Monday: The Creation
Read Genesis 1:4, Genesis 1:10, Genesis 1:12, Genesis 1:18, Genesis 1:21, Genesis 1:25, Genesis 1:31, and Genesis 2:1-3. What is the significance of the refrain “it was good” in the first Creation account? What is the implied lesson contained in the conclusion of Creation (Genesis 2:1-3)?
At each step of the Creation account, God evaluates His work as tov, “good.” It is generally understood that this adjective means that God’s work of Creation was successful and that God’s observation that “it was good” means that “it worked.” The light was illuminating (Genesis 1:4). The plants were yielding fruit (Genesis 1:12) and so forth.
Image © Lars Justinen at Goodsalt.com
But this word referred to more than the efficiency of a function. The Hebrew word tov is also used in the Bible to express an esthetic appreciation of something beautiful (Genesis 24:16). It is also used in contrast to evil (Genesis 2:9), which is associated with death (Genesis 2:17).
The phrase “it was good” means that the creation was working nicely, that it was beautiful and perfect, and that there was no evil in it. The world was “not yet” like our world, affected by sin and death, an idea affirmed in the introduction to the second Creation account (see Genesis 2:5).
This description of the Creation radically contradicts the theories of evolution, which dogmatically declare that the world shaped itself progressively through a succession of accidental happenings, starting from an inferior condition to a superior one.
In contrast, the biblical author affirms that God intentionally and suddenly created the world (Genesis 1:1). There was nothing happenstance or chancy about any of it. The world did not come about by itself but only as the result of God’s will and word (Genesis 1:3). The verb bara’, “create,” translated in Genesis 1:1-31 as in the beginning God “created” the heavens and the earth, occurs only with God as its subject, and it denotes abruptness: God spoke, and it was so.
The Creation text informs us that “everything” had been done then (Genesis 1:31), and according to the Creator Himself, it was all judged “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Genesis 1:1 states the event itself, the creation of heaven and earth; and Genesis 2:1 declares that the event was finished. And it was all completed, including the Sabbath, in seven days.
| Why does the idea of billions of years of evolution completely nullify the Genesis Creation story? Why are the two views incompatible in every way? |
(22)
As most of you would know by now, I spend a lot of time doing bird photography. When I take photographs ob brightly coloured birds and put them up on Facebook pages frequented by Christians, I get a lot of comments about how wonderful God is, and so on. The truth is that while there are many beautiful birds there are also some very plain ones and some that are downright ugly. I took a nice clear photograph of a Black Bittern and my daughter's first comment was, "That is one butt ugly bird!"
The other thing that I am very much aware of is that birds are not very nice to one another. We have a tiny bird here called a Brown Gerygone (It is not pronounced how it looks) that builds a beautiful pear shaped nest with a little porch on the side and a little tail underneath. I have seen them build a nest from scratch - it takes about a week. And then along comes a Lewin's Honeyeater and pulls it to bits, stealing the materials for its own nest.
I know that we always dismiss the ugly and uncomfortable behaviour with the notion that it is the work of sin and evil. But, I think that dismissal is just a little too trite. the "good" thing is that God has created life with the ability to adapt and survive even in the presence of sin. The little Brown Gerygone survives the attacks of the Lewin's Honeyeaters to the extent that both species are relatively common on my bird-watching walks. And the "butt ugly" Bittern survives because it looks like a broken off piece of rotting branch.
Can I suggest that God's creation was good, not just because it was pretty, but that even in the presence of sin it was built for survival. God gave his creatures adaptability, right from the beginning. That is "tov".
Great photograph! Cute bird.
Without God as the Creator, there is no meaning to life. Atheists can make up meaning but that is all it is, a figment of the imagination in their own creative mind. As our knowledge of science (God’s blueprints) are better understood, it is Atheists who stand on science alone as the creator, that are on the run. The scientific discoveries in the last 100 years are consistent with a Creation event. Christians no longer need to fear Darwin’s nonsense.
When God evaluated His creative work as "good", was this just because God subjectively decided it was good or was God comparing it to some objective reference point? I agree with the lesson's suggestion that "tov" reflects the idea of being "successful". And successful conveys the idea of it being "right" - from which we get the concept "righteous" and "righteousness". Thus, both the process and outcome God's creative work was righteous - as it ought to be. Within scripture, from God's perspective just/justice and righteousness are one-in-the-same thing and refer to things being in the state of life and living that they 'ought to be'. Thus it could equally be said that God's creative work was objectively "just and true" (Revelation 15:3).
So what was the reference point? In John 10:10, Jesus stated that He, the Creator: (John 1:3) had come to restore/re-create "zoe" - life to the full or abundantly. Zoe conveys the idea of the quality of life that God Himself experiences. Thus, God successfully created a world where the quality of life for His Creation was every bit the same as His own quality of life - to the fullest extent possible. Although a created being is not actually able to share in the self-existent nature of the Creator, it is fair to say that God held nothing back from - or invested everything in - His creation. God beneficently shares everything possible - every good and perfect gift (James 1:17) - with His creation.
Could it be that God is more passionate about us than we have realised (Romans 8:32)?
Hello Phil – I always enjoy and appreciate the clear and concise line-up of your thoughts. In your last paragraph you speak to the ‘quality of life for His Creation to be every bit the same as His own quality of life – to the fullest extend possible.’
Yes, as you state – ‘God held nothing back from – or invested everything in – His creation’ - - - - - even the possibility for man, a mortal creature, to obtain everlasting life.
I believe that behind all efforts by our Creator Father to call us back to Life is His Love to see his faith-children enter the path of everlasting life, which I consider to represent the "fullest extend possible for life".
Could you as well consider this 'fullest extend' to mean everlasting life?
Yes, Brigitte. I would agree that the ultimate expression of the life to its fullest would be to experience that life and living without end - and therefore everlasting. I certainly believe God would like to dwell with us forever - and I would absolutely like to abide in His presence forever too.
God created plants and vegetation on the third day. If there was no sunlight for many years, all vegetation would have died|
Orley, that‘s a good question that has an answer in Genesis 1:3
„And God said let there be light“ without specifying which light it was, until verse 14: ( also read til verse 18) KJV
„And God said let their be lights in the firmament of heaven to divide the day from the night…“
It doesn‘t mention here a creation of the sun and the moon, which obviously were already created, but God placed them effectively to divide between day and night and to provide the right light at the right time.
For further information, all plants can survive without light for a period of 4- 10 days.
So we trust God the almighty with His amazing chronological plan of the whole creation.
I agree Amina, I found it interesting that Gen 1:4-5 explains that God divided the light from the darkness and he called the light "day" and darkess "night". God is light and I believe for the first 3 days He Himself provided or withdrew the light, until on the 4th day he installed the Sun and Moon to divide the light from the darkness for Him.
Right from Day 1, it is stated that the evening and morning were the definition of "the first Day" and it is repeated six times to make sure we understood that God created everything in six 'evenings & mornings'. Once God had finished creating everything and it has been clearly established the definition of "1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th Day" is evening & morning, it is only logical that when the author of Genesis states three times "on the seventh day" that we are to understand "7th day" as evening & morning.
Gen.1:16 says God MADE (Created) two great lights; the greater light to rule the day and the lesser light to rule the night.
By faith I believe that the LORD created the world from nothing.
For those who would like some supporting explanations of the visible realities go to this site:
Creation and Science
For me the DNA helix and the complicated way it replicates reaffirms my belief that life did not happen by chance but by design.
By faith I believe that the LORD created the world from Love.
The mechanics of the creation story are similar to those of other middle-eastern civilizations (Egyptian, Babylonian, etc), but God's clearly expressed fundamental underlying reason for creation is radically different than the rationale of other stories.
God framed his creation story to the Hebrews in the context of their culture, experience and understanding, but framed it in a radically different way. For this reason, I wonder how God would frame his creation story in the context of culture, experience and understanding of our current secular society. How would this affect our witness to this society?
Just wondering.
Richard, I agree that the LORD might frame the creation story differently, however I can't image how. I found this quote from EG White of how Jesus Christ framed the truth interesting, maybe we could learn from His way of capturing their attention.
Shirley, I appreciate your insight. We definitely need God's Spirit to tune our words to the hearts of those whom we serve in his cause. This would apply to those both in and outside the redeemed. I think we often forget that those who are closest to us need as gentle a touch (or more so) as those with whom we do daily business. We need to reach each person where they are, that by God's grace, they may be brought closer into his loving presence. This requires thoughtful and prayerful guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Thanks again.
Yes, we can learn from Jesus to adapt our witness to the needs of those with whom we are sharing.
At the same time, while dressed in different garments, the truth remains the same, whatever the circumstances or the audience. I do not believe that God "adapts" the basic facts of His creation to various cultures. He tells the truth, no matter when or with whom He interacts. It is up to us to decide whether we will accept God's telling of this earth's origins or the secular world's version of this earth's origins.
The seven-day week appears to be a continuing testimony to the length of the original creation week. I wonder, can anyone think of a biblical reason not to believe that God created life on this planet in six literal days?
As for science: Until the mid-19th Century the vast majority of scientists were agreed on accepting the biblical version of origins. They studied science to learn more of "the ways of God."
What might be the reasons that the Creator's adversary would want humanity *not* to accept the biblical account?
I've generally viewed the similarity of creation stories around the globe as evidence that there was an original true and factual story which were corrupted by humanity jut as there is one true God whose worship was corrupted by representations of various images worshiped by people who had lost sight of Him.
Of course, secular history sees the biblical creation account as "derived" from the Babylonian account, but I believe it is the other way around. After all, the god of this world wants to make sure that we, as humans, forget that we were created by a loving, self-sacrificing Creator God and he applies all his great intelligence to make sure that we forget.
Millions and millions of years for there to be first an ameoba like life form and then more millions and millions of years for this life form to evolve into an intelligent and evil being like man but no fossils to show the progression of this idea is just pure nonsense.
I fail to understand why we have to hear about the Hebrew intrepretation of the refrain, it is good. What does that mean to you and I as English speaking. It is good. I like to think it means, it is perfect, fitting God's charactor. Also, it works, is not my interpretation. I do believe He knew it would work before He created this world. I do believe we were not the first world to be created. Even if we were the 1st, He still would know it was going to work before He created.
Yes I to believe in the six day creation without time lapse, is how He did it. Since He spoke His creation into existence it makes sense that he would create in 24 hour intervals. After all He created the day and the night. "So the evening and the morning were the second day." Genesis 1:8. If there were time lapse how would He have created the week? Yes as we study the complexity of all He created each day, it is no wonder that God has the only creating ability.
God said it and I believe it and that's good enough for me. Yes He has supplied much evidence to substantiate our belief. We did not see Him create. We have faith that He did create the way scripture says. Faith is the substance of things not seen. So have faith.
John, I agree. I believe that in Genesis 1:1-2:14, we are introduced to the concept of God declaring physical things, animals and beings as "good", they are "good" by His definition.
Then in Genesis 2:15-17 the LORD introduces an additional moral aspect to good as opposed to evil, this I believe is defined by the law of His government and a choice to obey or disobey unlike the "laws of nature" which operate automatically. I believe the LORD is stating that He will put into effect the consequences of obeying or disobeying the laws of His government - either He will grant eternal life or He will cause the being to cease to exist, return to dust, no breathe of life.
If a Christian does not believe in the first two chapters of Genesis, how does he pick and choose what else he believes in the scriptures?
GOOD for purpose !
Even entropy (decay), was good for purpose.
Many seeds (to continue life) were readily available BEFORE the fall of Satan, Adam and Eve.
This creation was not intended to last forever. It was intended to be transformed.
Romans 8:20-23
24 hours are developed by Babylonians in about 300 AD. There is nothing called seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months, years in Moses' language and time when writing down this Genesis. Please someone help me on this.
Observation on the Genesis 1:14-19 account, shows Sun, Moon dividing of day and night on the fourth day, which suggests a time period of what we call now 24 hours. However day one through day three can not be measured as a 24 hour period since it did not exist as that.
I believe the best frame of reference to the creation with respect to our solar system is 7 CREATIVE DAYS of unknown duration.
Proof on this is that the Sabath day is not 24 hours in Genesis since Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath from his priesthood and kingship at his resurrection and into eternity !
These 7 creative days should not be a salvation issue based on 24 hours but praise and glory to almighty God and a rest in his eternal sabbath!
In Christ
🙏
Hi Larry,
Is it not a bit dicey to make suppositions of days of "unknown duration," when the Bible describes each creation day as "evening" followed by "morning"? To most readers, the language implies real days, and a real 24-hour day is embedded in the Ten Commandments as a memorial of that first Sabbath day. At best, we would be left with a God who asks His followers to keep a literal day as a memorial of a period of unknown duration. At the same time, we would be left completely in the dark as to how the 7-day week originated. There is no obvious 7-day pattern in nature, although scientists are beginning to discover 7-day cycles in some of God's creation.
I confess I'm a bit mystified by your "proof" that the Sabbath day is not 24 hours. After all, three of the Gospels record Jesus as announcing Himself to be "Lord of the Sabbath" on a literal 24-hour Sabbath day - before He died and was resurrected. (Matthew 12:1-8; Mark 2:27,28; Luke 6:1-5)
Hi Inge
So are you saying Jesus is *ONLY* Lord of the Sabbath for 24 hours every Saturday in the New heavens and New Earth and not eternally or every day currently as we enter his rest of salvation ?
And that he never did any miracles while on earth in the flesh on other days, that were not Saturday ?
Shalom 🙏
No, Larry, Jesus is Lord of time and space and the whole universe. But when He walked this earth, people did not recognize this.
It is always useful to consider the context when we consider the meaning of a Bible text. A couple of times Jesus is recorded as saying, "“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man is lord even of the Sabbath.” (Mark 2:27,28) To me it sounds as though Jesus is saying that, as He is Lord of humanity and the Sabbath was made for humanity, He is Lord also/even of the Sabbath. My point in mentioning these incidents was that Jesus was speaking of a real Sabbath day on a real Sabbath day before His death and resurrection.
The real sabbath day is eternal, you are looking at a type one day Saturday not the reality in God !
Genesis never says the Sabbath day had an evening and morning like the other days, meaning its etetnal!
Yes context is everything!
In Christ
Larry, we understand your point of view, and there are others that agree with you.
However there are also many that believe that"day-yom" with a number means a day like we experience it now.
To close this discussion I would recommend those who are interested read the article "Is the Seventh Day 24-Hours Long?" from Answers in Genesis.
Another thought ...
How can you pontifically say that day 1,2, and 3 were 24 hour days,
When the sun, moon and stars were introduced on the fourth creative day ? Genesis 1:14-19
🙏
My apologies, for coming across as "pontifically." That was not my intent.
I observed that the Bible speaks of each day of creation as consisting of evening (the dark part of the day) and morning (the light part of the day). That sounds like the same kind of day as today.
Also There was *NO* evening or Morning the 7th day ...aka not 24 hours
We can be living currently in the 7th Day rest of God in Christ !
🙏
Hi Robert, I assume you are responding to John Herscher's comment
Remember that biblical days are measured from sundown to sundown, as the Jews still do to this day. Thus, in the creation account, the evening is mentioned before the morning for each creation day.
It doesn't matter whether we divide the day into 6 portions, 10 portions or 24. The interval between sunset and sunset remains the same.
Today we are used to referring to the day as a 24-hour period, as John Herscher did. How that 24-hour division came about has no impact on the biblical creation account.
We assume that our “time” is simply the natural consequence of astronomy. However, God’s very first act suggests that He intended (from the beginning) for “time” and “day” itself to be intentional, fulfilling a divine purpose (not just an incidental astronomical phenomenon). Only later, on the 4th day, does God create the Sun, moon, and stars to “rule” over the time He had already created. The ordering of time (7 days) then was also an intentional act of Creation. With such an emphasis on “time”, it is no wonder that the climax of God’s creative action was the creation of the 7th day in which God (who required no “rest”) to apparently spend the entire period -- “the day” (Hebrew: bayyowm) -- demonstrating a new divine state of being, called ‘shabath’…that also functioned to mark the end of the ‘time’ He created.
Thank you, Jeff, for giving me something to think about ...
There are varied interpretations of whether or not each day spoken of is a literal day. Most Protestant religions interpret it this way. Jews however, use a pattern like the year/day biblical principle and interpret each day as an age, a period of time (See Dennis Prager’s “The Rational Bible:Genesis”, Commentary pgs 18-19). Just as today we use the colloquial phrase, “In our day and age”, ( a distinct period of time, absolutely not a single day) the Jews also interpret the texts in these passages of scripture as an age, a period of time. In the end I side with how Dennis wraps it up after he makes his point.
“I find those examples persuasive. But I do not ascribe great importance to this debate for another reason: What matters is not how long it took God to create the world; what matters is that God created it. What matters is that, if there were no God, there would be no world. All existence, not to mention all life, and intelligent life in particular, is a miracle. When I look at the world and recite the words of Ps 92:5 - ‘How great are your works, Lord, how profound your thoughts’- it does not occur to me to think how long it took God to make His great works. Genesis 1 teaches God created the world, not chance. That is what matters.”
Jim, if the days of creation were not six literal days, topped off with the seventh rest (shabat) day, how did we get our seven-day week?
While it is true that the prophetic year-day principle has its origins with the ancient Jews, I can't see that as meaning that every "day" mentioned in Scripture is meant to be a year. Rather, the context should give some indication that the "days" or "times" are not meant to be literal.
I cannot see a prophetic context in the first chapter of Genesis. To me, it reads like a very clear, condensed factual account of how God ordered this planet for life and then created living creatures to inhabit it. And our seven-day week continues to testify to length of each of those first seven days.
Absolutely brilliant ....
Very well put ...there is no evening and morning for the seventh day sabbath.
In other words, the sabbath day has been current since then and has not ended! Jesus is lord of the eternal Sabbath ...not 24 hours
Shalom 🙏
Hi Larry. Your reasoning simply isn't consistent with God's word. The problem with that reasoning is that the "six days shalt thou labor" would never again apply after the perpetual "eternal Sabbath" you speculate about.
The 7th day, like all before it had a beginning and an end (Exodus 20:8-11).
Hi Sieg
My reasoning is consistent with the holy Spirit, and following:
God's rest has been available since Genesis to now!
Shalom
Larry, it appears that you may be conflating the actual Sabbath (aka 'Rest') day with the Sabbath (aka 'Rest') that is to be found in the shelter of God's love. It's like confusing a flag with the country it symbolizes. (A poor analogy, but useful in some respects.) The existence of the country does not negate the existence of the flag. Neither does the reality of rest in God negate the existence of the seventh day rest aka Sabbath.
The Bible says that the Lord "shabbathed" (rested) on the seventh day. (Gen. 2:2) And the fourth Commandment calls God's followers to do likewise on the day He originally blessed at creation. (Ex. 20:9-11)
Hi Seig
There is no evening and morning mentioned in Genesis chapter 1 or 2 first the 7th Day ..
God in his timlessness has already finished his work. God's sabbath day in creation is not man's 24 hours !
Throughout scripture after Genesis God says "they will not enter not rest" because that's were a timeless God is currently.
Yes indeed Robert I do have an answer to your question. Now the Biblical time was simply dusk to dawn, was night, and dawn to dusk, was day. Genesis 1:5. Now interesting that is how we still keep the Sabbath. We are Genisis Sabbath keepers. Robert I am glad you pointed that out, that God did not create on a 24 hour basis, rather He created on a dawn to dawn basis.
Now that creates a problem for Alaskan Sabbath keepers. When during the summer you have very little dusk to dawn hours. And during the winter you have very little dawn to dusk hours. An Alaskan Sabbath keeper has two choices. Hallow the Sabbath dusk to dusk or from 7 pm to 7 pm. The 1st God would have less time in the summer but more time in the winter. Actually that happens in the lower 49 but to a lesser extent, for Genesis Sabbath keepers.
Also we must take into consideration the earth was different after the flood. There was no rain antideluvian, is just one example.
Over the course of six workdays, divinely spoken words resound in rhythmic and almost consistent fashion the making of a highly ordered universe.IT WORKS
Could somebody shed light on this ideology: Young earth v.s old earth.
Hi Simeon,
If we read the Genesis account as history, we have a "young earth" - probably less than 10,000 years old. Or, at least the life on this earth is less than 10,000 years old. (The matter of this earth - "without form and void" - could have been created earlier, or not.)
By contrast, according to current naturalistic science (without God), the earth is billions of years old, and it took a very long time for life to arise from nothing. In this scenario it seems that enough time makes all things possible.
I believe the earth is young. How about you?
Obviously, we are never going to get universal agreement on the young earth/old earth issue until we get to Heaven.
Gen 1:2 The Earth was formless and empty; darkness was over the surface, and God’s Spirit hovered over the surface of the waters.
It seems to be indicating here that the ‘core’ or the basic material of the earth was already in existence before God said, “Let there be light”?
Is this why Evolution can claim an old Earth? Can we agree with them on this point?
Yes, indeed, Anne. That's one possible resolution.
After reading all the comments and questions regarding a literal 7 day creation, with each day being a literal 24 hour period, I’m puzzled why anyone would question it. Not only is the Genesis account clear on what God did and how long it took Him, we can then read Exodus 20:8-11, where God spoke the words directly to Moses that “in six days The Lord made heaven and earth, the sea…”. Then it was repeated in Deuteronomy 5:12-15. Put these altogether, and it seems pretty important that we understand what God has told us through Moses.
We have an adversary that has and is doing everything in his power to undermine the word of God. Our only safety from being deceived is to trust in Gods word. He has given us everything we need, including a direct line of contact with Him, to understand His word and trust it.
Under this day's topic, there have been a number of comments suggesting that the length of Genesis "days" doesn't really matter, as long as we believe that "God created." In other words, it doesn't really matter whether the creation account it literal history or not.
On the surface it makes some sense. However, this belief does not stand alone. If the creation account is not to be read literally, then it seems there was no literal Adam and Eve created on the sixth day. And if that is true, there was no literal "fall" into sin, and you can see where this leads ...
People try to overcome these difficulties with sophisticated arguments, but what is the reason *not* to believe that Genesis is literal history? A major reason is probably that the current scientific paradigm does not allow for the actions of a Creator in this universe, and that paradigm has shaped society. Thus we are constantly bombarded by the "fact" of long eons of time that it took for this world to be populated by plants and animals. The fossils seem to buttress this view. But I encourage our readers to take another look to see if it requires blind faith to accept creation by divine fiat, as the Bible describes it.
You can find a very brief overview in the video, Is Genesis History as posted on our front page.