Sunday, May 28th, 2023
Utley's You Can Understand the Bible Utley Commentary
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
These files are public domain.
Text Courtesy of BibleSupport.com. Used by Permission.
Utley. Dr. Robert. "Commentary on Genesis 1". "Utley's You Can Understand the Bible". https://studylight.org/
commentaries/ eng/ ubc/ genesis-1.html. 2021.
Utley. Dr. Robert. "Commentary on Genesis 1". "Utley's You Can Understand the Bible". https://studylight.org/
- Henry's Complete
- Clarke Commentary
- Bridgeway Bible Commentary
- Coffman's Commentaries
- Carroll's Biblical Interpretation
- Barnes' Notes
- Bullinger's Companion Notes
- Calvin's Commentary
- College Press
- Church Pulpit Commentary
- Smith's Commentary
- Constable's Expository Notes
- Darby's Synopsis
- Ellicott's Commentary
- Expositor's Dictionary
- Hole's Commentary
- Meyer's Commentary
- Gaebelein's Annotated
- Gann on the Bible
- Morgan's Exposition
- Gill's Exposition
- Everett's Study Notes
- Geneva Study Bible
- Haydock's Catholic Commentary
- Commentary Critical
- Commentary Critical Unabridged
- Gray's Concise Commentary
- Parker's The People's Bible
- Sutcliffe's Commentary
- Trapp's Commentary
- Kretzmann's Commentary
- Lange's Commentary
- Grant's Commentary
- Wells of Living Water
- Henry's Complete
- Henry's Concise
- Poole's Annotations
- Pett's Commentary
- Peake's Commentary
- Preacher's Homiletical
- Poor Man's Commentary
- Benson's Commentary
- Sermon Bible Commentary
- The Biblical Illustrator
- Coke's Commentary
- The Expositor's Bible Commentary
- The Pulpit Commentaries
- Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
- Wesley's Notes
- Whedon's Commentary
- Henry's Complete
- Keil & Delitzsch
- Hampton's Commentary
- Mackintosh's Notes
- Utley Commentary
- Kelly Commentary
PARAGRAPH DIVISIONS OF MODERN TRANSLATIONS
* Although they are not inspired, paragraph divisions are the key to understanding and following the original author's intent. Each modern translation has divided and summarized the paragraphs. Every paragraph has one central topic, truth, or thought. Each version encapsulates that topic in its own distinct way. As you read the text, ask yourself which translation fits your understanding of the subject and verse divisions. In every chapter we must read the Bible first and try to identify its subjects (paragraphs), then compare our understanding with the modern versions. Only when we understand the original author's intent by following his logic and presentation can we truly understand the Bible. Only the original author is inspiredreaders have no right to change or modify the message. Bible readers do have the responsibility of applying the inspired truth to their day and their lives. Note that all technical terms and abbreviations are explained fully in the following documents: Hebrew Grammatical Tems, Textual Criticism, and Glossary.
READING CYCLE THREE (see Guide to Good Bible Reading)
FOLLOWING THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR'S INTENT AT THE PARAGRAPH LEVEL
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
Read the chapter in one sitting. Identify the subjects. Compare your subject divisions with the five translations above. Paragraphing is not inspired, but it is the key to following the original author's intent, which is the heart of interpretation. Every paragraph has one and only one subject.
1. First paragraph
2. Second paragraph
3. Third paragraph
A. Studying Genesis 1-11 is difficult because:
1. we are all affected by our own cultures and denominational training
2. today several pressures consciously and subconsciously affect our view of “the beginnings”
a. modern archaeology (Mesopotamian parallels)
b. modern science (current theories)
c. the history of interpretation
(2) early church
3. this opening literary unit of the Bible is presented as history, but several things surprise the interpreter
a. Mesopotamian parallels
b. eastern literary techniques (two apparent accounts of creation)
c. unusual events
(1) woman created from a “rib”
(2) a talking snake
(3) a boat with two of all the animals on board for a year
(4) mixing of angels and humans
(5) long life of people
d. several word plays on the names of the main characters (cf. K. 3)
4. Christians need to be reminded of how the NT reinterprets Genesis 1:0 and 2 in light of Christ. He is the Father's agent in creation (cf. John 1:3, John 1:10; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Hebrews 1:2, of both the visible and the invisible realm (cf. Colossians 1:16). This new revelation shows the need to be cautious of literalism in Gen. 1-3. The Trinity is involved in creation.
a. God the Father in Genesis 1:1
b. God the Spirit in Genesis 1:2
c. God the Son in the NT by progressive revelation
This may explain the PLURALS in Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7
B. Genesis 1-11 is not a scientific document, but in some ways modern science parallels its presentation (order of creation and geological levels). It is not anti-scientific but pre-scientific. It presents truth:
1. from an earth perspective (a human observer on this planet)
2. from a phenomenological perspective (i.e. the five senses; the way things appear to the human observer)
It has functioned as a revealer of truth for many cultures over many years. It presents truth to a modern scientific culture but without specific explanation of events.
C. It is amazingly succinct, beautifully described and artistically structured.
1. things divide
2. things develop
3. From chaos to a physical planet teeming with life
D. The keys to its understanding are found in
1. its genre
2. its relation to its own day (see John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One)
3. its structure
4. its monotheism
5. its theological purpose
Interpretation must balance:
1. an exegesis of the verses
2. a systematic understanding of all Scripture
3. genre specificity
It reveals the origin of physical things (“and it was good,” cf. Genesis 1:31) and the corruption of these things (cf. Chapter 3). In many ways the Christ event is a new creation and Jesus is the new Adam (cf. Romans 5:12-21). The new age may ultimately be a restoration of the garden of Eden and its intimate fellowship with God and the animals (compare Gen. 1-2 with Rev. 21-22).
E. The great truth of this chapter is not how or when, but the who and why!
F. Genesis reflects true knowledge but not exhaustive knowledge. It is given to us in ancient (Mesopotamian) thought forms, but it is infallible theological truth. It is related to its day, but it is totally unique. It speaks of the inexpressible, yet it speaks truly. Basically it is a world-view (who and why), not a world-picture (how and when).
G. Without Genesis 1-3 the Bible is incomprehensible. Notice how quickly the story moves from (1) sin to redemption and (2) humanity to Israel. Creation forms an integral but passing piece of the account of God's choice of Israel for the purpose of world-wide redemption (cf. Genesis 3:15; Genesis 12:3; Genesis 22:18; Exodus 19:5-6 and John 3:16; Acts 3:25; Galatians 3:8; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9).
H. Your answer to the question, “What is the purpose of Inspiration and Revelation?” will affect the way you see Genesis 1:0. If you see the purpose as the impartation of facts about creation, you will view it one way (i.e. propositional truths). If you see it as conveying general truths about God , humanity, and sin, then possibly you will see it theologically (i.e. paradigmatic). If, however, you view the basic purpose as the establishment of a relationship between God and mankind, possibly another (i.e. existentially).
I. This section of Genesis is surely theological. As the plagues of the Exodus (cf. Exod. 7-11) showed YHWH's power over the nature gods of Egypt, Genesis 1:1-3 may show YHWH's power over the astral gods of Mesopotamia. The main subject is God. God alone did it for His own purposes.
J. I marvel at my own ignorance! I am appalled at my own historical, cultural, and denominational conditioning! What a mighty God we serve! What an awesome God has reached out to us (even in our rebellion)! The Bible is a balance of love and power; grace and justice! The more we know the more we know we don't know!
K. Here are the basic approaches of some helpful books:
1. Genesis 1-2 interpreted along the lines of modern science:
a. Bernard Ramm's The Christian View of Science and Scripture (good scientifically and theologically)
b. Hugh Ross' Creation and Time and The Genesis Question (good scientifically but weak theologically)
c. Harry Peo and Jimmy Davis' Science and Faith: An Evangelical Dialog (very helpful)
d. Darrel R. Falk, Coming to Peace with Science: Bridging the Worlds Between Faith and Biology (evangelical approach to theistic evolution)
e. Francis S. Collins, The Language of God
f. Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross, Who Was Adam?
2. Genesis 1-2 interpreted along the lines of ancient Near Eastern parallels
a. R. K. Harrison's Introduction to the Old Testament and Old Testament Times
b. John H. Walton's The Lost World of Genesis One
c. K. A. Kitchen's Ancient Orient and Old Testament
d. Edwin M. Yamauchi's The Stones and the Scriptures
3. Genesis 1-2 interpreted along the lines of theology from LaSor, Hubbard and Bush's Old Testament Survey
a. “Literary device also is found in the names used. The correspondence of the name with the person's function or role is striking in several instances. Adam means “mankind” and Eve is “(she who gives) life.” Surely, when an author of a story names the principal characters Mankind and Life, something is conveyed about the degree of literalness intended! Similarly Cain means “forger (of metals)”; Enoch is connected with “dedication, consecration” (Genesis 4:17; Genesis 5:18); Jubal with horn and trumpet (Genesis 4:21); while Cain, condemned to be a nâd, a “wanderer,” goes to live in the land of Nod, a name transparently derived from the same Hebrew root, thus the land of wandering! This suggests that the author is writing as an artist, a storyteller, who uses literary device and artifice. One must endeavor to distinguish what he intends to teach from the literary means employed” p. 72.
b. the theological implication of Gen. 1-11:
“Implication for Gen. 1-11. Recognizing the literary technique and form and noting the literary background of chs. 1-11 does not constitute a challenge to the reality, the “eventness,” of the facts portrayed. One need not regard this account as myth; however, it is not “history” in the modern sense of eyewitness, objective reporting. Rather, it conveys theological truths about events, portrayed in a largely symbolic, pictorial literary genre. This is not to say that Gen. 1-11 conveys historical falsehood. That conclusion would follow only if it purported to contain objective descriptions. The clear evidence already reviewed shows that such was not the intent. On the other hand, the view that the truths taught in these chapters have no objective basis is mistaken. They affirm fundamental truths: creation of all things by God; special divine intervention in the production of the first man and woman; unity of the human race; pristine goodness of the created world, including humanity; entrance of sin through the disobedience of the first pair; depravity and rampant sin after the Fall. All these truths are facts, and their certainty implies the reality of the facts. Put another way, the biblical author uses such literary traditions to describe unique primeval events that have no time-conditioned, human-conditioned, experience-based historical analogy and hence can be described only by symbol. The same problem arises at the end time: the biblical author there, in the book of Revelation, adopts the esoteric imagery and involved literary artifice of apocalyptic” p. 74.
c. If it is true that one language was spoken in Gen. 1-10 (cf. Samuel Noah Kramer, The Babel of Tongues: A Sumerian Version, “Journal of the American Oriental Society, 88:108-11), then it needs to be clearly stated that it was not Hebrew. Therefore, all of the Hebrew word plays are from Moses' day or patriarchal oral traditions. This verifies the literary nature of Gen. 1-11.
4. I would like to make a personal comment. I love and appreciate those who love and appreciate the Bible. I am so grateful for people who take its message as an inspired, authoritative message from the One true God. All of us who study the Scriptures are attempting to worship and glorify God with our minds (cf. Matthew 22:37). The fact that we as individual believers approach the Bible differently is not an aspect of unbelief or rebellion but an act of sincere devotion and an attempt to understand so as to incorporate God's truth into our lives. The more I study Genesis 1-11 and for that matter, much of the book of Revelation, I perceive it is true but literary, not literal. The key in interpreting the Bible is not my applying a personal philosophical or hermeneutical grid over the text but allowing the intent of the inspired original authors to fully express themselves. To take a literary passage and demand it to be literal when the text itself gives clues to its symbolic and figurative nature imposes my biases on a divine message. Genre (type of literature) is the key in a theological understanding of “how it all began” and “how it will all end.” I appreciate the sincerity and commitment of those who, for whatever reason, usually personality type or professional training, interpret the Bible in modern, literal, western categories, when in fact it is an ancient eastern book. I say all this to say that I am grateful to God for those who approach Genesis 1-11 with presuppositions that I personally do not share, for I know they will help, encourage and reach people of like personalities and perspectives to love, trust and apply God's Book to their lives! However, I do not agree that Genesis 1-11 or the book of Revelation should be approached literally, whether it is Creation Research Society (i.e. young earth) or Hugh Ross's Reasons to Believe (i.e. old earth). For me this section of the Bible emphasizes the “Who” and “why” not the “how” and “when” of creation. I accept the modern science's sincerity in studying the physical aspects of creation. I reject “naturalism” (i.e. all life is a chance development of natural processes), but surely see process as a valid and demonstrable aspect of our world and universe. I think God directed and used process. But natural processes do not explain the diversity and complexity of life, current and past. To truly understand current reality I need both the theoretical models of modern science and the theological models of Genesis 1-11. Genesis 1-11 is a theological necessity for understanding the rest of the Bible but it is an ancient, literary, succinct, artistic, eastern presentation, not a literal, modern, western presentation.
Parts of the Bible are surely historical narrative. There is a place for the literal interpretation of Scripture: there was a call of Abraham, an Exodus, a virgin birth, a Calvary, a resurrection; there will be a second coming and an eternal kingdom. The question is one of genre, not reality, of authorial intent, not personal preferences in interpretation. Let all men be liars--and God be true (cf. Romans 3:4)!!!
SPECIAL TOPIC: THE AGE AND FORMATION OF THE EARTH
OPENING STATEMENTS ON THE STUDY OF GENESIS 1-11
A. How is Genesis 1-11 related to modern western science?
1. totally antagonistic
2. total agreement
3. points of similarity
Science is a research method. It is a modern phenomenon but is always changing in light of new knowledge. God as creator and God as savior are held together by the “two books,” nature (natural revelation, cf. Psalms 19:1-6) and Scripture (special revelation, cf. Psalms 19:7-11). God wrote both! They do not disagree!
B. How does Genesis 1-11 relate to modern history?
1. Eastern and western literary genres are different. Not true or false, not right or wrong, but different. Genesis 1-11 is pre-history. It is crucial theologically, but somewhat veiled (brief literary pattern). Veiled in literary genre, veiled in historical drama, veiled as is the end of history (i.e. Revelation).
2. Christianity, as Judaism, is a historically based religion. It stands or falls on its historical events. However, some events (i.e. Gen. 1-11) are beyond our comprehension, so they are communicated in ways that humans can understand (i.e. accommodation). This is not in any way to deny their trustworthiness, but to emphasize their theological purpose. The Bible chooses to focus not on creation, but on re-creation (redemption).
3. Genesis is set within a “historical” frame of reference. We can document obvious links to secular history beginning with Genesis 12:0 (i.e. Nuzi and Mari Tablets). However, Genesis 1-3 is beyond historical confirmation and genre identification.
C. How does Genesis 1-11 relate to literature?
1. There are parallels of Genesis 1-2, Genesis 1:3, and 6-9 from Mesopotamian sources. Often terminology, details, and story line are similar. However, the Bible's monotheism and the dignity of humanity are unique.
2. There are at least two dangers in approaching the Bible as literature.
a. As literature it is mythological, totally non-historical.
b. As literature it is literal, no figurative language, no eastern genres, no dramatic, parabolic events.
God has revealed Himself to a particular time and culture using human language (i.e. metaphors, analogies, and negations). It is true and trustworthy, but not exhaustive.
3. Creation is a progressive revelation truth. Genesis 1-2 are foundational, but Psalms and the NT are also crucial for a proper perspective. Each of the three sources adds to a theological understanding of the method and purpose of creation.
D. How do we interpret Genesis 1-11?
1. How it all began and how it will all end are veiled (Genesis 1-11 and Revelation, i.e. we see through a glass darkly).
2. We have all the truths needed to respond to God and to understand the Bible. But, we do not have exhaustive, literal, complete facts. We have theologically selective and interpreted events.
3. We must view Genesis 1-11 through
a. literary genre
b. theological emphasis
c. historical events
d. modern western science/culture/biases
4. Fallen humans all stand before the Bible (i.e. God's revelation) and are judged by it. It is beyond our mental abilities, but we must be able to comprehend it in order to be able to properly respond to it. Believers interpret it differently (some poorly), but all are responsible for the truths they understand. It reveals God; it reveals human rebellion; it reveals divine redemption. Our eternities are related to these truths, not the how and when of creation and the events of Gen. 1-11. They are primarily the Who and why, which are so crucial.
God have mercy on us all (and He has)!
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:1-5 1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. 3Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. 5God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning” Bereshith (BDB 912) is the Hebrew title of the book. We get Genesis from the Septuagint translation. This is the beginning of history but not of God's activity (cf. Matthew 25:34; John 17:5, John 17:25; Ephesians 1:4; Titus 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Peter 1:19-20; Revelation 13:8). R. K. Harrison says it should be translated “by way of beginning” (Introduction to the Old Testament, p. 542 footnote 3). John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One says it introduces a period of time (p. 45).
▣ “God” Elohim (BDB 43) is a PLURAL form of the general name for God in the ancient Near East, El (BDB 42). When referring to the God of Israel the verb is usually (6 exceptions) SINGULAR. The rabbis say that it speaks of God as creator, provider and sustainer of all life on planet earth (cf. Psalms 19:1-6; Psalms 104:0). Notice how often this word is used in chapter 1.
I believe that this verse is an independent clause: Ibn Ezra says that it is a dependent clause with the emphasis on Genesis 1:2 while Rashi says that Genesis 1:2 is a parenthesis and the emphasis is on Genesis 1:3. Modern dispensational commentators say that Genesis 1:1 is a dependent clause in order to support their view of a previous fall (the gap theory). Notice that there is no explanation of the origin of God. It does emphatically assert that God created matter and did not fashion existing matter (Greek cosmology). In Enuma Elish, (Babylonian creation account), like Greek thought, Spirit (which is good) and matter (which is evil) are co-eternal. The Bible does not discuss or reveal the origin of God. He has always existed (cf. Psalms 90:2). There is surely mystery here. Mankind simply cannot grasp the fullness of God!
This discussion of clauses is theologically significant. The Jewish Publication Society of America has translated Genesis 1:1 a temporal clause, “When God began to create the heaven and the earth‒the earth being unformed and void. . .” This translation might conclude that God and matter are co-eternal like Greek cosmology (cf. “Creation and Cosmology” in Encyclopedia Judaica, vol. 5, p. 1059). The Sumerian account of creation, Enuma Elish, begins with “when in the beginning. . .” See SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY.
▣ “created” Bara (cf. Genesis 1:1, Genesis 1:21, Genesis 1:27; Genesis 2:3, Genesis 2:4) is the Hebrew VERB (BDB 135, KB 153, Qal PERFECT) used exclusively for God's creative activity. Its basic meaning is to fashion by cutting. God willed into being everything but Himself. Psalms 33:6, Psalms 33:9; Hebrews 11:3 and 2 Peter 3:5 present creation (cosmology) by God's spoken word (fiat) from nothing (ex nihilo), although water is never said to be created (cf. Genesis 1:2). Greek (gnostic) and Mesopotamian philosophies emphasize an eternal dualism between “spirit” and “matter.” Whatever bara implies it accentuates God's activity and purpose!
The Bible asserts that creation has a beginning point. Twenty-first century science would characterize this as the “big bang.” Naturalism can now not assert an unlimited regression back in time. However, it is probable that Genesis 1:0 refers to the beginning of a functioning earth, not the material beginning of matter (John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One).
▣ “the heavens” The word “heavens” (BDB 1029, see SPECIAL TOPIC: Heaven) may be used in several senses:
1. it refers to the atmosphere of the earth as in Genesis 1:8 and 20;
2. it may refer to the entire cosmos (i.e. all material existence); or
3. it may refer to the creation of all things visible (material) and invisible (angels, heaven as God's throne). If option three is true then a parallel would be Colossians 1:16. If not, then Genesis 1:0 focuses only on the creation of this planet. The Bible emphasizes a geocentric perspective (i.e. creation seen as a spectator on this planet would have observed it). Some would assert that Genesis 1:0 is addressing the creation of the universe (i.e. sun, moon, stars, and galaxies), while Gen. 2-3 focuses on this planet and the creation of mankind. This is surely possible because chapters 2-4 form a literary unit. In both (i.e. Genesis 1:0 and 2-4) creation is geocentristic (i.e. earth focused).
▣ “the earth” The term (BDB 75, see SPECIAL TOPIC: Land, Country, Earth) can refer to a specific land, country or the whole planet. Genesis 1:0 is admittedly geocentric (cf. Genesis 1:15). This fits the theological purpose of the chapter, not science. Remember that the Bible is written in the language of description for theological purposes. It is not anti-scientific, but pre-scientific.
Genesis 1:2 “The earth was” This VERB (BDB 224, KB 243, Qal PERFECT) can only very rarely be translated “became.” Grammatically and contextually “was” is preferable. Don't let your (i.e dispensational premillennial) pre-suppositional theology of two falls (the gap theory) affect the exegesis of the text.
NASB“formless and void” NKJV“without form, and void” NRSV, NJB“a formless void” TEV“formless and desolate” NIV“formless and empty” REB“a vast waste” SEPT“invisible and unfurnished” JPSOA“unformed and void”
These two terms are found in BDB 1062, KB 1688-1690 and BDB 96, KB 111. Does this imply water only? The earth is changing form (i.e. tectonic plates) continually (i.e. one original continent called Pangea became several continents). The question again is the age of the earth. These words appear together in Jeremiah 4:23. They are used in the Sumerian and Babylonian accounts of creation but in a mythological sense. This state of creation shows that God used a progressive process to an inhabitable earth (cf. Isaiah 45:18). These two words describe, not the beginning of matter, but a state of undeveloped non-functioning orderly system (John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One p. 49). It is not ready for humanity!
▣ “darkness” This term (BDB 365) does not represent evil, but original chaos. God names the darkness in Genesis 1:5 as He does the light. These two terms, though often used in the Bible to denote spiritual realities, here are representing original physical conditions.
▣ “the deep” The Hebrew term is tehom (BDB 1062 #3, KB 1690-91). A similar, but different, Semitic root is personified as Tiamat in the Sumerian and Babylonian creation myths as the monster of chaos and the mother of the gods, wife of Apsu. She tried to kill all lesser gods that came forth from her. Marduk killed her. Out of her body Marduk fashioned heaven and earth in the Babylonian Genesis called Enuma Elish. The Hebrews believed that water was the beginning element of creation (cf. Psalms 24:1-2; Psalms 104:6; 2 Peter 3:5). It is never said to have been created. However, the Hebrew term is masculine, not feminine and it is unrelated etymologically to Tiamat.
There are passages in the OT which describe YHWH in conflict with personified watery chaos (cf. Psalms 74:13-14; Psalms 89:9-10; Psalms 104:6-7; Isaiah 51:9-10). However, these are always in poetical, metaphorical passages. Water is a crucial aspect of creation (cf. Genesis 1:2b, Genesis 1:6-7).
NASB, NKJV, TEV, NIV“the Spirit of God” NRSV, JPSOA“a wind from God” NJB“a divine wind” REB“the spirit of God” SEPT“a breath of God”
The Hebrew term ruach (BDB 924) and the Greek term pneuma (cf. John 3:5, John 3:8, see SPECIAL TOPIC: Spirit in the Bible) can mean “spirit,” “breath” or “wind” (cf. John 3:5, John 3:8). The Spirit is often associated with creation (cf. Genesis 1:2; Job 26:13; Psalms 104:29-30; Psalms 147:14-18). The OT does not clearly define the relationship between God and the Spirit. In Job 28:26-28; Psalms 104:24 and Proverbs 3:19; Proverbs 8:22-23 God used wisdom (a feminine noun) to create all things. In the NT Jesus is said to be God's agent in creation (cf. John 1:1-3; 1 Corinthians 8:6; Colossians 1:15-17; Hebrews 1:2-3). As in redemption, so too, in creation, all three persons of the Godhead are involved. Genesis 1:0 itself does not emphasize any secondary cause.
NASB, TEV“moving” NKJV, NIV“hovering” NRSV“swept” NJB“sweeping”
This term (BDB 934, KB 1219, Piel PARTICIPLE) developed the connotation of “brooding” or “active hovering” (cf. JB). This is a mother bird word (cf. Exodus 19:4; Deuteronomy 32:11; Isaiah 31:5). It is not related to Phoenician cosmology which asserts that the earth came from an egg, but a feminine metaphor for God's active parental care, as well as the development of His creation at this early stage!
Genesis 1:3 “God said” This is the theological concept of creation by the spoken word, using the Latin word fiat (cf. Genesis 1:9, Genesis 1:14, Genesis 1:20, Genesis 1:24, Genesis 1:29; Psalms 33:6; Psalms 148:5; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Hebrews 11:3). This has often been described as “out of nothing matter came into being using,” by God's command, using the Latin phrase ex nihilo (cf. II Macc. 7:28). However, it is probable that Genesis 1:0 is not about the original creation of matter but the organizing of existing matter (cf. John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One, p. 54ff).
This power of the spoken word can also be seen in:
1. the patriarchal blessing
2. God's self accomplishing redemptive word, Isaiah 55:6-13, esp. Gen. 1-11
3. Jesus as the Word in John 1:1 and
4. Jesus as returning with a two-edged sword in His mouth (cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:8; Hebrews 4:12; Revelation 1:6; Revelation 2:12, Revelation 2:16; Revelation 19:15, Revelation 19:21). This is an idiomatic way of creation by God's will through thought and word. What God wants, occurs!
▣ “Let there be” These are JUSSIVES (cf. Genesis 1:3, Genesis 1:6[twice], 9[twice in meaning, not form], 11, 14, 20[twice in meaning not form], 22, 24, 26[in meaning not form]).
Genesis 1:4 “God saw that the light was good” (Genesis 1:4, Genesis 1:10, Genesis 1:12, Genesis 1:18, Genesis 1:21, Genesis 1:25, Genesis 1:31) All creation was good (cf. Genesis 1:31). Evil was not part of God's original creation, but a perversion of the good. “Good” here probably means “fits its purpose” (cf. Isaiah 41:7) or “intrinsically without flaw” (BDB 373).
▣ “God separated” This VERB (BDB 95, KB 110, Hiphil IMPERFECT) is characteristic of how God develops His creation. He divides (KJV) and starts new things (cf. Genesis 1:4, Genesis 1:6, Genesis 1:7, Genesis 1:14, Genesis 1:18).
▣ “light” Remember that there is no sun yet. Be careful not to be dogmatic about the time sequence (i.e. 24 hours for the earth to rotate which has not been constant throughout earth's history).
Light (BDB 21) is a biblical symbol of life, purity, and truth (cf. Job 33:30; Psalms 56:13; Psalms 112:4; Isaiah 58:8, Isaiah 58:10; Isaiah 59:9; Isaiah 60:1-3; John 1:5-9; 2 Corinthians 4:6). In Revelation 22:5 there is light with no sun. Also notice that darkness is created (cf. Isaiah 45:7) and named by God (cf. Genesis 1:5) which shows His control (cf. Psalms 74:16; Psalms 104:20-23; Psalms 139:12). John H. Walton, The Lost World of Genesis One (p. 55ff), based on Genesis 1:4, Genesis 1:5, asserts that this means “a period of light,” not the origin of the sun.
Genesis 1:5 “God called” (Genesis 1:8, Genesis 1:10) This naming shows God's ownership and control.
▣ “And there was evening and there was morning” This order could reflect the existence of darkness before the creation of light. The rabbis interpreted this as the day as a unit of time beginning in the evening. There was dark and then there was light. This is reflected in Jesus' day also where the new day began at twilight, in the evening.
▣ “day” The Hebrew term yom (BDB 398) can refer to a period of time (cf. Genesis 2:4; Genesis 5:2; Ruth 1:1; Psalms 50:15; Psalms 90:4; Ecclesiastes 7:14; Isaiah 4:2; Isaiah 11:2; Zechariah 4:10) but usually it refers to a 24-hour day (i.e. Exodus 20:9-10).
SPECIAL TOPIC: DAY (YOM)
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:6-8 6Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. 8God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
Genesis 1:6 This verse has two Qal JUSSIVES (“Let...) From the verb “be” (BDB 224, KB 243). The same construction is in Genesis 1:14 and Genesis 1:22.
NASB, NET JPSOA“an expanse” NKJV“firmament” NRSV, TEV“dome” NJB“vault”
This term (BDB 956, KB 1290) could mean “to hammer out” or “to stretch out” as in Isaiah 42:5. This refers to the earth's atmosphere (cf. Genesis 1:20) depicted metaphorically as an air vault or inverted bowl above the surface of the earth (cf. Isaiah 40:22).
▣ “waters” Fresh water and salt water are important elements in extra-biblical creation accounts, but in the Bible they are controlled by God. There is no distinction in Genesis 1:0 made between salt water and fresh water. The water in the atmosphere is divided from the water on the earth. Analysis of Genesis 1:0 shows that God separates several things as a process to an inhabited earth (light from dark, water above from water below, water below from dry land, sun time from moon time).
Genesis 1:7 “separated the waters” God is in control of watery chaos (BDB 95, KB 110, Hiphil PARTICIPLE). He sets their boundaries (cf. Job 38:8-11; Psalms 33:6-7; Isaiah 40:12).
▣ “and it was so” Whatever God willed occurred and occurs (cf. Genesis 1:9, Genesis 1:11, Genesis 1:15, Genesis 1:24, Genesis 1:30).
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:9-13 9Then God said, “Let the waters below the heavens be gathered into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so. 10God called the dry land earth, and the gathering of the waters He called seas; and God saw that it was good. 11Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation: plants yielding seed, and fruit trees on the earth bearing fruit after their kind with seed in them”; and it was so. 12The earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. 13There was evening and there was morning, a third day.
Genesis 1:9-10 The initial two VERBS (BDB 876, KB 1082 and BDB 906, KB 1157) are both Niphal IMPERATIVES used as JUSSIVES. Does this imply one continent (i.e. Pangaea)? The earth is changing form (i.e. tectonic plates) continually. The question again is the age of the earth. Notice also God controls all natural phenomenon. There are no nature gods!
Genesis 1:9 “let the dry land appear” This is similar to the original holy hill of Egyptian cosmology. Another example of this sharing of a common world-view throughout the ANE would be humans created from clay. This is common to the creation accounts of Mesopotamia, Egypt and Israel.
Genesis 1:11-12 This was not meant to be a technical description for the origin of all plant life. It seems to refer to three types of plants: grasses, grains, and fruit. The animals will eat the first and second; humans will eat the second and third. God is preparing the earth step by step as a stage or platform on which to fellowship with and sustain His highest creation, mankind.
There have been several modern scientific theories as to the order of the development of plant life. Some scientists would assert this very order. But we must be careful because scientific theories change. Christians do not believe the Bible because science and archaeology confirm a matter. We believe it because of the peace we have found in Christ and the Bible's own statements of inspiration.
Genesis 1:11 “Let the earth sprout” This is a Hiphel JUSSIVE of the verb “sprout” (BDB 205, KB 233).
▣ “after their kind” Creation is structured (cf. Genesis 1:12, Genesis 1:21, Genesis 1:24, Genesis 1:25; Genesis 6:20; Genesis 7:14) so that once created, plants, animals and humans can reproduce and adapt in and of themselves. God created life to adapt. At this level, evolution to varying conditions surely occurred through time (micro-evolution or horizontal evolution).
There is a growing trend in theology toward the concept of progressive creation which implies that God may have created mankind (1) in stages or (2) Adam and Eve were created at a later stage, fully developed (cf. writings of Bernard Ramm and Hugh Ross).
In contrast to the ancient Near East where fertility was worshiped as twin gods, this shows the source of life as God, not a sexual act. In many ways this creation account diminishes the gods of the ancient Near East (water; light/dark; heavenly bodies; forces of nature; and fertility gods) as the plagues of the Exodus depreciated the gods of Egypt. The sole initiator is the one and only God!
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:14-19 14Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years; 15and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. 17God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. 19There was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
Genesis 1:14 “for signs and for seasons and for days and years” The heavenly lights were to mark feast days (cf. Genesis 18:14; Leviticus 23:0; Deuteronomy 31:10) and cycles of rest, work, and worship (cf. Psalms 104:19-23). The sun was created to divide the calendar and each day into segments of time to help humans fulfill all their responsibilities (i.e. physical and spiritual).
Genesis 1:16 “the two great lights. . .He made the stars also” God is creator of the heavenly bodies (cf. Isaiah 40:26). They are not deities to be worshiped (Mesopotamian astral worship, cf. Deuteronomy 4:19; Ezekiel 8:16) but physical servants (cf. Psalms 19:1-6). This is a theological statement!
Genesis 1:17-18 The parallel structure of the Hebrew implies three purposes in addition to Genesis 1:14.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:20-23 20Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” 21God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. 22God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” 23There was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
Genesis 1:20-23 Invertebrates appear in the Cambrian Period suddenly and in abundance of forms. There is no physical evidence of a gradual development.
The verbs “swarm” (BDB 1056, KB 1655) and “fly” (BDB 733, KB 800) used in Genesis 1:20 are both IMPERFECTS used as JUSSIVES.
Genesis 1:20 “living creatures” This same word, nephesh (BDB 659), is used of humans (cf. Genesis 2:7) and animals (cf. Genesis 2:19; Leviticus 11:46; Leviticus 24:18). It represents life force (cf. Ezekiel 18:4) related to and dependent on this planet.
▣ “birds” Literally this is “flying things” (BDB 733) because in Deuteronomy 14:19-20 it can also refer to insects.
Genesis 1:21 “created” This is the term bara (BDB 135, KB 153, Qal IMPERFECT) as in Genesis 1:1. It implies divine creation. “Man and the animals” are “made” in Genesis 1:24-25 which implies out of previously existing matter (i.e. dirt). However bara is used for “man” in Genesis 1:27 (three times).
This special term is used of (1) the universe (or earth) in Genesis 1:1; (2) of the sea creatures in Genesis 1:21; and (3) of mankind in Genesis 1:27.
NASB, NRSV, TEV, NJB“the great sea monsters” NKJV, NIV“great sea creatures” LXX, KJV,“great whales” JB“great sea-serpents”
This may refer to leviathan (BDB 1072, cf. Psalms 104:26; Psalms 148:7; Job 41:1ff). Sometimes the word is associated with Israel's enemies: (1) Egypt, Isaiah 51:9; Ezekiel 29:3; Ezekiel 32:2 (sometimes referred to as “Rahab” cf. Psalms 89:10; Isaiah 51:9) and (2) Babylon, Jeremiah 51:34. Often it is associated with cosmic/spiritual enemies, Job 7:12; Psalms 74:13; Isaiah 27:1. The Canaanite creation account makes this a god fighting against Baal but in the Bible it is a good creation of the one true God.
▣ “every winged bird” This includes everything that flies, birds and insects (cf. Deuteronomy 14:19-20).
Genesis 1:22 As the plants were made to reproduce, so too, the animals. God wants His planet filled with life (series of Qal IMPERATIVES [and one JUSSIVE], cf. Genesis 1:28; Genesis 9:1, Genesis 9:7). This was one of the rebellion issues (i.e. unwillingness to separate and fill the planet) of the Tower of Babel (cf. Gen. 10-11).
This is a study guide commentary, which means that you are responsible for your own interpretation of the Bible. Each of us must walk in the light we have. You, the Bible, and the Holy Spirit are priority in interpretation. You must not relinquish this to a commentator.
These discussion questions are provided to help you think through the major issues of this section of the book. They are meant to be thought-provoking, not definitive.
1. How is science related to the Bible?
2. The real questions are the who and why of creation, not the how and when. If this is true, how then should we interpret Genesis 1-2?
3. How did God create the physical world? Should we push fiat, ex nihilo if this is poetry?
4. What is the major thrust of Genesis 1:0?
5. How is the Bible like/unlike other creation accounts?
SOME HELPFUL RESOURCES
A. Objections Sustained by Phillip Johnson
B. Darwin on Trial by Phillip Johnson
C. Creation and Time by Hugh Ross
D. The Creator and the Cosmos by Hugh Ross
E. The Genesis Question by Hugh Ross
F. The Christian View of Science and Scripture by Bernard Ramm
G. The Scientific Enterprise and Christian Faith by Malcolm A. Jeeves
H. Coming to Peace with Science by Darrel R. Falk
I. The Language of God by Francis S. Collins
J. Who was Adam? by Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross
K. The Lost World of Genesis One, IVP (2009) by John H. Walton
CONTEXTUAL INSIGHTS INTO Genesis 1:24-3
A. In the past two centuries, OT scholars have often asserted that Genesis records two creation accounts by different authors, using different names for God. However:
1. this may be typical eastern literary form of a general account followed by a more specific account
2. Genesis 1:1-3 may be a summary account of the creation of this planet and Genesis 2:4-25 refers to the creation of the first couple.
3. this may reflect the different aspects of God's character (i.e. rabbinical, see SPECIAL TOPIC: Names for Deity)
a. Elohim - creator, provider and sustainer of all life
b. YHWH - savior, redeemer and covenant God of Israel
B. There seems to be a distinction made between God creating out of nothing and created things bringing forth. Example: God created in Genesis 1:21 yet in Genesis 1:20 the water produces; in Genesis 1:25 God made yet in Genesis 1:24 the earth produced. Augustine noticed this distinction and postulated two acts of creation: (1) matter and spiritual beings and (2) their organization and diversification.
C. This passage clearly teaches that humans are like the higher land animals:
1. both have nephesh, Genesis 1:4 and 2:7;
2. both were created on the sixth day, Genesis 1:31;
3. both were created from the ground, Genesis 2:19;
4. both eat plants for food, Genesis 1:29-30;
5. both procreate.
However, humans are also like God:
1. special creation, Genesis 1:26; Genesis 2:7;
2. made in the image and likeness of God, Genesis 1:26; and
3. have dominion, Genesis 1:26; Genesis 1:26, Genesis 1:28.
D. Genesis 1:26 “Let us . . . “ (cf. Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7; Isaiah 6:8) has been greatly discussed.
Several theories have emerged:
1. The plural of majesty (but no early example in the Bible or in rabbinic literature)
2. God speaking of Himself and the heavenly court of angels, 1 Kings 22:19
3. Points toward plurality in God, and therefore, foreshadowing of the Trinity, see SPECIAL TOPIC: The Trinity, Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7; Isaiah 6:8. It is to be noted that (a) Elohim is PLURAL and (b) divine persons are mentioned in Psalms 2:2; Psalms 110:1, Psalms 110:4: Zechariah 3:8-10.
E. Theories as to the meaning of image and likeness:
1. Irenaeus and Tertullian:
a. Image physical aspects of humanity
b. Likeness spiritual aspects of humanity
2. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Athanasius, Hilary, Ambrose, Augustine, and John of Damascus
a. Image ‒ nonphysical characteristics of man
b. Likeness ‒ aspects of man that can be developed such as holiness or morality, and if not developed then are lost.
3. The Scholastics (Thomas Aquinas)
a. Image mankind's rational ability and freedom (natural)
b. Likeness original righteousness and supernatural gifts that were lost at the fall.
4. The Reformers
a. All basically denied any distinction between the terms (Genesis 5:1; Genesis 9:6).
b. Luther and Calvin both express this concept in different terms, but basically expressed the same truth.
5. I think that they refer to our (1) personality; (2) consciousness; (3) language skills; (4)volition; and/or (5) morality.
F. See SPECIAL TOPIC: Natural Resources, below
SPECIAL TOPIC: NATURAL RESOURCES
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:24-25 24Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. 25God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:24 “Then God said,” Elohim (BDB 43) is the ancient plural name for God which dominates chapter 1. The etymology is uncertain. See SPECIAL TOPIC: NAMES FOR DEITY. The rabbis say that it shows God as creator, provider and sustainer of all life on planet earth. The PLURAL seems to be theologically significant when connected with Genesis 1:26; Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7 and the plurality of the word “one” which is found in the great prayer of monotheism(Shema), Deuteronomy 6:4-6. When used of the God of Israel the VERB is almost always SINGULAR. The term elohim in the OT can refer to (1) angels (cf. Psalms 8:5); (2) human judges (cf. Exodus 21:6; Exodus 22:8, Exodus 22:9; Psalms 82:1); or (3) other gods (cf. Exodus 18:11; Exodus 20:3; 1 Samuel 4:8).
▣ “Let the earth bring forth” This (BDB 422, KB 425) is a Hiphil JUSSIVE. There is a distinction made in Genesis 1:0 between God creating by the spoken word out of nothing and that which He created, reproducing (i.e. adapting). Compare Genesis 1:20 and 21 and Genesis 1:24 and 25.
▣ “living creatures after their kind” Genesis 1:24-25 describes the land animals both large and small, domestic and wild. Notice the term “living creatures”(BDB 659 and 311) is based on the term nephesh which is the word used for humans in Genesis 2:7. It is obvious that the uniqueness of mankind is not found in the term nephesh, often translated in Greek as “soul.” See Genesis 35:18; Genesis 35:18.
▣ “creeping things” Literally this refers to “gliding,” or “sliding” (BDB 943). This is the same word that is used in Genesis 1:21, “that moves.” It seems to refer to all animals which do not walk on their legs or that they have such short legs that they are unnoticeable.
▣ “and it was so” God's desires became reality! See note at Genesis 1:7.
Genesis 1:25 “and God saw that it was good” God's creation was good (BDB 373) and is proclaimed to be “very good” in Genesis 1:31. This may be a Hebrew idiom meaning adequate for an assigned purpose. Theologically it may also speak of the absence of sin from God's original creation. Sin is the result of rebellion, not creation.
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Genesis 1:26-31 26Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. 28God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” 29Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; 30and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food”; and it was so. 31God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.
Genesis 1:26 “Let Us make” The form (BDB 793, KB 889) is Qal IMPERFECT, but is used in a COHORTATIVE sense. There has been much discussion over the PLURAL “us” (cf. Genesis 3:22; Genesis 11:7). Philo and Eben Ezra say it is “the plural of majesty,” but this grammatical form does not occur until much later in Jewish literary history (NET Bible says it does not occur with VERBS, p. 5); Rashi says that it refers to the heavenly court (cf. 1 Kings 22:19-23; Job 1:6-12; Job 2:1-6; Isaiah 6:8), but this cannot imply that angels had a part in creation, nor that they have the divine image. Others assume that it is an incipient form of the concept of a Triune God. See Special Topic: Trinity.
Interesting is the fact that in the Mesopotamian accounts of creation the gods (usually linked to individual cities) are always contending with one another but here not only is monotheism evident but even in the few PLURAL expressions there is harmony and not capricious discontent.
▣ “man” This is the Hebrew word “Adam” (BDB 9), which is an obvious play on the Hebrew term for ground, adamah (cf. Genesis 1:9). The term may also imply “redness.” Many scholars believe that this refers to humanity being formed out of the red clods or clay of the Tigris/Euphrates River valley (cf. Genesis 2:7). Only in these opening chapters of Genesis is the Hebrew term “Adam” used as a proper name. The Septuagint uses the word anthropos to translate this term which is a generic term referring to men and/or women (cf. Genesis 5:2; Genesis 6:1, Genesis 6:5-7; Genesis 9:5-6). The more common Hebrew term for man or husband is ish (BDB 35, cf. Genesis 2:23 the etymology is unknown) and ishah (BDB 61) for woman or wife.
At this point in my theological understanding it is very difficult to relate the Bible's account of the creation of the original pair with the fossil remains of several types of bi-pedal Homo erectus. Some of these ancient grave sites include the burial of items apparently connected to a belief in an after life. I am not offended by evolution within species. If this is true, then Adam and Eve are primitive humans and the historical time-frame of Gen. 1-11 must be radically expanded.
Possibly God created Adam and Eve at a much later period of time (i.e. progressive creationism), making them “modern” humans (Homo sapiens). If so, then their relationship to Mesopotamian civilization demands a special creation sometime close to when culture begins. I want to emphasize that this is just speculation at this point in time. There is so much moderns do not know about the ancient past. Again, theologically, the “who” and “why,” not the “how” or “when” are crucial!
▣ “in Our image, according to Our likeness” The term “image” can also be found in Genesis 5:1, Genesis 5:3; Genesis 9:6. It is often used in the OT to denote idols (KB 1028 II). Its basic etymology is “to hew into a certain shape.” There has been much discussion in the history of interpretation to identify the exact meaning of image (BDB 853, KB 1028 #5) and likeness (BDB 198). Comparable Greek terms are found in the NT to describe humanity (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:7; Colossians 3:10; Ephesians 4:24; James 3:9). In my opinion, they are synonymous and describe that part of humanity that is uniquely capable of relating to God. The Incarnation of Jesus shows the potential of what humanity could have been in Adam and will be one day will be through Jesus Christ. See Who was Adam? By Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross, p. 79.
▣ “let them rule” This is literally “trample down” (BDB 853, KB 1190, Qal IMPERFECT used in a JUSSIVE sense). This is a strong term that speaks of mankind's dominion over nature (cf. Psalms 8:5-8). This same concept is found in Genesis 1:28. The two terms, “rule” in Genesis 1:26 and 28, and “subdue” in Genesis 1:28 have the same basic etymology which means “to tread upon” or “trample.” Although these VERBS seem hard they reflect the image of God's reign. Mankind has dominion over the created earth because of his/her relationship to God. They were to reign/dominate as His representatives, in His character. Power is not the theological issue, but the way it is exercised (for self or for the good of others)!
Notice the PLURAL, which implies mutual dominion of male and female (cf. Genesis 5:2). Also notice the PLURAL IMPERATIVES of Genesis 1:28. The submission of the woman only comes after the Fall of Genesis 3:0. The real question is, “Does this submission remain after the inauguration of the new age in Christ”?
Genesis 1:27 “God created” There is a threefold use (Qal IMPERFECT followed by two Qal PERFECTS) of the term bara (BDB 127) in this verse, which functions as a summary statement as well as an emphasis on God's creation of humanity as male and female. This is printed as poetry in NRSV, NJB and acknowledged so in NIV footnote. The term bara is only used in the OT for God's creating.
▣ “in His own image” It is extremely interesting that the PLURAL of Genesis 1:26 in now a SINGULAR. This encompasses the mystery of the plurality, yet the unity, of God. God's image (BDB 853) is equal in men and women! See Special Topic: Women in the Bible.
▣ “male and female He created them” Our sexual aspect relates to the needs and environment of this planet. God continues to separate (see note at Genesis 1:4). Notice the mutuality here, in Genesis 2:18 and Genesis 5:2. Our divine image allows us to uniquely relate to God.
Genesis 1:28 “God blessed them . . . Be fruitful and multiply” Part of God's blessing (BDB 138, KB 159, Piel IMPERFECT) was procreation (cf. Deuteronomy 7:13). This blessing was both on the animals (cf. Genesis 1:22) and on man (cf. v. Genesis 1:28; Genesis 9:1, Genesis 9:7). In the Mesopotamian creation accounts the noise of the overpopulation of humans is the reason for the gods' destruction of humanity. The Genesis account urges population growth. It is surprising that one of the first acts of rebellion (cf. Gen. 10-11) was mankind's reluctance to separate and fill the earth.
▣ “subdue it; and rule” There are two commands in the Hebrew text which are parallel to “Be fruitful and multiply” (series of three Qal IMPERATIVES). This makes both human sexuality and human control God's will.
Both the Hebrew verbs, “subdue” (BDB 461, KB 460) and “rule” (BDB 921, KB 1190), can have a negative (i.e. cruel domination) connotation. The specific context must determine whether the meaning is benign or aggressive.
Genesis 1:29 The plant kingdom is divided into three different groups. The food chain begins with photosynthesis in plants. All earthly animal life depends on the miracle of plant life. In this verse, mankind is given the grains and the fruits for his food (cf. Genesis 2:16; Genesis 6:21), while the third group, the grasses, is given to the animals. It was not until after the flood that humans were allowed to eat flesh (cf. Genesis 9:3). This may be connected with the fact that there was no harvest possible that year. It is theologically inappropriate to draw universal dietary food laws from Genesis 1:0.
It is also possible that this description is only related to the Garden of Eden. Death and carnivores go back to the earliest fossils relating to the Cambrian layer 500,000 years ago where the fossilized record of life begins with profusion.
Genesis 1:30 “I have given every green plant for food” The thrust of this statement is that all life is based on the process of photosynthesis (i.e. the food chain).
Genesis 1:31 “it was very good” This is an extremely important conclusion to creation because in later gnostic Greek thought, matter is evil and spirit is good. In this Greek system (as well as some Mesopotamian texts) both matter and spirit are co-eternal which serves as their explanation of the problems on earth. But the Hebrew account is very different. Only God is eternal and matter is created for His purpose. There was no evil in God's original creation, only “freedom”!
▣ “there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day” It is important to note that, like the third day, the sixth day has two creative acts, so there are eight creative acts in six days. The rabbis begin the new day at twilight which is based on this phrase, “evening and morning.”