The Bible as a document was written in the Ancient imperial and patriarchal world. In this way, embedded patriarchy has shaped the way the biblical myths of origin have been interpreted for many centuries. The biblical myths of origin shaped the human understanding of the universe until the modern scientific period. In the past curiosity was satisfied with myths and it took a long time for myths to evolve into science. In this way, it took time for the Christian community to begin to understand that the narrative in Genesis 1-3 consists of myths. The Christian community believed that the Earth was created about 4000 BCE. However, scientists have now shown that the Earth is about four and a half billion years old (McIntyre and McKirdy 2012:
viii).
Until the dawn of modern science, the reading of the biblical myths of origin (Gen. 1-3) shaped people’s understanding of the Earth. It was believed that the earth was only 6000 years old. For example, In 1658 Archbishop James Ussher wrote: “In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth. Which the beginning of time fell upon the entrance of the night preceding the twenty-third day of Octob[er] in the year 4004”.
72 An ivory plaque dating back to the 9th century BCE found in the Louvre shows a single winged female cherub standing protectively next to a sacred tree. The Assyrian Ancient culture also depicts winged figures, both male and female guarding a sacred tree. See Graves and Patai (1964).
[167]
Ussher’s date was included in the English bible and was accepted as part of scripture (McIntyre and McKirdy 2012:4). This view came from a literal interpretation of Genesis 1-3 which was believed to be God’s own word and to question it was (and is still to some extent) believed to be heresy. Eusebius (c.260-340) and St. Jerome (c.340-420) also extended the chronology of human beings back to Adam. It was this Eusebius who sat at the right hand of Constantine and opened the council of Nicaea in 325.
The Christian date of creation also influenced the thinking of early scientists. Many scientists before modernity came from a theological background. For example, the scientist Johannes Kepler in 1619 wrote: “my book may wait 100 years for a reader, since God has waited 600 years for a witness” (McIntyre and McKirdy 2012:2). It was for this reason that Sir Isaac Newton’s final work, The Chronology of the Ancient kingdoms Amended (published posthumously) was an attempt to correct this wrong notion(McIntyre and McKirdy 2012:2). In his Principia, Newton estimated that a red-hot sphere of iron as big as the Earth would take 50,000 years to cool, but the result was ignored as inconsistent with scripture.
The influence of Christian belief on the creation of the world also perverted classical literature and popular culture. For example, in Shakespeare’s As you like it (1600), Rosalind exclaims:
“The poor world is almost six thousand years old”. Soil erosion and decay was seen as punishment for human sinfulness (Gen. 3). However, as already touched on, the eighteenth century enlightenment provided unequivocal evidence that the earth was far older than generally believed by the Christian community. They began to see the possibility of evolution, not only of the physical world, but also of living creatures. These scientific discoveries began to show that human beings live in a historical universe, one in which stars and galaxies as well as living creatures are born, mature, grow old and die. Because of scientific discoveries, the earlier contribution of the Greek historian and traveller Herodotus (c. 484-425 BC) was retrieved.
Herodotus, discovered that the sediments of the River Nile recorded past events and concluded that Egypt had formed from slowly accumulating river deposits. But the work was originally ignored (cf. McIntyre and McKirdy 2012:2).
[168]
In is clear from the foregoing that the Western missionaries who introduced Christianity in Africa in the 19th century were highly conditioned with the patriarchal and dualistic western ideologies (Kwok 1995: 30). For example, in Zambia the missionaries condemned cultural practices which were aimed at preserving the natural world. Sacred groves, territorial shrines and forests were seen as sources of evil (Machila 1990). Thus, the objects and natural phenomenon that were the fabric of the ecological wellbeing of the society, which were consistent with the Genesis account, were destroyed. Three elements of embedded patriarchy are therefore evident in the way the biblical myths of origin have been interpreted and appropriated in Africa and particularly among the Tonga people of Zambia. These elements of embedded patriarchy shape people’s perception of biodiversity.
First, a patriarchal view of the myths has constructed a God who is outside creation. Through a patriarchal interpretation of the myths of origin, as already shown, Christianity has introduced a cultural framework that is hierarchical (Nash 1989:91)73. This cultural framework places Yahweh (God) outside the natural world resulting in the desacralisation of the natural world.
Additionally, the notion of monotheism (“Yahweh alone”) has only served to justify a hierarchical worldview with God on top, followed by man while women and the natural world are pushed to the bottom of the pecking order. Human beings, particularly men are seen to have been given dominion to rule on earth (Gen. 3: 26-28). For this reason, western Christianity supported (and is still supporting) human exploitation of the natural world. The exploitation of the natural world is contrary to the tenets of an African worldview. In Africa, God is believed to be present in the natural world (Mununguri 1997:26). However, a patriarchal view of the biblical myths of origin has consolidated ideologies that have pushed God outside the earth so as to use the natural world as a resource for profit. MacCulloch (2009:2) is then right to argue that
73African male theologians consolidated the notion of a transcendent God. John Mbiti suggests that in Africa God is up above everything. This view, can be construed to mean that in African consciousness, there is a geographical gap between the world of God and the world of humans. This contrary to the African worldview where the natural world is considered to be sacred and an abode of God. See Mbiti (1970b:13), Schofeeleer (1979), Kaunda (2011).
[169]
Christianity’s anthropocentrism, dualism74 and hierarchical worldview lie at the root of the ecological crisis and leaves nature as “other”.
Second, a patriarchal view of the myths has constructed a cultural framework of imperial domination. Based on myths of origin (Gen. 1:26-28), human beings see themselves as nature’s absolute master for whom everything that exists was designed. As a result, they exploit animals and other earth’s resources. As Vail (1997:129-155) indicates, the theory of western civilization and commerce was conditioned by embedded patriarchy and undermined the balanced relationship between humans and nonhuman forms of life in indigenous African cultures.
Admittedly, the negative impact of the theory of commerce and civilisation are being felt by poor nations like Zambia. Adams (2003:23) observe:
The acquisition of colonies [in Africa] was accompanied by, and to a large extent enabled by a profound belief in the possibility of restructuring nature and re-ordering it to serve human needs and desires.
The principle of western civilisation and commerce was supported by the biblical notion of dominion and nature and came to be defined as absence of European human impact. It is also worth noting that Christianity emerged from a two-fold ancestry of imperial powers: Judaism and the Greco-Roman worldview (MacCulloch (2009:2). Christians have therefore, used the myths of origin to consolidate the notion that women and the natural are secular (non-sacred) and men are associated with the sacred. In this way women and the natural world are dominated and exploited.
Third, a patriarchal view of the myths of origin (Gen. 3) reinforce the view that the earth and the natural world are destined for destruction. As Boff (1997:78) has observed, the notion that nature and the earth have fallen due to human sin has anti-ecological bias and foster a view that the
74Dualism is the doctrine that the world or reality is divided into two opposite principles: soul-body, spiritual-secular and mind-matter. It holds that the spiritual realm is more superior to the physical world.Thus, instead of engaging with contemporary issues such as the ecological crisis, Christians distance themselves from the affairs that affect the earth. The origin of Greek dualism is found in the ideas of the ancient Greek philosopher, Plato (428-348 BC). See MacCulloch 2009:2,
[170]
earth is a wicked place from which Christians will be rescued. This view promotes escapism75 and the earth is seen as a temporary habitation that will be destroyed in a near future (Orr 2005:
291, Dyer 2002:45-49). It can be argued therefore that lack of care for the forests, soils, wildlife, air, water, seas and climate is entrenched in the view that the earth is not a permanent home due to human sin.