Genesis As Myth In the book, Genesis As Myth, by Edmund Leach. He stated that everybody had different views on myths in Genesis. For example German theologian who defined myth as the “expression of unobservable realities in terms of observable phenomena.” This German theologian, who is relating this to the devout Christian, which indicates that all sanctimonious Christians believe that the bible is strictly a myth. I in the other hand disagree to that argument because, the Christians believed that the bible was not a myth, and the events that happened in the bible are true. My reasoning for that remark is, that most Christians were raised to believe that the bible was true and we werent able to argue with its readings.
We feel that the importance of the myth is more likely to be less probable. This German theologian believed that communica tion has an important role in myths throughout the bible. I believe that all mythological systems that recur in stories, oc cur in many different versions. He stated that “man is created in Genesis, and then he created all over again. And, as if two first men were not enough, we also have Noah in chapter eight.” A quote from the bible that states “I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end, saith the Lord.” The German Theologian says that “God against the world and the world itself for ever dividing into opposites on either side: male and female, living and dead, good and evil, first and last.” In a different example Edmund Leach stated that “Solomon the wise, the great king, the builder of the temple, nevertheless is a sinner in that he loved many strange woman, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, woman of the moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, Zidonians and hittites.” Taken as its face value, the text of the old testament represents the relation between the various tribal groups involved as one of “binary segmentation” of the most consistent kind. The view that history in the old testament has more in com mon with production than with history in an “ordinary aca demic sense” is not itself at all new.
Relatively orthodox Van Rad points out that “Sauls disasters seem to follow one upon another with the inevitability of Greek tragedy” I Think That Van Rad demonstrated the existence of a kind of patterning which was not previously suspected in the previous verses of the bible. To illustrate another point, Edmund Leach expresses that the “So-called primitive ignorance of paternity is nothing else but a very imperfect knowledge that intercourse is a necessary though not sufficient condition of the woman being opened up.” Jesus is a legal status as a man and his essential natural as God. Joseph is the husband of Mary, and in this legal sense he belongs to the “lineage” of David. The divine basis derives from the fact that the male fragment of his conception was the holy spirit which entered Marys body by a unnatural route. Edmund Leach indicated that “Mary was impregnated through the ear.” In conclusion I feel that Edmund Leach was a very good author and his logic was very influential in my understanding why myths can miss-guide ones judgement and beliefs.
Ive tried to see the connections between the facts and the myths as we know them. In this book of Genesis and Myths. I feel that it is hard to determine the myths from the facts, as we discussed in class earlier. Although this book helped me look into things more deeply. It made me wonder what is actually true or is it a myth?.