2

Well, I would like to know with the passage

Matthew 24:37 "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."

implies that we have to have a literal interpretation of the genesis ?

1
  • I don't see any connection.
    – Dinah Leah
    May 16 at 22:38
1

We should always take the Bible literally, but literature also includes many poetic figures of speech. Regarding, the passage you quoted, it certainly implies that we should take Genesis historically. I just don't think it means that we should interpret everything written in it according to our first impression of the meaning of words found in Genesis as they are presented to us in 21st century English.

0

The passage in Matt 23:37 only means that the story of Lot has some significance. According to some (with whom I disagree!!) the Book of Genesis has fact mixed with myth and fiction. However, the NT frequently quotes and alludes to Genesis stories as historical fact. Here is a brief sample:

  • Creation - 2 Peter 2:5, Acts 2:24, Eph 3:15
  • Adam to Enoch - 1 Cor 15:45, Rom 12-19, Luke 3, 1 Tom 2:14, Jude 14
  • Flood and Noah - Heb 11:7, 1 Peter 3:20, Matt 24:37, 38, Luke 17:26, 2 Peter 2:5
  • Abraham and Isaac - Heb 11:8-17, James 2:23, Gal 3:6, 4:3
  • Lot and Melchizedek - Luke 17:28, Heb 7:1-17, 5:10
  • Jacob - Joseph - Acts 7:2-14

... and so forth.

Thus, the NT, including Jesus Himself, treats the entire book of Genesis as historical fact, including the flood and creation. I note Paul's comments about these OT stories in 1 Cor 10 -

6 These things took place as examples to keep us from craving evil things as they did. ... 11 Now these things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come.

This was good advice from Paul then and now.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.