You are here

The Days of Genesis 1, part 2

In the previous post I concluded the story of Genesis 1 describes creation in six days. But if we want to understand this first creation story in Genesis, we can't ignore the second creation story, the story of Adam and Eve, of the garden and the serpent, which says all of creation—from forming the heavens and the earth to making the first human—happened in a single day.

These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

In the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens, when no plant of the field was yet in the earth and no herb of the field had yet sprung up—for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was no one to till the ground; but a stream would rise from the earth, and water the whole face of the ground—then the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and the man became a living being.

—Genesis 2:4-7  

This represents a very different order of creation than that of Genesis 1. But while modern readers often miss the change from plural days to a singular day, many ancient interpreters took Genesis 2 very seriously.

The Jewish philosopher Philo explained the difference in terms of the symbolism of six days.

And he says that the world was made in six days, not because the Creator stood in need of a length of time (for it is natural that God should do everything at once, not merely by uttering a command, but by even thinking of it); but because the things created required arrangement; and number is akin to arrangement; and, of all numbers, six is, by the laws of nature, the most productive: for of all the numbers, from the unit upwards, it is the first perfect one, being made equal to its parts, and being made complete by them; the number three being half of it, and the number two a third of it, and the unit a sixth of it, and, so to say, it is formed so as to be both male and female, and is made up of the power of both natures; for in existing things the odd number is the male, and the even number is the female; accordingly, of odd numbers the first is the number three, and of even numbers the first is two, and the two numbers multiplied together make six.

Second century Christian scholar Clement of Alexandria explicitly referenced the single day of Genesis 2.

For the creations on the different days followed in a most important succession; so that all things brought into existence might have honour from priority, created together in thought, but not being of equal worth. Nor was the creation of each signified by the voice, inasmuch as the creative work is said to have made them at once.…

That, then, we may be taught that the world was originated, and not suppose that God made it in time, prophecy adds: "This is the book of the generation: also of the things in them, when they were created in the day that God made heaven and earth." For the expression "when they were created" intimates an indefinite and dateless production.

Clement's disciple Origen used stronger language.

For who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? and that the first day was, as it were, also without a sky? And who is so foolish as to suppose that God, after the manner of a husbandman, planted a paradise in Eden, towards the east, and placed in it a tree of life, visible and palpable, so that one tasting of the fruit by the bodily teeth obtained life? and again, that one was a partaker of good and evil by masticating what was taken from the tree? And if God is said to walk in the paradise in the evening, and Adam to hide himself under a tree, I do not suppose that any one doubts that these things figuratively indicate certain mysteries, the history having taken place in appearance, and not literally.

So while the "days" of Genesis 1 refer to literal days within the context of the story, believers from ancient times have recognized that the story itself was never intended as literal history. But if it wasn't meant as history, what was its intent? We'll explore that in a future post.

55 readers like this.

Theme by Danetsoft and Danang Probo Sayekti inspired by Maksimer