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2005.

Hamilton, Victor P. The Book of Genesis Chapters 1-17. The New

International Commentary on the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Eerdmans, 1990.

Hasel, Gerhard F. "Polemic nature of the Genesis cosmology." Evangelical

Quarterly 46, no. (1974): 81-102.

Hauser, Alan Jon. "Genesis 2-3: The Theme of Intimacy and Alienation,"
Pages 383-398 in "I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood". Edited by
Richard S. Hess and David Toshio Tsumura. Winona Lake, Indianna:
Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Hess, Richard S. "The Geneaologies of Genesis 1-11 and Comparative

Literature," Pages 58-72 in "I Studied Inscriptions from Before the Flood".

14
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

Edited by Richard S. Hess and David Toshio Tsumura. Winona Lake:

Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Hoffmeir, James K. "Some Thoughts on Genesis 1 & 2 and Egyptian

Cosmology." Journal of the Ancient Near Eastern Society 15, no. (1983): 39-
49.

Jacobsen, Thorkild. "The Eridu Genesis," Pages 129-142 in "I Studied

Inscriptions from Before the Flood". Edited by Richard S. Hess and David
Toshio Tsumura. Wiona Lake, Indiana: Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Keiser, Thomas A. Genesis 1-11: Its Literary Coherence and Theological

Message. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock, 2013.

Lambert, W. G. "A New Look at the Babylonian Background of Genesis."

Journal of Theological Studies 16, no. 2 (1965): 287-300.

Levenson, Jon D. Creation and the Persistence of Evil: The Jewish Drama of
Divine Omnipotence. Pinceton University Press, 1988.

Middleton, J. Richard. The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1.

Grand Rapids, Michigan: Brazos Press, 2005.

Millard, A. R. "New Babylonian 'Genesis' Story." Tyndale Bulletin 18, no.

(1967): 3-18.

Miller, Patrick D. Jr. "Eridy, Dunnu, and Babel: A Study in Comparative

Mythology," Pages 143-68 in "I Studied Inscriptions From Before The Flood".
Edited by Richard S. Hess and David Toshio Tsumura. Wiona Lake, Indiana:
Eisenbrauns, 1994.

Moberly, R. W. L. "Did the Serpent Get It Right?". Journal of Theological

Studies 39, no. (1988): 1-27.

Moberly, R. W. L. The Theology of the Book of Genesis. Old Testament

Theology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

Pearcy, Nancy. Total Truth: Liberating Christianity from its Cultural Captivity.
Wheaton, Illinois: Crossway Books, 2005.

15
Tim Dieppe Westminster Theological Centre March 2015

Petrovich, Douglas. "Identifying Nimrod of Genesis 10 with Sargon of Akkad

by Exegetical and Archaeological Means." Journal of the Evangelical
Theological Society 56, no. 2 (2013): 273-306.

Schmutzer, Andrew J. Be Fruitful and Multiply: A Crux of Thematic Repetition

in Genesis 1-11. Eugene: Wipf and Stock, 2009.

Waltke, Bruce K. An Old Testament Theology: An exegetical, canonical, and

thematic approach. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2007.

Walton, John H. Genesis 1 As Ancient Cosmology. Winona Lake, Indianna:

Eisenbrauns, 2011.

Wenham, G J. Genesis 1-15. Word Biblical Commentary. Dallas, Texas:

Word, 1987.

Westermann, Claus. Genesis 1-11. Translated by John J. Scullion. A

Continental Commentary. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994.

16