Is Genesis Myth?

Dr. Craig discusses what he means by the use of the term "myth."

QUESTIONER: You use the term “myth” in describing these ancient creation stories and also apply it to the first 11 chapters of Genesis. When a lot of people hear the word “myth” they immediately think of a made-up story. How are you using that term?

DR. CRAIG: I make it very clear in the book that I'm using the word “myth” in the sense in which it is used by students of folklore and classical literature – to talk about a traditional, sacred narrative that is regarded as authoritative in a society that seeks to ground present realities and institutions and values in events in the primordial past. I think you would agree that Genesis 1 to 11 fits that description to a “T.” And so I'm not using it in the popular sense where we talk about the myth of the low-calorie diet or the myth of the self-made man. I recognize that the use of a word like this is potentially misleading but I believe that as scholars we need to be straightforward with our people, with our laity, and not try to mince words and use euphemisms as some Old Testament commentators and scholars do. Rather, we ought to be straightforward about what we're saying and then define our terms very carefully so as to preclude misunderstanding. That's what I try to do. The view that I'm laying out in the book is actually not uncommon among Old Testament scholars – people like Bill Arnold at Asbury Seminary or John Walton at Wheaton or Gordon Wenham in his commentary on Genesis. But they just don't use the same terminology. They use euphemisms like “proto-history” or “imagistic history” where I try to use the technical terminology that is actually used by students of ancient Assyriology for this kind of literature.