Interpreting Genesis 1-3: Some thoughts from Bruce Milne’s book, “Know the Truth”

In his book, ‘Know the Truth’ , Bruce Milne comments on ‘The Fall of Mankind’. He expresses dissatisfaction with ‘(t)he mythical view (which) rejects any historical element in Genesis 3′.

He distinguishes between ‘(t)he literal view (which) sees the Genesis record as a direct historical description’ and ‘the historical view (which) asserts that while Genesis 2-3 are not to be interpreted in a literal sense at every point, space-time events are certainly being recounted’.

He points out that the literal view is ‘less frequently adopted even among those who unquestionably acknowledge the full inspiration of Scripture’ (p.102). He suggests that ‘a degree of symbolism’ is used in the Biblical account of man’s fall (p.103).
In his discussion of ‘The Question of Origins’, he emphasizes that ‘(t)he divine origin of the universe is … not in question’, he maintains that ‘the real issue is the correct interpretation of the biblical teaching’ (p.77).

Seeking the intention of the writer, Milne asks, ‘Is this a poetic-religious passage, or is it a scientific account of the cosmological origins of the universe? or is it something combining both: an account of real events, conveying religious truth?’ (p.77).

In his answer to these questions, he writes, ‘1. … The Bible is concerned to convey a message of salvation to all people of all ages and therefore adopts popular, non-technical language … 2. Biblical language is “phenomenal”, i.e. it … describes things from the viewpoint of the observer … the sun “rises and sets” … 3. Biblical language is non-theoretical. The Bible … does not teach a specific cosmology. 4. Biblical language is cultural, communicating its divine revelation primarily through the culture of its time. All these factors need to be carefully before dogmatizing about the correct interpretation of Genesis 1-2′ (p.78).
He distinguishes between ’some degree of liberty in interpreting the biblical account of cosmological beginnings’ and any denial of ‘a genuine act at the “beginning” of time by which God brought the universe into existence out of nothing’ (pp.78-79).

Emphasizing that ‘there is need for caution in asserting what Genesis 1-3 must or must not mean’ (p.95), he insists that ‘Dogmatism is inappropriate here unless we can show that Scripture necessarily requires a particular interpretation’ (p.93).