Dr. Norman Habel

Question to ponder:

Is Genesis 1 about "domination?"

About the Bible

Short Answers to Big Questions
A Helpful Resource Revised and Expanded

Answers? Perhaps. Responses? Yes. Earlier this month Augsburg Books released a revised and expanded edition of Terence E. Fretheim's About the Bible: Short Answers to Big Questions. I have personally benefited from the first edition and have recommended it to many friends and family members. This welcomed revision provides a highly accessible resource for laity, pastors, students, and general inquisitors concerning pervasive questions with respect to the Bible. Two of the additional questions addressed in this edition include: "Did God create the world good and not perfect?" and "Does God cause natural disasters in the Bible?" While the questions in this volume are not ones that all have asked, I would submit that all who think about the Bible deal with some formulation of these questions to an extent, and to that end, this collection of responses is pertinent.

http://www.augsburgfortress.org/store/item.jsp?clsid=196246&productgroupid=0&isbn=0806657677

Is Genesis 1.26 A Divine Soliloquy?

While I was reading Thomas Mann’s work, The Book of Torah: The Narrative Integrity of the Pentateuch, a number of questions came to mind; one of which I will explore in detail here. Is Genesis 1.26 a divine soliloquy? Mann seems to believe that it is, “The distinction of humankind is expressed by the divine soliloquy in Genesis 1.26.”[1] A brief analysis of the definition of soliloquy,[2] and one may wonder how Mann can make such a claim. Personally, I find it hard to make the claim, mainly because of the definition of the word soliloquy. In some ways, the address is like a soliloquy, in that it conveys the inner thoughts of God in some sense, however, in this instance the phrase, “Let us,” acknowledges that there are other beings present, and that these beings are addressed in some way. For some more insight on soliloquies in Genesis, I examined R.A.F. MacKenzie’s study entitled, “The Divine Soliloquies in Genesis.”[3] MacKenzie does not examine Genesis 1.26 as a soliloquy, however, in a footnote he acknowledges the Priestly writer’s use of soliloquy in Genesis 1; however, he does not specifically mention the text in question.[4] MacKenzie’s focus is on the texts that he considers to be from the (J) Yahwist writer. Specifically he considers Genesis, 2.18; 3.22; 6.3; 6.7; 8.21; 11.6; and 18.20. Of those texts I believe MacKenzie has legitimate grounds to consider these soliloquies, except 3.22, and 11.6. My reason for rejecting those texts, as well as 1.26, is the presence, at least in some English translations, of the word “us.” The use of the phrase “let us,” is decidedly different from the term “I” which is used in many of the texts that MacKenzie considers soliloquies (Gen 2.18; 6.7; 8.21; 18.20). Much biblical scholarship has speculated that the “us” is a reference to the “divine council,” as portrayed in other biblical texts. For example some scholars would say, “The “let us” language (1.26; see11.7) images God as a consultant of other divine beings (for heavenly council, see Jer 23.18-22). The creation of humankind results from a dialogical act, an inner-divine communication.”[5] More specifically, in support of my point, Terence Fretheim writes, “The “let us” language refers to an image of God as consultant of other divine beings; the creation of humankind results from a dialogical act – an inner-divine communication – rather than a monological one.”[6] It should be noted here that one’s view of the type of speaking going on here is not the most important issue at stake; it was worth noting that there are implications and questions that will be raised whenever this text is read. For many readers, the phrase “let us,” does not catch their attention. For others, it raises the concern of the “Trinity,” or even polytheism. I hope that my future research on this text will provide me with some interesting dialogues with those who raise these questions.[7]


[1] Thomas W. Mann. The Book of the Torah: The Narrative Identity of the Pentateuch. John Knox Press, 1988, p.14. (Italics added)
[2] Soliloquy: 1: the act of talking to oneself 2: a dramatic monologue that represents a series of unspoken reflections. Merriam Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. Eleventh Edition. Merriam-Webster. 2007, p 1188.
Or, 1: an utterance or discourse by a person who is talking to himself or herself or is disregardful of or oblivious to any hearers present (often used as a device in drama to disclose a character’s innermost thoughts): Hamlet’s soliloquy begins with “To be or not to be.” 2: the act of talking while or as if alone. Random House Unabridged Dictionary. Random House, 2006. www.dictionary.com.

[3] R.A.F. MacKenzie. “The Divine Soliloquies in Genesis.” The Catholic Biblical Quarterly, vol. 17
[4] MacKenzie. p. 278.
[5] Bruce C. Birch et al. A Theological Introduction to the Old Testament. Abingdon, 1999, p.49.
[6] Terence Fretheim. “Genesis.” In The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol 1. p. 345.
[7] For more research I have read and am reading J.Richard Middleton. The Liberating Image: The Imago Dei in Genesis 1. Brazos Press. 2005, specifically pages 55-60 deal with the meaning of “let us.” Also I am considering Patrick D. Miller’s study, Genesis 1-11: Studies in Structure and Theme. Journal for the Study of Old Testament Supplement 8; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1978, chapter 1.