Journal: Detroit Baptist Seminary Journal
Volume: DBSJ 28:1 (NA 2023)
Article: Book Reviews
Author: Anonymous

DBSJ 28 (2023) p. 95

Book Reviews

The Manifold Beauty of Genesis One: A Multi-Layered Approach, by Gregg Davidson and Kenneth J. Turner. Grand Rapids: Kregel, 2021. 210 pp. $22.99.

Creation studies show no sign of abatement as interpretive disputes on the meaning of Genesis 1–2 persist. These authors propose a via media by focusing on the allegedly diverse perspectives provided by the biblical creation account. Gregg Davidson is professor and chair of the geology department at the University of Mississippi, while Kenneth Turner is Professor of Old Testament at Toccoa Falls College. The pairing of a geology professor with an Old Testament professor furnishes a clue as to the authors’ shared perspective on the earth’s origins. This is confirmed by the endorsements in the frontispiece from scholars such as Tremper Longman III, John Walton, Richard Averbeck, and C. John Collins, prominent for their alignment of Genesis with old-earth origin models. Davidson has previously published a book arguing for the essential harmony between Scripture and modern science when the former is interpreted properly in its literary and historical contexts (Friend of Science, Friend of Faith: Listening to God in His Works and Word [Kregel, 2019]). Davidson and Turner contend that Genesis 1 constitutes “theologically rich literature” providing multiple layers of perspective on God’s work of creation. Divine creation, they suggest, is narrated through seven interpretive lenses that include song, analogy, polemic, covenant, temple, calendar, and land.

The authors begin by expressing their regret over the “acrimony” and “verbal wars” that too often characterize discussions of origins (3). They suggest that “much of this conflict derives from a failure to fully embrace what the church has long affirmed about the nature of the Bible as a whole,” namely, that Scripture is multi-dimensional and open to a variety of interpretive conclusions (3–4). This early claim strikes the reader as somewhat disingenuous given the consistency of Jewish and Christian interpretations through history as to the meaning of Genesis 1–2. Rather, the inference that because some parts of Scripture are prone to multiple interpretations therefore any part of Scripture must be open to multiple interpretations is the fallacy of composition, which often leads to hasty generalizations (see Gula, Nonsense: A Handbook of Logical Fallacies, 85). To advance their tack, however, the authors propose that the Bible presents “layers of truth” that avouch multiple perspectives as simultaneously valid (4). The original cultural context of Scripture must be held supreme (7–8). Concerns that t...