Jonathan Sacks: Credo
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
If we understood the first chapter of Genesis, we might put an end to some of the needless arguments between scientists and religious believers.
The first thing to note is its sheer brevity. It takes a mere 34 verses. The Hebrew Bible takes some 15 times as long to describe the Israelites’ creation of the sanctuary in the wilderness. It is astonishing that the world's greatest and most influential account of the origins of the Universe is so short.
Next is its numerical structure. We know the significance of the number seven. The Universe is made in seven days. Seven times the word “good” is used. But the pattern goes deeper than that. The first verse of Genesis contains seven Hebrew words, the second, fourteen.
The account of the seventh day contains 35. The word “God” appears 35 times; the word “Earth” 21. The entire passage contains 469 (7 x 67) words. By these hints, something is being intimated. The Universe has a structure, and it is mathematical.
Then there is the structure itself. On the first three days God creates domains: light and dark, upper and lower waters, sea and dry land. On the next three days He populates these domains one by one: first the Sun, Moon and stars, then birds and fish, then land animals and human beings. The seventh day is holy. So six (the days of creation) symbolises the natural order, seven the supernatural.
As if by way of unintended confirmation, Sir Martin Rees, the Astronomer Royal, wrote a book, Just Six Numbers, in which he showed that the entire structure of the physical Universe is determined by six mathematical constants.
Beyond these structural features is a sharp polemic. Most readers of the Bible are only dimly aware of the degree to which it is shaped by a polemic against myth. In the case of Genesis 1 this is obvious. What is missing is the element of struggle between rival gods that dominates all mythical accounts of creation. In the biblical account there is no opposition, no conflict. God speaks and the world comes into being. Max Weber called this the “disenchantment”, the demythologising, of the world. He believed it to be the foundation of Western rationalism.
There are times when the polemic is more subtle. Read the account of the second day, when the waters are divided, and you will see that it alone of the six days lacks the word “good”.
Instead, “good” appears twice on the third day. This is an allusion to one of the most common features of myth: the primal battle against the goddess of the sea, symbol of the forces of chaos. The Bible dismisses this in a single oblique reference, that imposing order on the primal waters took one and a half days instead of one. The creation account is anti-myth.
So Genesis 1 is not a proto-scientific account of the birth of the Universe and the Big Bang. Its purpose is clear. The Universe is good: hence world-denying nihilism is ruled out. It is the result of a single creative will, so myth is eliminated. The Universe is a place of structure and order, so the text is an invitation to science, by implying that the world is not irrational and ruled by capricious powers.
Why then is Genesis 1 there? We are puzzled by that question because we forget that the Hebrew Bible is called, in Judaism, Torah, meaning teaching, guidance, or more specifically, law. Genesis 1 is best understood not as pseudo-science, still less as myth, but as jurisprudence; that is to say, as the foundation of the moral law. God created the world; therefore God owns the world. We are His guests — strangers and temporary residents, as the Bible puts it. God has the right to specify the conditions of our tenancy on Earth. The radical message of Genesis 1 is that divine sovereignty is constitutional. God rules not by might but by right, and so must we.
So Genesis 1 can be restated in terms with which even the most avowed secularist might agree. The world does not belong to us. We hold it as trustees on behalf of those who will come after us.
Renouncing our ownership of the Earth is all we need to ground what is surely the fundamental point of the story itself: that we are here to protect, not destroy or endanger, the Earth and all it contains.
— Rabbi Sir Jonathan Sacks is Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Does the good Rabbi understand what he is talking about?
He said, "we forget that the Hebrew Bible is called, in Judaism, Torah".
To be a "HEBREW" signifies the faith of an individual, not the language they speak or their ethnicity, as the scripture says of Abram, calling him "Abram the Hebrew".
Judaism evolved out of the Hebrew faith into a 'religion' and has lost all knowledge of the meaning of the scripture, the Law and the Prophecies.
Genesis is about the creation of the Hebrew faith, not the bricks and mortar of the planet. Wake up Johnathan.
Ian , London,
To argue that humans are stewards of the Earth is laughable. The Earth existed for billions of years without us. Complex life existed for hundreds of millions of years without us. The Earth and the life upon need no stewards. They can manage their own affairs. The only thing humans need to be stewards of is themselves and we have failed dramatically in that regard.
In my opinion our choice of words is very important. Part of the reason humans are out of synch with all of the Earth's processes and the rest of the animal kingdom is because we are fond of appointing ourselves roles that we clearly do not hold. We are not stewards. As Richard Leakey said, "We are merely short-term tenants, and pretty unruly and destructive ones at that." If the human race were to completely disappear today the Earth and all of its life would be just fine without us. Can anyone rationally argue otherwise? If not, how can we be stewards?
Mike, Kootznoowoo, Alaska
E Skelton,
I prefer a harmonious, scientific worldview over any other type of worldview. However, if such a thing is not possible I would choose a harmonious, non-scientific worldview any day over a disharmonious, scientific one. Worldviews exist only as long as humans do and we'll only exist as long as we are harmonious with the Earth's processes and the life upon it.
Mike, Kootznoowoo, Alaska
Well Jesus talks about Humanity being tennants, just read the parable about the vinyard, The master of the vinyard builds a house, wine press, vines etc and rents it to the tennants. When it comes to pay day the master sends his servants for a share of the rent, the tennants kill them. Again the master does it and again the tennants kill them. Finally the master sends his son and they kill him - and the Jesus asked 'what do you think the master will do to those tennants' and they told him 'he will destroy them and release the farm to new tennants who will give the farmer his due'. A highly interesting parable.
We are merely tennants awaiting the masters return, like the parable of the wise and foolish brides. I wonder how God will react to what we have done. But then again it already describes what he will do in revelation - these are scarey times were alive in.
Andrew, York, United Kingdom
It is the orginal word for dominion that has been given it's proper meaning in it's orignal language, that which Genesis is written in. This word means stewerdship. So it is legitmate for the Rabbi to say that we don't own the Earth but merely look after it.
So Harmony is a core to this. The dear Rabbi, is, not 'spinning' anything. He is reflecting understanding and scholarship on the text. He should have explained that better. We have indeed followed the old idea or english version of dominion in the past and have caused problems but so has scientific progress at all costs. The two have mixed together.
It is now with our mutual understanding that we should be working to solve these problems together. There is a groundswell behind the green movement as the knowledge and understaning of the stewerdship concept has grown in Christianity.
My point is many relgious people are now the voice of conscious on green matters. THey shout louder and have a profound impact to make!
Steven, Buckhurst Hill,
I think J Sacks has got it wrong - Genesis describes God making the world in six days, not seven. He rested on the seventh day. I wish the rabbi would do some real explaining of his subject, like why he does not believe that Christ is God.
John, Cromer,
I have as much respect for Judaism, if not more, than I do for any non-scientific world view. On top of this, I have as much respect for Jonathan Sacks as I do for any religious teacher. My point? Is this really as good as it gets? To paraphrase Richard Dawkins : "If its a theologian I want he's as good as they come. Perhaps I dont want a theologian".
E Skelton, Cardiff, Wales
Apparently Rabbi Sacks skipped over Genesis's 28th verse. When you read it do the words "trustees" or "protect" come to mind? They don't for me.
I think it's laughable that many Christians and Jews are now spinning the Bible as an environmental creed. Read the Bible as a whole. Then take the mythologies of Native Americans (or almost any other indigenous people) as a whole. It's an understatement to say that there's a stark contrast between the two in terms of how our relationship to the Earth and all of the life upon it is depicted. The Bible is utterly lacking when it comes to presenting a picture of a cohesive relationship with the Earth and all of its life. That itself is in my mind one of the major contributing factors to all of our current environmental problems.
This effort to spin the Bible is really a subtle admission that our Neolithic religions have been leading us down the wrong path and aren't conducive to a harmonious relationship with the Earth and all its life.
Mike, Kootznoowoo, Alaska
Yes we must all protect the earth but Jonathan Sacks really is flying into uncharted territory when he starts counting the number of times certain words appear in the bible.
I would have hoped for something better from him instead of numerical poppeycock.
robbo, Chester, England