BIBL 410 WEEKLY STUDY QUESTIONS 4 LIBERTY
UNIVERSITY COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED
2026
◉ Of the five views in Reading Genesis 1-2: An Evangelical
Conversation which one do you prefer. Summarize your preferred view
and argue for it (this may include arguments against the other two views
as well). Answer: Todd Beall - Literal Approach
"Genesis 1 should be read (along with all of Gen 1-11) as historical
narrative that is meant to be taken literally". Beall argues that there
should not be a different hermeneutic for Genesis 1-11, much less
Genesis 1-2, than the rest of the book.
Additionally, Beall stays away from ANE texts, writing that "the biblical
account in Genesis is so unlike other ANE literature that many scholars
hold that the creation account is a polemic against the ANE creation
myths". Rather than comparing and contrasting the writing of Genesis
and ANE texts, Beall argues that readers ought to take the text at face
value and allow Scripture to interpret itself.
Additionally, Beall draws a connection between the New Testament
authors with the way they approach Genesis 1-2. Beall argues, "At least
twenty-five NT passages refer to Gen 1-11, and all take the accounts
literally". In his argument for a literal approach, Beall points to the
necessity of a literal, historical account for several reasons, including the
conclusion that Jesus and the New Testament writers did the same.
, Especially Matt 19:4-6 where Jesus cites both Gen 1:27 and Gen 2:24, to
which there is no indication that Jesus takes these texts as allegory or
figurative.
Two strong arguments that Beall incorporates are the connections made
with the New Testament writers and Jesus' view of creation, as well as
Beall's emphasis on proper hermeneutics. In dealing with the New
Testament and Jesus, Beall offers insight in discussing how they viewed
the creation account in Genesis 1-2. Beall allows this to drive his
interpretation of the Scripture, which ties into his contention for a literal
and historical account. Beall argues for Scripture to interpret itself and
does not allow for science or ANE texts to drive the foundation of the
interpretation
◉ Explain what is meant when we say "Interpret Genesis within its
Canonical and Pentateuchal Contexts?" Answer: Canonical Context
- 24 books of the Tanak (Jewish Bible - the Law (Torah), the Prophets
(Nevi'im), and the Writings (Kethuvim)) as compared to the order of the
39 books of our traditional English translations
- Why? Jesus seems to think in terms of the Tanak
--Luke 11:51 "from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah"
---Abel - Genesis 4:1-8
---Zechariah - 2 Chronicles 24:20-22
UNIVERSITY COMPLETE SOLUTIONS VERIFIED
2026
◉ Of the five views in Reading Genesis 1-2: An Evangelical
Conversation which one do you prefer. Summarize your preferred view
and argue for it (this may include arguments against the other two views
as well). Answer: Todd Beall - Literal Approach
"Genesis 1 should be read (along with all of Gen 1-11) as historical
narrative that is meant to be taken literally". Beall argues that there
should not be a different hermeneutic for Genesis 1-11, much less
Genesis 1-2, than the rest of the book.
Additionally, Beall stays away from ANE texts, writing that "the biblical
account in Genesis is so unlike other ANE literature that many scholars
hold that the creation account is a polemic against the ANE creation
myths". Rather than comparing and contrasting the writing of Genesis
and ANE texts, Beall argues that readers ought to take the text at face
value and allow Scripture to interpret itself.
Additionally, Beall draws a connection between the New Testament
authors with the way they approach Genesis 1-2. Beall argues, "At least
twenty-five NT passages refer to Gen 1-11, and all take the accounts
literally". In his argument for a literal approach, Beall points to the
necessity of a literal, historical account for several reasons, including the
conclusion that Jesus and the New Testament writers did the same.
, Especially Matt 19:4-6 where Jesus cites both Gen 1:27 and Gen 2:24, to
which there is no indication that Jesus takes these texts as allegory or
figurative.
Two strong arguments that Beall incorporates are the connections made
with the New Testament writers and Jesus' view of creation, as well as
Beall's emphasis on proper hermeneutics. In dealing with the New
Testament and Jesus, Beall offers insight in discussing how they viewed
the creation account in Genesis 1-2. Beall allows this to drive his
interpretation of the Scripture, which ties into his contention for a literal
and historical account. Beall argues for Scripture to interpret itself and
does not allow for science or ANE texts to drive the foundation of the
interpretation
◉ Explain what is meant when we say "Interpret Genesis within its
Canonical and Pentateuchal Contexts?" Answer: Canonical Context
- 24 books of the Tanak (Jewish Bible - the Law (Torah), the Prophets
(Nevi'im), and the Writings (Kethuvim)) as compared to the order of the
39 books of our traditional English translations
- Why? Jesus seems to think in terms of the Tanak
--Luke 11:51 "from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah"
---Abel - Genesis 4:1-8
---Zechariah - 2 Chronicles 24:20-22
