Who Should Explain Genesis?
How the Bible Reads the Bible
How Should Christians Read the Bible’s Foundational Story?
Genesis 1–3 stands at the foundation of the entire biblical story. It introduces creation, humanity, marriage, sin, judgment, redemption, and hope. Throughout the rest of Scripture, Jesus and the inspired biblical authors repeatedly return to these foundational chapters, explaining, developing, and applying their theology in the light of God’s unfolding revelation.
Unsurprisingly, Genesis has also become one of the most debated sections of Scripture.
Across the centuries, countless interpreters have approached these chapters with different questions and different assumptions. Historians ask historical questions. Linguists examine Hebrew grammar. Archaeologists explore the ancient world. Theologians construct doctrinal systems. Modern readers often ask questions about gender, psychology, authority, identity, or social relationships.
Many of these questions are worthwhile.
But before asking what Genesis teaches, Christians should first ask a more fundamental question:
How should Genesis be interpreted?
This article argues that the answer is found by learning how the Bible itself reads earlier Scripture. Throughout the canon, Jesus and the inspired biblical authors repeatedly return to Genesis, not to replace it, but to explain, develop, and apply its theology. The Bible therefore provides its own model for interpreting Genesis.
Rather than beginning with competing theological systems or modern interpretive methods, Christians should first learn to read Genesis as the Bible itself reads Genesis.
Every Interpreter Asks Questions
No one comes to Genesis without questions.
Some ask:
- How was the world created?
- What does Genesis teach about men and women?
- What is the nature of sin?
- How should marriage function?
- What does this reveal about human identity?
Others ask:
- What did the original Hebrew mean?
- How would the first readers have understood these chapters?
- How do later biblical writers understand and use Genesis?
None of these questions is illegitimate.
But our questions influence the evidence we notice and the conclusions we reach.
One of the most important lessons of biblical interpretation is this:
The questions we ask often shape the answers we find.
Good interpretation therefore begins by asking whether we are allowing Scripture itself to determine not only our answers, but even the questions we bring to the text.
Tools and Authorities
Christians have many valuable tools available for understanding Scripture.
These include:
- Hebrew grammar
- textual criticism
- literary analysis
- archaeology
- ancient Near Eastern studies
- church history
- theology
- lexicons
- historical context
Each of these contributes something important.
But tools are not the same as authorities.
Grammar helps us understand what the text says.
History helps us understand the world in which it was written.
Lexicons help us understand words.
Archaeology helps us understand historical setting.
Church history reminds us that Christians have wrestled with these questions for centuries.
Theology helps us draw together the teaching of Scripture.
These disciplines are invaluable servants.
They are not the Bible’s primary interpreters.
They serve Scripture.
They do not govern Scripture.
The Order of Interpretation
Every interpreter operates with an order of authority, whether consciously or unconsciously.
For Christians, that order might be expressed like this:
- The biblical text itself.
- Scripture interpreting Scripture.
- Literary and historical context.
- The witness of the Church throughout history.
- Modern scholarship and contemporary discussion.
Each level has genuine value.
But each should remain in its proper place.
When later authorities become the primary lens through which Scripture is read, interpretation can gradually move away from the biblical text itself.
The crucial question therefore is not whether these disciplines are valuable—they unquestionably are—but whether they are allowed to replace the Bible’s own interpretive priorities.
The remainder of this study argues that the Bible itself models the order in which Christians should approach Genesis. Throughout the New Testament, Jesus and the apostles repeatedly return to Genesis and other Old Testament Scriptures, explaining, developing, and applying them in the light of God’s unfolding revelation. Before constructing theological systems or appealing to external authorities, Christians should first observe how the Bible itself reads earlier Scripture. In doing so, we learn not only what Genesis says, but how God progressively unfolds its meaning through his inspired authors.
How the Bible Reads the Bible
One of the distinctive features of the Bible is that it continually returns to its own earlier writings.
This is far more than an occasional quotation or illustration. As God’s revelation progressively unfolds, later inspired authors repeatedly return to earlier Scripture, explaining it, developing it, and applying it in the light of what God has now made known.
This pattern is woven throughout the whole canon.
Rather than treating earlier Scripture as complete and self-contained, later revelation often invites God’s people to return to it with fresh understanding.
The Bible therefore does more than teach the principle that Scripture interprets Scripture.
It demonstrates how Scripture interprets Scripture.
Jesus
Jesus repeatedly caused his hearers to revisit the Old Testament.
In the Sermon on the Mount, he exposed misunderstandings of God’s law and revealed its true intention.
When questioned about divorce, he did not begin with the concession given through Moses but directed his hearers back to the creation accounts in Genesis, saying, “from the beginning it was not so.” Rather than allowing later concessions to control interpretation, Jesus returned to God’s original creational purpose.
After his resurrection, Jesus explained to the disciples “in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself.” Later that same day, he “opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.”
The Scriptures themselves had not changed.
Their understanding of them had.
Jesus repeatedly invited his followers to return to earlier revelation and read it again in the light of God’s unfolding purposes.
Peter
Peter follows the same pattern.
On the day of Pentecost, he returned to the prophet Joel and explained how Joel’s prophecy was being fulfilled through the outpouring of the Holy Spirit.
Later in the same sermon, he reread Psalm 16 in the light of Christ’s resurrection and Psalm 110 in the light of Christ’s exaltation to the Father’s right hand.
Peter did not discard these Old Testament passages.
He showed their fuller significance as God’s redemptive plan unfolded.
Stephen
Stephen likewise retold Israel’s history before the Sanhedrin.
Beginning with Abraham and continuing through Joseph, Moses, the wilderness generation, and the temple, he invited his hearers to reread Israel’s history in the light of God’s continuing purposes.
The historical events had not changed.
But Stephen showed how those events anticipated Israel’s repeated rejection of the very deliverers God had sent, culminating in the rejection of Christ himself.
Israel’s history was not abandoned.
It was reread in the light of God’s completed revelation in Christ.
Hebrews
The Epistle to the Hebrews provides one of the clearest examples of this biblical pattern.
The author repeatedly returns to the Old Testament.
The tabernacle.
The priesthood.
The sacrificial system.
Melchizedek.
The new covenant.
Psalm 110.
Each is reread in the light of the person and work of Christ.
Earlier revelation is not dismissed as incomplete or mistaken.
Rather, its theological significance becomes clearer as God’s purposes reach their fulfilment.
Indeed, the entire argument of Hebrews depends upon rereading the Old Testament through the revelation of Christ.
Paul
Paul follows exactly the same pattern.
He repeatedly returns to Genesis and other foundational Old Testament passages, not merely to quote them, but to explain, develop, and apply their theological significance.
In Romans he rereads Abraham as the father of all who believe.
In Galatians he develops the promises made to Abraham, interpreting them in the light of Christ and the gospel. He even explains the significance of Abraham’s “offspring” and later rereads the account of Sarah and Hagar to illuminate the relationship between the old and new covenants.
In Romans 5 he rereads Adam as the representative through whom sin and death entered the world, contrasting him with Christ, the last Adam, through whom righteousness and life come to humanity.
In Romans 1 Paul develops the theology of humanity’s rebellion that begins in Genesis 3. Humanity exchanges the glory of God, rejects the Creator, worships the creature, and experiences God’s judgment. Christians do not normally regard this as a merely illustrative use of Genesis. Rather, Paul is understood to be explaining the enduring theological significance of humanity’s first rebellion.
In 1 Corinthians 10 Paul rereads the Exodus generation as a warning to the church, showing that Israel’s history continues to instruct God’s people.
In Ephesians 5 Paul returns to Genesis 2 when explaining marriage and the relationship between Christ and the church.
In both 1 Corinthians 11 and 1 Timothy 2 he again returns to Genesis 2, repeatedly grounding his teaching about men and women in the order and relationships established in creation.
Throughout his letters Paul consistently treats Genesis not as a collection of ancient stories but as the theological foundation upon which he builds his teaching.
A Consistent Biblical Pattern
These examples reveal a consistent pattern throughout Scripture.
Earlier revelation is not discarded.
Nor is it replaced.
It is reread in the light of later inspired revelation.
This observation has important implications for Christian interpretation.
When Jesus, Peter, Stephen, the author of Hebrews, and Paul repeatedly return to earlier Scripture, they are not simply quoting familiar texts. They are showing God’s people how those Scriptures should be understood within the unfolding story of redemption.
This is not merely a theological principle.
It is the Bible’s own interpretive method.
Accordingly, Christians should not hesitate to revisit their understanding of Genesis when confronted by the inspired interpretations found elsewhere in Scripture.
Indeed, this is precisely what the Bible repeatedly invites its readers to do.
When our understanding of Genesis differs from the way later inspired authors understand and apply Genesis, our first response should not be to explain their interpretation away.
Rather, we should return to Genesis itself and ask whether our own reading of Moses needs to be reconsidered.
Later inspired revelation does not replace earlier revelation.
It often leads us back to it with deeper understanding.
The Bible therefore teaches us how to read Genesis by showing us how Jesus and the inspired biblical authors themselves read and apply Genesis.
The Canon Before Systems
Every theological tradition approaches Genesis with certain emphases.
Some focus upon covenant.
Others emphasise creation.
Others authority.
Others equality.
Others redemption.
Others the social or political implications of biblical teaching.
Each of these may contribute genuine insights.
Yet every theological system also brings with it assumptions about what Genesis ought to mean.
The danger is not that theology exists.
The danger is allowing theology to determine the meaning of Genesis before Genesis has been allowed to speak for itself.
The Bible models a different approach.
Moses is first allowed to tell his own story.
Later inspired authors then return to Genesis, explaining, developing, and applying its theology as God’s revelation unfolds.
Only after this biblical conversation has been heard should Christians seek to formulate theological systems.
Theological systems should arise from Scripture.
They should not become the framework into which Scripture is made to fit.
Reading Genesis Canonically
Reading Genesis canonically means more than recognising that later biblical books occasionally quote Genesis.
It means recognising that the canon itself progressively unfolds the theological significance of Genesis.
Creation.
Humanity.
Marriage.
Sin.
Promise.
Redemption.
New creation.
Each of these themes begins in Genesis.
Each develops throughout the unfolding story of Scripture.
Genesis therefore functions not simply as the Bible’s beginning but as the foundation upon which the rest of Scripture continually builds.
A canonical reading therefore asks more than,
“What does Genesis say?”
It also asks,
“How does the rest of Scripture understand Genesis?”
For Christians, that question is not optional.
Christians read Genesis as part of the whole Christian canon, not as an isolated document. The meaning of Genesis is progressively unfolded by Jesus and the inspired biblical authors as God’s revelation reaches its fulfilment.
That question becomes especially important whenever later inspired authors repeatedly return to the same passages of Genesis.
Who Explains Genesis?
The previous section has shown that Jesus and the inspired biblical authors repeatedly return to Genesis, explaining and applying its theology within God’s unfolding revelation.
This naturally raises an important methodological question.
Who should explain Genesis?
One possibility is for every interpreter to construct an independent understanding of Genesis and then compare that understanding with the rest of Scripture.
Another is to allow the later inspired authors themselves to explain how they understand Genesis.
The Genesis2Paul project argues that the second approach should receive interpretive priority.
Genesis should first be understood through Moses’ own literary argument.
Paul should first be understood through Paul’s own literary argument.
Only then should we ask how Paul himself understands and applies Genesis.
This distinction is crucial.
The question is not simply,
“What do I think Genesis means?”
It is also,
“How do Jesus and the inspired biblical authors understand Genesis?”
When Jesus returns to Genesis to explain marriage, Christians rightly pay careful attention.
When Paul repeatedly returns to Abraham, Adam, the Fall, the Exodus, and Genesis 2, Christians likewise recognise that he is not merely quoting familiar stories but explaining their theological significance.
Throughout the New Testament, believers gladly accept Paul’s inspired interpretation of Abraham in Galatians, Adam in Romans, humanity’s rebellion in Romans 1, and the Exodus generation in 1 Corinthians 10.
The methodological question is therefore not whether Paul may interpret Genesis.
He clearly does.
The question is whether we are willing to allow the inspired interpretation of Genesis given by Jesus and the apostles to challenge our own understanding of Genesis wherever they appeal to it.
To read Genesis without allowing Jesus and the inspired apostles to explain and apply it is to read Genesis as though the New Testament had never been written.
Christians therefore read Genesis as part of the whole Christian canon. They read Genesis not as though they possess only Genesis, but as members of the new covenant who possess the completed Scriptures.
This is not because Jesus and the apostles replace Moses.
It is because they are God’s inspired interpreters of Moses.
If an apparent tension exists between our understanding of Genesis and the understanding of Genesis given by Jesus and the inspired apostles, our first response should not be to explain their interpretation away.
Rather, we should return to Genesis itself and ask whether we have understood Moses correctly.
The interpreter is therefore not the bridge between Moses and Paul.
The inspired biblical authors themselves provide that bridge.
Our task is first to understand Moses.
Then to understand the later inspired authors on their own terms.
Then to understand how they themselves develop Moses within God’s unfolding revelation.
Only after all the inspired authors have been fully heard should we seek to synthesise their teaching.
Humility Before the Text
Good interpretation requires humility.
No individual scholar, denomination, theological tradition, or contemporary movement has exhausted the meaning of Genesis.
Christians should therefore welcome insights from many disciplines while continually returning to Scripture itself.
Humility also means being willing to revisit our own conclusions.
Throughout Scripture, later inspired revelation repeatedly leads God’s people back to earlier revelation with deeper understanding.
The same attitude should characterise Christian interpretation today.
When the understanding of Genesis given by Jesus and the inspired apostles challenges our own, humility does not immediately seek to explain their interpretation away.
Instead, it willingly returns to Genesis and asks whether Moses has been understood correctly.
Scholarship remains an invaluable servant.
Theological systems remain valuable summaries.
Historical investigation continues to enrich our understanding.
But all of these serve Scripture best when they encourage us to return again and again to the biblical text itself.
The goal of Christian interpretation is therefore not simply to read Genesis faithfully, but to read Genesis as Jesus and the inspired biblical authors teach Christians to read it.
Continue Exploring
This study has argued that Christians should read Genesis within the whole Christian canon, allowing Jesus and the inspired biblical authors to explain, develop, and apply its theology.
But why should the teaching of the apostles be received as Christ’s authoritative interpretation of Scripture?
Why the Ascended Christ Continued to Teach His Church Through His Apostles
The next study begins with Jesus Himself and asks how the ascended Christ continued His teaching ministry through the apostles He appointed and empowered by the Holy Spirit.ible itself to explain Genesis, how should they approach Paul’s own writings? Should Paul’s letters first be understood through his own arguments before later theological systems are imposed upon them? .Explore this study →