Review of Genesis: History, Fiction, or Neither? Part IV (Sparks)

The final contributor to Genesis: History, Fiction, or Neither? is Kenton Sparks, professor of biblical studies and vice president for enrollment management at Eastern University. His books include the Ancient Texts for the Study of the Hebrew Bible (a fantastic resource for students and non-specialists on the pertinent literature of the ANE), and God's Word in Human Words.

For Sparks there is too much internal (Gen 1-11 itself) and external evidence (scientific discoveries and ANE literature) to expect Gen 1-11 to behave as a literal historical past. "Whatever the first chapters of Genesis offer, there is one thing that they certainly do not offer, namely, a literal account of events that actually happened prior to and during the early history of humanity" (p. 111). Drawing on arguments Sparks has made elsewhere, he finds no reason to dismiss the Bible as the Word of God based on genre considerations.

The bulk of Sparks's essay attends to the issue of composition. Using the genealogies as a starting point, he sees three authors behind the text of Gen 1-11: Antiquarian Theologian, Ethnic Apologist, and the Ethnic Anthologist. According to Sparks, the Anitquarian wrote the creation myth of Gen 2-3, the genealogy of Gen 4, the Yahwistic elements of  Gen 6-9, and the Tower of Babel episode in Gen 11. The Apologist wrote Gen 1, the genealogy of Gen 5, and the Elohistic elements of Gen 6-9. (One can readily see a strong connection to Wellhausen's J and E sources with Sparks's Antiquarian and Apologist). An editor called the Anthologist brought these stories together to form a literary unit. However, the Anthologist was not concerned with smoothing out any contradictions between the sources. "The editor so valued tradition, and was so fixed on collecting these sources, that he or she did not care (or did not care much) about whether the traditions fit together nicely" (p. 137)

Unlike his forerunners, Sparks does not treat the three test cases specifically. Instead, he deals with them each in broad brush strokes in the context of their literary composition. In each case, though, he emphasizes the fact that these were not intended to be written as historical accounts of real past events, but serve to point the reader to broader theological concerns about the fall of humanity and the resulting separation between God and humanity, and humans with other humans, something with which each of us can relate.

Sparks asks, and answers, three overarching questions. First, "Did the authors intend at every point to write reliable history?" Sparks says no. Second, "Did the authors believe that history stood behind their narratives?" Sparks says yes. Third, "Did the author accept as history anything which cannot in fact be historical?" Sparks says sometimes (pp. 138-139).

Finally, I'll leave you with Sparks's closing comments. "Humanity will not be saved by accurate historical recollections or scientific facts. We are saved through God's actual intervention in our world through the person of Jesus Christ. Gen 1-11, when read well, points us to him" (p. 138)