God; Creation Words; Pagan Cosmogonies
There are different views as to when God created the
angels. 1) God creates the angels before Genesis 1:1; 2) God created the angels
between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, 3) God created the angels on day 3, and this is
usually argued for on the basis of the analogy that is found in the Scriptures
where the angels are spoken of metaphorically as the stars of heaven, e.g. Job
38:7. Then you would not have the angelic conflict or the fall of Satan until
after Genesis 2:3. The first view, that the angels were created before Genesis
1:1, is preferable.
In Genesis 1:1, the next word we
look at is “God,” even though this is the third word in the Hebrew text. What
do we mean by the term “God”? People
think that they can just generate out of their own mind, their own frame of
reference, who God is. It is all personal opinion, and it is very rare to find
someone who will stop and say, “The Bible says that God is this way … God has
revealed Himself to be a God who is righteous and holy and just, who is
sovereign, love, eternal,” etc. We live in an era today when people think that
they can figure out spirituality just from generating it up from their own
subjective impressions, and that is true about the meaning for God. There are
all kinds of views of God so we have to address the question as to what this
means.
What we see in Genesis 1:1 is that
God is the creator of everything. The word that is used is the Hebrew word Elohim. There
are a number of Hebrew words for God and Elohim is a sort of generic term for God. The im suffix is
plural, and the reason it has been said that this is not translated “Gods” is
that this is the plural of majesty. But there is a disagreement with this
because there is a tendency among scholars to go too far overboard and say you
can’t find the Trinity in the Old Testament, so don’t go to the plurality of
God’s name. The reason that is a problem is the way Elohim is actually used in the context
of Genesis chapter one. For example, in verse 26 there is not only the noun Elohim which,
if it was a plural of majesty would always be dealt with in terms of the verbs
and pronouns as a singular. But we have “And Elohim said,” in v. 26, “let us make man
in our image, according to our likeness”; so the plural pronoun that is used in
v. 26 mitigates against the argument that this is simply a plural of majesty.
The plural of Elohim
would include the concept of at least a plurality in the Godhead. It doesn’t
teach the Trinity in and of itself, it just contains within itself the idea of
a plurality in the Godhead. So we have just the statement that God creates.
But we know from later revelation
that God exists as a Trinity, and we know from subsequent revelation that all
three members of the Trinity are involved in creation. There are different
roles within the Godhead. They are not subordinate to one another in terms of
essence, they are equally God, but they are subordinate in terms of role
function. God the Father is viewed as the architect, the planner. The Son is
the contractor, as it were, the one who is more immediately involved in the
construction of the universe. Then the Holy Spirit is the one who is involved
in renewal and renovation. Colossians 1:16; John 1:3. The unique characteristic
of God against all other gods is His act of creation. It is this act of
creation (ex
nihilo, out of nothing) that is the defining event in all history for
revealing who God is. This almost beyond anything else distinguishes God from
everything else in history.
In Revelation chapter five John
takes us into the throne room of God and describes what he sees in the heavens.
In 5:9 we see the emphasis on redemption. However, what precedes this? In 4:11,
before we come to a praise of the Son for His act of redemption, first we have
praise for God for His act of creation. “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive
glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy
pleasure they are and were created.” So it is in the presence of God that the angels
praise Him continuously because He created all things. So to learn who God
really is we must abandon pagan deceptions that surround creation. That is not
an easy thing to do because all thought systems in human history have some sort
of pagan notion about who God is and what He is like, and the whole concept of
Scripture is to completely renovate our thinking. So as we go to the end of the
Bible we see that even in Revelation there is an emphasis on creation.
This comes through even at the very
end of Revelation. Revelation 21:1, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth:
for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away.” Then in v. 4, “And
God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more
death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for
the former things are passed away.” Can verse 4 be understood if Genesis
chapter three and the fall of man is not understood? It becomes meaningless.
And not only that. If God created the heavens and the earth through some sort
of long-term evolutionary process, then there are real problems interpreting
the immediate creation of a new heavens and a new earth when it comes to
Revelation 21:1. You have to have a consistent system of hermeneutics or
interpretation through the Scriptures. In verse 1 we read that the first
creation was removed. 2 Peter describes it, it burns up in some sort of nuclear
explosion. And God creates instantly a new heavens and a new earth for the
habitation of believers throughout all eternity. So if we don’t believe there
was an instantaneous creation in Genesis 1:1 then we have no reason to believe
that there is an instantaneous creation of a new heavens and earth in
Revelation 21.
The issue in Genesis and in origins
is such that if you tweak with it, twist it out of line, it is going to destroy
soteriology. As we will see, evolution is really an attack, a subtle but
damaging attack, on the cross and the need for a savior to go to the cross and
die for man. There are further implications in Revelation 22:1, “And he showed
me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the
throne of God and of the Lamb.” Notice that there is a river that flows out of
the throne of God in the new earth and in the New Jerusalem. Then v. 3, “And
there shall be no more curse.” How can you understand v. 3 if you don’t
understand Genesis 3? If Genesis 3 isn’t literal, then how can Revelation 22 be
understood in a literal sense?
The next word we come to in Genesis
1:1 is the verb “created.” This is in the qal stem, almost compared to the
indicative mood in Greek. We have the qal stem of bara, and this verb is used about 50
times in the Old Testament. Every time it is used in the qal stem only God is
the subject of the verb. Man never bara’s; only God bara’s. So bara is a word that emphasizes divine
creation. There has been a claim that bara had the idea of ex nihilo creation inherent in the
meaning of the word. But that is not true. Ex nihilo is Latin for “out of nothing.” In other
words, two seconds before Genesis 1:1 nothing existed except God and the
angels. God created the angels out of nothing; He created the heavens and the
earth out of nothing. The word bara is used in Isaiah chapter 43:1, “But now thus saith the LORD that created
thee, O Jacob, and he that formed thee, O Israel, Fear not: for I have redeemed
thee, I have called thee by thy name; thou art mine.” God is talking to the
nation of Israel, calling them Jacob. The word “created” there is the Hebrew bara. Was
Israel created out of nothing? No, they were created from already existing
materials. Abraham came along through the normal process of procreation. The
reason we can say that this has the idea of “out of nothing” is not because of
the core meaning of bara is “out of nothing,” it simply emphasizes the uniqueness and
the creation of something by divine command. What bara emphasizes is just this uniqueness
of God. Other passages in the context of Genesis make it clear that this is out
of nothing. For example, Hebrews 11:3, “Through faith we understand that the
worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not
made of things which are visible.” So that is ex nihilo creation. We also have the
fact that in Genesis 1:1, “God creates the heavens and the earth,” indicates
that there was nothing there before He created them.
There are three other words we need
to pay attention to when we talk about creation. Bara is the first word. The second word
is asah,
found in Genesis 1:26, “And God said, Let us make man in our image.” The word
for “make” is asah,
usually translated “do, make,” sometimes “create,” and it is a more generic
term for the act of making, fashioning, shaping, creating something. It is used
in some passages as a synonym for bara, but a point to be made is that when it is
used as a synonym for bara it is the more technical bara that defines the meaning of asah, and
there are too many scholars who want to destroy the significance of bara by
coming along and going from asah and saying it is a general word, don’t make such a big deal
out of bara,
it is used in parallel with asah in these passages, so it is not a big deal. No, the
technicality of bara
restricts the meaning of the broader word. And that is always true in any kind
of poetry; that if you are paralleling two words and one word is more precise
than the other word that restricts the field of meaning of the more general
word. So asah
is the more general word used for create. Then in versed 27, “So God created [bara] man in his
own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he
them.” This indicates that man was uniquely created by God. In Genesis 2:7,
“And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground,” is the mechanics. Here we
have our third word for creation, yatser, which has the idea of molding,
fashioning, or shaping. This would be the word a potter would use for shaping a
clay vessel, so it is a particularly appropriate word for the construction or
formation of the male physical body; “and breathed into his nostrils the breath
of life; and man became a living soul.” The biological life is yatser, the
soul life is bara,
and together the entire process is referred to as creation, asah. A
fourth word is banah,
which means to build. When the woman was made, she was “built,” banah.
Questions that are raised.
a)
Isn’t Genesis
one “myth” compatible to other ancient legends and mythologies?
b)
Could there be
millions of years between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2, and couldn’t this be the time frame
for historical geology, all the ages of the dinosaur, and take all of evolution
and just basically dump it into this Genesis 1:1-1:2?
c)
How long are
the days? Are these really 24-hour days, and must we understand them to be
24-hour days? Or could they be seven long periods of time?
d)
Could God have
used evolution as a mechanism for creation?
In order to answer the first
question we should look at one of the other legends that was popular at the
time. The one that was most well known is one that was discovered between 1848
and 1876, and is a Canaanite creation story, so it is right in the context of
the land of Israel. It was in King Ashur-bani-pal’s library in Nineveh. The
library dates form about 668-630 BC, and the foremost expert on this document was
Dr Alexander Hydell, and this is how he desribes the story: “ … is the
principal source of our knowledge of Mesopotamian cosmology. Yet, it is not
primarily a creation story at all, its prime objective is to offer cosmological
reasons for Marduk’s advancement from the position as chief god of Babylon to
that of the head of the entire Babylonian pantheon.” In other words, this is
really a political move and a coup takeover by a secondary god, Marduk, who is
the god for Babylon, who is going to take over all the gods. This is just a
justification for Babylonian ascendancy. This story has a real epic tone to it.
Whenever you have something of epic proportions it always drives you back to
origins. Origins and the beginnings are always brought in to some degree. In
the beginning the heaven and the earth wasn’t named; there was just the
presence of water. The chaotic sea was personified. There was the presence of
water, three deities, and the use of the heaven and the earth, formlessness and
chaos. Everything begins with chaos but there is something that is there. There
is matter and chaos already there. There is violence where one of the gods is
split in half. Half becomes the heavens and half becomes the earth. Notice the
parallelism with modern evolution. It starts with existing matter; we don’t
know where it came from. It is in a chaotic state. It is from matter that
everything is created, and somehow order is brought to bear.
Notice the difference between that
and the simplicity of “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
So you just can’t come along and claim that the Bible just fits into the milieu
of ancient pagan cosmogonies, it is radically different.