An Honest Old-Earther: James Barr

For those who haven't read my book yet, A Matter of ACTUAL Days: The Voices of a Recent Creation, I give you the words of a man a bit more interested in conceding the intent of Moses as he penned Genesis 1 than most old-earthers. Though by no means a conservative scholar, the late Hebraist, James Barr (1924-2006), spoke volumes about Moses's intent in regard to the length of day found in the first chapter. Referring to the long life of those listed in the ancestral genealogies of Genesis 5, he made it clear that though he believed them to be legendary, such was not the intent of the author. In fact, he made it equally apparent that the ancient author intended that the extreme ages be read as actual and even “scientifically true” in their time. Said Barr,

We have to distinguish between literal intention and historical, factual truth. The figures are not, to us, historically, scientifically or factually true, but they were literally intended. A year to them was the same period as it still is to us. The figures do not correspond with actual fact, that is, they or some of them are legendary or mythical in character, but the biblical writers in overwhelming probability did think that they corresponded to actual fact. When, in modern times, people began to say that these passages were ‘not to be taken literally’, this was really a cowardly expedient which enabled them to avoid saying that, though they were literally intended, they were not literally true. They were literally intended: they were chronological statements of numbers of years and made no sense otherwise.[1]

Notice how Barr drew a distinction between “literal intention” and “historical factual truth,” even forthrightly stating that “The figures are not, to us, historically, scientifically or factually true,” but then declared with the same certainty that the “figures” were indeed literally intended. According to him, although modern readers can deny their literality, we cannot deny that that is just how the original author intended them.

Of course, for the purposes of this section, the same certitude accompanies Barr’s view of Genesis 1 and creation. In fact, in a personal letter to David Watson, Barr said the following, 

Probably, so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Gen. 1-11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that…creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience.[2]

Again, note his emphasis on the intended literality of the ancient account’s author, namely, that “creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience.”

In conclusion, while most old-earthers are bent on forcing a modern understanding of origins on both the ancient author and his audience, it’s helpful to find at least one old-earther honest enough to admit his unbelief rather than pretend the text says something never intended by its author, Moses. If only other old-earthers were as honest.

(Get my book here: https://www.amazon.com/Matter-ACTUAL-Days-Voices-Creation/dp/B0C8QXC5S6/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=1690810967&sr=8-1)

[1] James Barr, “Biblical Chronology: Legend Or Science?” University of Oxford The Ethel M. Wood Lecture Delivered at the Senate House, University of London on 4 March 1987, p. 5, https://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/emwl/chronology_barr.pdf.

[2] Mike Boling, James Barr’s personal letter dated April 23, 1984 November 10, 2016, Servants of Grace, November 10, 2016, Retrieved from https://servantsofgrace.org/category/theology-for-life/the-beginning-of-redemptive-history-through-the-lives-of-adam-and-eve/.