1The heavens, the earth, and all their vast array were finished. 2On the seventh day God finished his work which he had done; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had done. 3God blessed the seventh day, and made it holy, because he rested in it from all his work of creation which he had done.
4This is the history of the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that Yahweh God made the earth and the heavens. 5No plant of the field was yet in the earth, and no herb of the field had yet sprung up; for Yahweh God had not caused it to rain on the earth. There was not a man to till the ground, 6but a mist went up from the earth, and watered the whole surface of the ground. 7Yahweh God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 8Yahweh God planted a garden eastward, in Eden, and there he put the man whom he had formed. 9Out of the ground Yahweh God made every tree to grow that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food, including the tree of life in the middle of the garden and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. 10A river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from there it was parted, and became the source of four rivers. 11The name of the first is Pishon: it flows through the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold; 12and the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and onyx stone are also there. 13The name of the second river is Gihon. It is the same river that flows through the whole land of Cush. 14The name of the third river is Hiddekel. This is the one which flows in front of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates. 15Yahweh God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to cultivate and keep it. 16Yahweh God commanded the man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; 17but you shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.”
18Yahweh God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make him a helper comparable to him.” 19Out of the ground Yahweh God formed every animal of the field, and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them. Whatever the man called every living creature became its name. 20The man gave names to all livestock, and to the birds of the sky, and to every animal of the field; but for man there was not found a helper comparable to him. 21Yahweh God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep. As the man slept, he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh in its place. 22Yahweh God made a woman from the rib which he had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23The man said, “This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh. She will be called ‘woman,’ because she was taken out of Man.” 24Therefore a man will leave his father and his mother, and will join with his wife, and they will be one flesh. 25The man and his wife were both naked, and they were not ashamed.
In recent years, several evangelical scholars have departed from the view that the Genesis narratives (chs 1-9) are historical narratives, but are, rather, mythical accounts that teach theological lessons (a departure from the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy [see Article XII below] and the Doctrinal Statement of the Evangelical Theological Society on Inerrancy, based on the Chicago Statement), with the creation account of the universe similar to Ancient Near Eastern myths about creation. In so doing, they discount several aspects of the creation account in Genesis 1 and 2, and reject the historical creation of Adam and Eve. Rather, they embrace theistic evolution (similar to liberal scholars of the late 19th and early 20th century) and deny the Genesis 2 record of God physically creating Adam and Eve, as well as the fall of these first humans. See the admonition of the Church Father, Irenaeus, on the pernicious teaching of false teachers in the second century A.D.
Other Hebrew scholars argue that the creation accounts in Genesis are similar to historical accounts in the book of Genesis, similar to the genealogies, and also what we know about modern science (see https://hvsb.app/WEB/GEN/1/doc/1ZiJzA92xdyBPSPIF6zW) found in the hvsb.app. As well, several scholars have argued that the Genesis creation account is a polemic against ANE creation myths rather than evolutionary ideas based on a philosophical foundation. Moreover, literary scholars like C.S. Lewis say that myth always comes from history and not history from myth.
Following is a comparative chart that organizes the views of prominent critical scholars (embracing the philosophical evolutionary view) who see Genesis 1-2 as myth (in the ANE genre or framework), versus those conservative scholars who argue that Genesis 1-2 is a historical narrative (possibly polemical against ANE myth, but not myth itself). The chart includes representative scholars, their positions, key arguments, and relevant responses from those affirming the historical reliability of Genesis 1-2.
Article XII of the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy: Article XII:
"We affirm that Scripture in its entirety is inerrant, being free from all falsehood, fraud, or deceit.
We deny that Biblical infallibility and inerrancy are limited to spiritual, religious, or redemptive themes, exclusive of assertions in the fields of history and science. We further deny that scientific hypotheses about earth history may properly be used to overturn the teaching of Scripture on creation and the flood."
Comparative Chart: Is Genesis 1-2 Myth or History?
| Viewpoint | Representative Scholars | Key Arguments | Responses by Historical View Scholars |
|---|---|---|---|
| Genesis 1-2 as Myth (ANE Parallels) | Tremper Longman III | Genesis uses symbolic, theological language; not meant as literal history. Reflects ANE worldview to teach truth through "mythic" structure. | Gerhard Hasel: Genre of Genesis 1 is historical narrative, not poetic/mythic (based on Hebrew grammar and syntax). |
| John Walton | Genesis is “functional ontology,” not material creation. God gives order/roles to existing chaos (like in ANE temple texts). Not about physical origins. | Currid: While there are surface similarities with ANE myths, Genesis is distinct in its monotheism, order, and absence of divine conflict. | |
| Bruce Waltke | Genesis adapts ANE mythical language to communicate theological truths. Literal interpretation misses intended meaning. | Hasel: Repeated use of “And God said... and it was so…” demonstrates a structured, historical framework. | |
| William Lane Craig | Genesis is mytho-history: not pure myth, but also not straightforward history. Combines symbolic and historical elements. | C. John Collins: Mythical elements may exist, but the structure is narrative and communicates real events (see his Did Adam and Eve Really Exist?). | |
| Peter Enns | The Bible reflects the ancient mindset; evolution and ANE parallels show that Genesis is accommodation, not literal history. | John Sailhamer: Genesis begins historical narrative in 1:1; Genesis 1-11 uses genealogical structure identical to Genesis 12-50. | |
| Genesis 1-2 as Historical Narrative (with Polemical Function) | Gerhard Hasel | Strong evidence of narrative structure (use of waw-consecutive verbs); not myth. Genesis contrasts sharply with polytheistic myths. | Affirmed by many conservative evangelicals; shows consistency between Genesis 1-11 and rest of Genesis. |
| John D. Currid | Genesis is a polemic against ANE myths (esp. Egyptian and Mesopotamian), not a reworking of myth. It teaches monotheism, not syncretism. | See Against the Gods: The Polemical Theology of the Old Testament (Crossway). | |
| Kenneth Kitchen | Genesis 1-11 reflects early historical thinking; lacks mythic markers like divine combat or sexual deity interplay found in ANE texts. | Emphasizes Genesis’ historical intent and structure. | |
| C. John Collins | Genesis uses exalted prose, but still intends to communicate real history. It invites careful reading without dismissing truth claims. | See Genesis 1–4: A Linguistic, Literary, and Theological Commentary. | |
| Allen P. Ross | The structure, themes, and grammar of Genesis support it as historical narrative meant to be taken seriously as origins account. | Creation is depicted as deliberate, ordered, and purpose-driven—unlike chaotic ANE myths. | |
| C.S. Lewis (Literary Scholar) | “Myth is a real but unfocused gleam of divine truth falling on human imagination... but Christianity is myth become fact.” | Lewis affirms that biblical stories, while grand and symbolic, are rooted in real events (e.g., Incarnation, Creation). Lewis argues that myth always comes from history, and never history from myth. |
Additional Observations