Light before sun? Explanation 1: Metaphor

14And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky  . . . . 19and there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.  Genesis 1:14, 19  NIV

One of the explanations of the sun’s creation on day 4 is that the whole creation story, as well as most if not all of the Bible, is metaphor—to be read and interpreted as literature not as history.  A lot of people believe this; a lot of others take issue with it.  Once again I turn to Lennox.

Of course the Bible is full of metaphor, he says.  When Jesus says, “I am the door,” does he mean a literal wooden or metal door?  Of course not.  He is using a metaphor.  But he uses it to represent an actual spiritual reality.

Look at Psalm 104 for another example.

1  Praise the LORD, my soul.  . . . .

2  The Lord wraps himself in light as with a garment:

     He stretches out the heavens like a tent

     And lays the beams of his upper chambers on their waters . . . .

5  He set the earth on its foundations;

    It can never be moved.

If we had been considering creation in the 17^th century, the question at hand would be whether or not the earth was fixed and immovable as the Bible says, or rotating around the sun as scientist Galileo was claiming.

Nowadays Christians who believe the Bible also have come to believe that the earth is rotating.  How can this be?  Although this verse can be interpreted to mean the earth is not moving at all, explains Lennox, it doesn’t have to be interpreted that way.  There is room for metaphor.  In the same way that Jesus represents the door to relationship with the Father, the earth represented as stable in its situation.

Light before sun? Huh?

14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. Genesis 1.14-15 NIV

Here is a long-standing question for Bible students:  light on day 1; sun not until day 4. What's up with this?  It's not a modern question.  Origen, who lived in the second century, asked:  "If the sun is not yet there, how are we to understand the first three days with their 'evenings and mornings'?"  Good question!  Furthermore there's the issue of plants.  How could the plants created on day 3 have flourished with no sun until day 4?

Here are some of the basic ideas.

~The Genesis 1 creation story is to be taken metaphorically, not literally.

~This telling of the events of day 4 is to be taken functionally, not materially.

~The sun, created on day 1, was hidden from view on earth by a vapor cloud until day 4.

~Light was indeed created before the sun.  God is light and doesn't need the sun, but the sun serves a purpose for humans.

Much could be said about each of these interpretations.  And I intend to give a brief look at them in the next few days . . . after I figure out how to consolidate this wealth of opinions.

Personal note

I've been away from the blog for about a week for two reasons.  We have had a bunch of family events and company, and I'm trying to figure out what to say about the perplexities of Day 4 in Genesis 1.  

In other news, thanks again to Daughter Ellen for the layout revision.

We added a link in case anyone is interested in receiving email notice of these posts.

Lennox on Metaphor

Genesis Files: The Meaning and Purpose of Creation | Faith & Science | John Lennox, PhD

This weekend I'd like to recommend this video lecture by John Lennox, mathematics professor at Oxford. It's an hour long, but I doubt you'll be bored. Listen while you file your nails or wax the dog.



Happy Easter to all!

After its kind???

12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day. Genesis 1.12-13 NIV

Long, long ago I listened to cassette tapes of John Whitcomb, well known defender of creationism and in fact known as one of the fathers of that movement. Whitcomb made a big point of everything being made after its own kind. In fact, this phrase "after its kind," or "according to their kinds" appears in Genesis 1 ten times. It seems the author wants his readers to get this.

It does indeed look like an argument for the Bible teaching fixity of the species. A simple dictionary definition of species is animals, plants, organisms which can potentially interbreed and produce fertile offspring. However, there are questions about the outworking of this as new information comes to light, particularly now in the area of genetics. Sometimes scientists disagree; sometimes things are reclassified.

Blue Letter Bible guy Don Stewart points out verses in Leviticus 11 which also use "after its kind," and which show, he says, that the Hebrew word for kind is not limited to species.

It can get confusing. But this is obvious: although hound dogs can be bred into dachshunds for specifically hunting badgers, a hound dog cannot be bred into a goat.

LIFE!

11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation . . . . Genesis 1.11-12 NIV

The first observation that jumps out here on day 3 is that we have not one but two instances of "And God said." More on this later.

Another big observation here is that God doesn't, as we might expect, say "let there be vegetation," but "let the land produce vegetation." The New American Standard translates it, "Let the earth sprout vegetation," and the Voice says, "Earth, sprout green vegetation!" It sounds like the potential for the plants was already in the earth, awaiting God's word to burst forth. It's interesting, isn't it?

This is a huge leap forward. Up to now, the story has involved inanimate elements, air, water, ground. But with vegetation there is life! Here in Genesis 1.11 (hmmm), God by his word--somehow with the agency of the earth--creates life.

Making Mountains

9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good. Genesis 1.9-10 NIV

The earth created in verse 1 is covered with dark water we are told in verse 2. Add light in verse 3, and then in verse 6 add what is variously translated space, an expanse, sky or air. That's where we are here in verse 9. There are periods of light and there is space between the waters, but we still have a planet covered with water. Then God calls the waters into one place so the dry land can appear.

Of course we know that water will naturally lay itself out flat in the lowest place possible, so why wasn't the water already gathered? Given that gravity is foundational to creation, to physics, planet formation, this surely wasn't God calling the water down from being heaped over mountain tops. A reasonable explanation is that the great plates of the earth's crust move; the sea floor sinks as mountains rise up and volcanoes spew.

Voilà! Dry land.

Ancient Cosmology

6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. Genesis 1.6-8 NIV

At one time everyone knew the earth was flat. This was obvious from observation, the basis of knowledge in the ancient world. A literal read of Genesis 1 reveals the same cosmology as seen in the rest of the Ancient Near East: flat earth (supported on pillars), surrounded by primeval waters above, below, and all around, held back from deluging human living space by the solid dome of the sky.

Although the author of Genesis has an understanding of the physical properties of the earth common to cultures of his time, clearly his picture of the world's creator is outstandingly different. This passage does not teach science; it has no goal of correcting the view of the day. (What a different book we would have if God had said: no, guys, you've got it all wrong about the earth. It's round and it rotates.) But that is not the purpose. The purpose is to show our all-powerful God preparing a habitat for humans made in his image.


PS A Google search easily finds the website of today's Flat Earth Society. "This site is not a joke," says their Q & A page.

Translation Tangles

And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day. Genesis 1.6-8 NIV

We can get into sticky issues with regard to how words, phrases, sentences, meaning (!) hold up through translation. Here is how some of the main translations present Genesis 1.8.

New International Version, NIV God called the vault "sky."
New Living Translation God called the space "sky."
English Standard Bible And God called the expanse Heaven.
New American Standard Bible God called the expanse heaven.
King James Bible And God calleth the firmament Heaven.
Revised Standard Versions And God called the firmament Heaven.
International Standard Version God called the canopy "sky."
God's Word Transltn God named [what was above] the horizon [sky].
Jubilee Bible 2000 And God called the firmament Heavens.
Amplified God called the expanse [of sky] heaven.
Darby Bible Translation And God called the expanse Heavens.
Expanded Bible God named the air "sky."
World English Bible God called the expanse "sky."
Young's Literal And God calleth to the expanse Heavens;'
Complete Jewish Bible and God called the dome sky.
Jewish Study Bible, 1985 JPS edition God called the expanse Sky.
Masoretic Text, MT* And God called the firmament Heaven.
*authoritative Hebrew & Aramaic text of the Tanakh for Rabbinic Judiasm

Unfortunately, ancient writers and copiers didn't leave us a dictionary relating their vocabulary to that of twenty-first century American English. At any rate, I'm told the common Hebrew interpretation for what God creates here in verse 8, raqiya, means actually a firm, solid, dome, like an inverted bowl made of hammered out metal. More on this next time.

Why evening and morning, not morning and evening?

And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. Genesis 1.5b NIV

Ever wonder why the evening is stated before the morning? Normally we'd say we work from morning to evening, right? Was God doing these things at night?

All I can figure is that it was dark when he started--before the light was born. As that was the original condition, it gets first billing. Or maybe it's because God reckons the same as his chosen people, the Jews.

Why doesn't God call light light?

God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” Genesis 1.5 NIV

John Walton, Professor of Old Testament at Wheaton College, asks the following burning question about verse 5:
Why does God call the light day? Why doesn't he simply call it light? Hmmm.

Walton, like Lennox, points out that in this verse, light--as called day--is contrasted with night and thus represents a period of time. God called the period of light day. That makes sense.

Extending the logic back through verses 4 and 3 gives the reading, "God said let there be a period of light," and it was so. "We must inevitably consider day one," says Walton in chapter 5 of The Lost World of Genesis One, "as describing the creation of time." Oh! "The basis for time is the invariable alteration between periods of light and periods of darkness. This is a creative act, but it is creation in a functional sense, not a material one."

More explanation on this model is yet to come.

How long is a day? Well, . . . which kind of day?

God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day. Genesis 1.5 NIV

Mathematician John Lennox points out that the word day is used in several different ways in Genesis 1 and 2.

Here, since it is contrasted with night, it means a 12-hour day, the period of daylight.

The second use of day, in this same verse, includes evening and morning and so of course would mean a 24-hour day.

Jump ahead to Genesis 2.2. After the six-time repetition of "and there was evening, and there was morning--the ___day," we come to the seventh day and see this phrase is missing. On this day, creation activity has stopped and God begins his reign over all that he has made. There's no end to this day of God's ceasing to create and beginning to rest (or rule clarifies John Walton). It is on-going until now. Lennox says, ". . . we are still today in God's Sabbath rest." So the seventh day in this case is what St. Augustine looked at as "an epoch that extends onward into eternity."

Finally, consider Genesis 2.4. Although the NIV uses when, other translations more accurately translate that Hebrew as "in the day that." NASB, AMP, ESV, and Young's Literal all say, "in the day that" the Lord God made the earth and the heavens . . . . In this case, it's like saying, "In my day, we did it this way." It means an era of time.

Thanks to John Lennox (7 Days That Divide the World) for these examples.

Again something to think about as we consider how to read the Bible.

Light splashed through darkness or . . .?

God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. Genesis 1.4 NIV

God does a lot of separating in Genesis 1, a lot of organizing, ordering.
In verse 2 there is only darkness over the primeval water.

Then--POW!--God creates light!

But it's not yet separated from the dark. What does that look like? Could the light have been splashed through the darkness? Imagine floating along in the dark when suddenly you hit a patch light! After further bobbing, you're back again in utter darkness. Grope about and, ah!, there's the light again. Or perhaps the light and dark were mixed into an eerie half-light. What could it have been like before these two were definitively separated? We can only imagine.

And Light Is

And God saith, `Let light be;' and light is.
Genesis 1.3 Young’s Literal Translation

Wow! I like this translation.

Early Genesis is not the only ancient creation story. As discovered in the mid 1800s, other cultures of the Ancient Near East had their own renditions of how our world came to be, the Egyptians, Sumerians, and most notably the Babylonians with their Enuma Elish. Because of fascinating similarities with Genesis 1, when Enuma Elish first came to light, theories abounded that the biblical author had copied from or was at least influenced by it and the other stories from older traditions.

More recently scholarship has focused on the remarkable differences. The Hebrew story breaks radically from the understanding of other cultures. In Enuma Elish there are many gods, and the world is formed as a direct result of their conflict with each other. In Genesis, there is one God. No conflict. His power is such that he can create light with only is word. Let there be light and light is. So be it!

If you’d like further reading on the similarities and differences between Genesis 1 and Enuma Elish, see this article by Peter Enns.
http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/genesis-1-and-a-babylonian-creation-story

Sources

It's time for a disclaimer. I make no assertion of any expertise whatsoever on the topic of early Genesis and the origins of the universe, origins of our world, origins of life, origins of humanity. I am not a primary source. But I have become interested in the topic and been reading and listening to those who do have some expertise, both scientists and Bible scholars and some who are both. Of course, there is no consensus.

Beloved author, lecturer, church watcher and founding author of the religion department at Publishers Weekly, Phyllis Tickle says, quite seriously, that one shouldn't go into the pastorate today without having a degree in physics.

Here are some of the things I've been reading.

By John C Lennox, Professor of Mathmatics at Oxford: Seven Days that Divide the World, lectures on the internet
By John H Walton, OT scholar at Wheaton: The Lost World of Scripture, The Lost World of Genesis One, lectures on the internet, lecture in Urbana
By Robin A. Parry: The Biblical Cosmos: A Pilgrims Guide to the Weird and Wonderful World of the Bible
By Henri Blocher, Professor of Theology at Faculte Libre de Theologie Evangelique, France: In the Beginning: The Opening Chapters of Genesis
By Francis S. Collins, geneticist and head of the Human Genome Protect: The Language of God
By Johnny Miler, professor emeritus at Columbia International University, and John Soden, author: In the Beginning. . . We Misunderstood
By Christine Hayes, Professor of Religious Studies, Yale: Introduction to the Old Testament, online Open Yale course
By Bruce Fouke, Professor in Geology, Microbiology, and the Carl R. Woese Institute for Genomic Biology, at UIUC: The Emergence of Life--Osher Lifelong Learning course
By Peter Enns, Professor of Biblical Studies at Eastern University: The Bible Tells Me So
The Jewish Study Bible

Brooding God

and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. NIV

What a fascinating picture: dark mysterious waters covering our planet and the Spirit of God hovering over them. Some translations say brooding, fluttering, moving.

The Message translates it this way:

Earth was a soup of nothingness, a bottomless emptiness, an inky blackness. God’s Spirit brooded like a bird above the watery abyss.

I wonder if God was seeing everything that would come from this watery abyss if he invested in taming it: first the disobedience, then the subsequent suffering, loss, hunger, betrayal, addiction, disease, greed, despair, fear, war. Could he see all that as he brooded over the waters? If so, he must have been able to see the love, companionship, sacrifice, giving, poetry, joy, and beauty as well. Apparently he decided making our world was worth the cost.

tohu wabohu

The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep. . . . NIV

Traditionally translated formless and void, the Hebrew is tohu wabohu. Some scholars further interpret the meaning as hostile to habitation. Wheaton College text professor John Walton emphasizes that it’s non-functional. The earth is here, but covered with primeval waters it serves no purpose. Other creation stories from the Ancient Near East also begin with these dark waters. They are the non-functional chaos out of which God will bring order and set up a habitation for the creatures soon to be made in his image.

How old is the earth?

Genesis 1

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Genesis 1.1 NIV

Although long familiar with this profound assertion, I am recently reading it with new attention and awareness. For one thing, I had assumed it was part of the first day of the six days of creation. Not so, points out Oxford mathematics professor John Lennox. His evidence from the text: a careful look at Genesis 1 noting the chapter divisions into six days all of which begin with “And God said;” all of which end with “And there was evening, and there was morning—the [first/second/third/fourth/fifth/sixth] day.” NIV These repetitive patterns are not uncommon in Hebrew.

Observe that the “And God said” for day one begins in verse 3, not verse 1. This puts verse 1, God’s creation of the heavens and the earth, outside of the six days of creation week—previous to those days. It could have been immediately before; it could have been eons before, maybe even 4,500,000,000 years, or more, before. Thus, says Lennox, the Bible makes no claim as to the age of the earth. Very interesting.

Oops. Out of Order with Genesis 4

NIV Gen 4.1 - 6

Adam made love to (1984 lay with, KJV knew) his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. She said, “With the help of the LORD I have brought forth a man.” 2 Later she gave birth to his brother Abel.
Now Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. 3 In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. 4 And Abel also brought an offering—fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering,5 but on Cain and his offering he did not look with favor. So Cain was very angry, and his face was downcast.
6 Then the LORD said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? ... .”

v1 Adam lay with his wife Eve. New NIV translation of made love to seems weird to me here.

Q Where did this happen?
A? Hebrew Bible (JSB) reports one scholar saying knew could be read had known, as in it happened earlier, before the fall, in the Garden of Eden. This could mean that we weren’t all "conceived in sin" tho, and apparently this interp doesn’t have much support. Can't buy it.

Q But if Eve didn't get pregnant until they were ousted from the garden, I've gotta wonder why. If God meant them to re-create, why wasn't it happening in the garden before they sinned?
A? Maybe they sinned on their very first day together. That would be discouraging, tho not surprising.

v1 Observation: Even with the curse on childbirth, Eve acknowledges that God helps her through it. The word help is in both NIV and JSB, but Young’s Literal says: “I have gotten a man by Jehovah.” This one sounds like an immaculate conception! So I'm rejecting this conjecture too.

Q v4 Is this judgement capricious of God since we see no prior instruction of expectations to the young men?
A? Hebrews 11:4 clarifies that Able gave by faith.
A? JSB points out that Able gave “the choicest of the firstlings;” whereas Cain gave “the fruit of the soil.”
So JSB sees it as Able gave the best and Cain gave only, meh, whatever was available.
But that's not ringing true to me. Cain was so upset that I think he must have put a lot into his offering.

Q v6 God asks Cain why he is distressed. “If you do right, you’ll be accepted.” How is Cain to know what is right? There is no mention of faith as criteria.
A? Cain, like (or from) his parents, would have had the knowledge of good and evil.
He would have had a conscience, correct?

Q v6 Why was giving the best of the flock right while the fruit of the ground was unacceptable?
A? Because Adam, made from dust, was fruit of the ground?
NO. Tho Adam was made up from the dust of the ground, he, unlike vegetation & other animals, was special creation, not produced by ground.
(Gen 1.11 & 12 “The land/earth produces/brings forth vegetation.” Combo NIV & JSB; Gen 1.24 “Let the land produce living creatures.” NIV; Gen 1.24 “Let the earth bring forth every kind of living creature.” JSB BUt God created man in his own image. Gen 1.27)

A? Because the ground was cursed?
Cain’s gift came from the cursed ground! Maybe a reminder of sin? Maybe.

A? Because Cain’s gift came as a result of Cain’s own work to overcome the curse?
Cain worked to produce an acceptable gift; Whereas Able just accepted and returned what came from God.
Able kept flocks while Cain worked the soil (v 2).
There’s more work to working than to keeping, right? Able just had to sit back and watch the animals, by God’s providence, multiply. Then he chose the best and gave it back to God as sacrifice.
God did what was necessary, and Able, by faith, accepted that.
Now that seems more reasonable to me.