The waters recede (Genesis 8)

The waters steadily recede.

Eventually, the mountaintops emerge from the waters, echoing Day Three of Creation Week (1:9).  Day Three also had the emergence of plants and we will soon see expedited plant growth in the Noah account.

Eventually, the ark comes to rest in the "mountains of Ararat".  This area is currently in Eastern Turkey.

Noah still cannot see any land, so he sends out a raven and then a dove looking for dry land.  They each return, but eventually the dove returns with an olive leaf and afterwards, it does not return at all.  Given the speed of the events, it suggests that there is miraculous plant growth in order to go from no dry land to an olive leaf within the span of a week.  (8: 9-11).  This is a more subtle reminder of Day Three of Creation Week.  (1:11-12).

I recently read the flood myth of the Pima people, a Native American tribe in Arizona.  This account has something similar to the Biblical one in that a woodpecker and a humming bird are dispatched to fly around the world looking for the "earth's navel", where the Pima people live.  It seems the gods are looking for the remnant of humans.

This is about the only similarity with the version about Noah.  Afterwards, one of the goods, Ee-ee-toy creates giant snakes that push away the waters.

Back to Genesis, the earth dries to the point that Noah can release the animals.  He does so and immediately builds an altar and sacrifices animals to God.  (8:20).  Here, we see that Noah conducts animal sacrifices, but still have no evidence that Noah eats the animals he was supposed to protect.  This falls in line with the idea that the seven pair of clean animals (7:3) were intended for sacrifice and not human consumption.

It is also the second recorded instant of animal sacrifice in the Bible.  The first one lead to the death of the sacrificer, Abel.  Here, no one is angered by it.  In both accounts, God is pleased and accepts the offering.  In fact, the smell of the offering is a fragrance to God.

It rains and it pours (Genesis 7)

God tells Noah to go into the ark.  The animals arrive and within a week, the rains begin.  The text provides three different sources of water.  In verses 11-12, they are:

* Rain for forty days and forty nights.
* Springs of the great deep burst forth.
* Floodgates of the heavens were opened.

I have heard theories from people who take the beginning of Genesis far more literal than I do, that the earth had a literal water sphere around it.  This water sphere had floodgates, which are opened at the this time, as the text states.  Later, as the water drains, it drains out of areas like a faucet drain, perhaps the same places as the "springs of the great deep".

I certainly cannot disprove such an idea, but I do not think we even need to go there for an interpretation that makes sense.  The "floodgates of the heavens were opened" feels like a metaphor to just mean a lot of rain, as we might say "it is raining cats and dogs".

Really, I think it is besides the point.  There is clearly a lot of supernatural activity as described in the text.  In fact, as modern readers, we are actually left with a lot of questions.

* What about insects?  Were they on the ark?  Bacteria, molds, fungi, and non-food plants?  Did Noah collect all of these, too?

* What about fresh water fish and seawater fish?  With all the waters mixing, this will destroy all freshwater environments.  Freshwater fish would be poisoned by the high salt content.

* Why did not people just get in boats and save themselves?


Regional or worldwide flood?
The text indicates that it was a worldwide.  Even if we allow that from Noah's perspective, it could have "worldwide" to him, there is something that is not quite right about that.  Mainly, the stated purpose of the flood was that it would need to be worldwide.

The biggest issue I have with a super-literal interpretation comes from plant growth records that extend by 10,000s years.  From there, we can a see a continual growth pattern with no evidence of a cataclysmic flood.

Really, I do not know.  Obviously, what happened requires a major supernatural event.  Could God have flooded the world, then removed all geological and paleobiological evidence to that effect?  Sure, I suppose.

I also am not impressed with the "universal flood myth" in many cultures as evidence of the great flood.  The main reason is that the details of the flood look very different in cultures far removed from mesopotamia.  There, we find floods that were regional, caused by rain, or caused by tsunamis or hurricanes.  What that shows to me is not that the "great flood" was universal, but rather that flooding is a universal problem.

Another theory is that this came from the end of the Ice Age when flooding became a major problem.  Ice melted and dry land filled in with water.  For instance, both the Persian Gulf and the Black Sea were largely dry basins not too long ago.

The clean and unclean animals always stand out to me.  The Robert Alter translation and commentary states that this referred to sacrificial animals, not dietary animals.  This would make more sense given that the ark environment would have to be vegetarian to some extent.

God's instructions to Noah (Genesis 6:13-22)

This is the longest continuous speech thus far in the book of Genesis.  It contains God's instructions to Noah to escape the oncoming flood.

God tells Noah to:

1.  Build an ark of cypress wood
God gives Noah specific details about the dimensions (300 x 50 x 30, cubits).  It also should include a skylight at the top and a door on the side.

2.  Collect animals
A male and female of every kind.  We later see Noah collected seven of every clean and unclean animal.

3.  Collect food
Some of every type to serve as food Noah and his family and the animals.  Collecting plants would allow all terrestrial plant life to survive the food.

Taking the story as it is laid out, an open question is -- how much God would help Noah in doing all of this?  After all, God is about to do a major supernatural event.  Noah is asked to an awful lot.

I think it is usually assumed that God helped Noah at least with the collection of animals.  Animals are not corralled or herded without a herdsmen or someone directing their activity.  Likewise, how would Noah know which animals is every kind unless God tells him so.

More realistically, and I think tends to be overlooked in depictions of Noah's Ark, some animals would need their character changed.  Some would be dangerous to either Noah or other animals.  For instance, it would not help the survival of zebras if lions ate all of them while on the ark.

Likewise, collecting enough food for them is a major undertaking, let alone collect the cypress wood necessary for the ark.

Noah could reasonably either (1) be a lumberjack and collect the wood, (2) build the ark, (3) collect animals, (4) grow voluminous amounts of food, or (5) collect the food harvests, but probably could not do all five simultaneously.

In depictions of the story that I have seen, God gives Noah the lumber and Noah is the shipbuilder.  Likewise, God sends the animals, two by two, to Noah.  Plants are usually overlooked in depictions, but God would have to do the same.


Undoing Creation and Re-creation
What is about to happen is simultaneously an doing of creation and its re-creation.

God is about to change the boundary of earth, sea, and sky, which were set in Days Two and Three of Creation Week.  This change in the boundaries will unleash waters and kill animals, plants, and humanity, undoing the creation of life on Days Three, Five and Six.

We also will see a re-creation.  In order for the animals to live happily together on the ark, they must be returned to the condition they had in the Garden of Eden.  In other words, the ark itself must be a vegetarian community, at least for the animals.  So, assuming assuming that happens, then creation is happening a second time, and whatever tainted nature the animals had due to man's corruption is being undone.

Of course, we will see a new population of people, just like with Adam and Eve.  God is starting humanity over with Noah.

The rise of agriculture (Genesis 2:4-9)

Finally, we get to the Garden of Eden and the first named people, Adam and Eve.

Prior to that, we see something very interesting.  Before Adam appears, verses 4-6 state that there were no "plant" or "shrub" in the "field".  We saw the rise of plants on Day  Three of Creation Week (1:11-13).  So, what is this?  

On one hand, if we view Genesis 2 generally as a retelling of Genesis 1, but with a stronger emphasis on the role of mankind, then perhaps 2:4-6 cover the situation on Day Three.  I think that is a fair interpretation.

Alternatively, 2:4-6 could cover the rise of agricultural, I.e., field plants.  The text emphasizes that these are "field" plants and verse 6 further links this concept to man working the ground.  There was no man to "work the ground", so God's solution was to have springs of water emerge from the ground and the create man in verse 7.  Finally, in verse 8, we see that God "had planted" a Garden, named Eden.  The concept of "Garden" inherently requires agriculture.

Looking back at Genesis 1, do we consider these events straddling the Creation Week?  We have a separate creation account, so what to do with them?

I think it generally is commonly accepted that the events of Genesis 2 straddle Genesis 1.  However, if we take them as separate distinct events, we get a sense of God's re-creative abilities.  God can not only only create once, but can recreate creation to match the needs of man.  This opens up an interesting perspective and possibilities about nature.  

First, nature is not "static", but rather there is a flux.  This actually is confirmed in science, including evolution on any level (micro evolution and macro evolution).  Likewise, we see both a destruction and creation of new species today.  From what I remember in my ecology classes, the background rate for both is about 1/1,000,000 species a year.  Meaning that for every 1,000,000 species, one species goes extinct and one species is formed each year.  The net natural rate is on balance, but although humanity has upset the balance.

Second, far more practically speaking, we can go to God for help in environmental problems and despoliation of the planet.  If God created once and recreated again to fit man's needs, then we today can go to God for help with nature.

This latter function of recreation and restoration is something that is strongly emphasized throughout the Bible.  In Ezekiel 37:1-14, we see the valley of dry bones come to life.  In Joel 2:25, God promises to repay the years that the locusts have eaten.

In the New Testament, Jesus provides living waters (John 4:13-14) and brings the dead to life (Lazarus, John 11:38-44; the open tombs, Matthew 27:52-53).

The Dawn of Controversy (Genesis 1)

People get so many different things out of Genesis 1.  The following represents my perspective on how to make sense of it.  

Although I point out areas of disagreement, it is not intended to be argumentative.  Rather, I seek to explore various ideas, their logic, and implications.

1.  On Reading Genesis, Generally

The creation account of Genesis 1 is, in my opinion, the greatest poem ever written. I think it should be aloud to really sink into the language and power of the text. For instance: "Let there be light [pause] and there was [1/2 pause] light".

But if it is poem, how literal should we take it? Does it reflect an historical record or a metaphor, describe events on a spiritual level, or was intended to contrast the Enuma Elish and show God's might over the Sumerian gods? I must admit that I just don't know. If anything, I'm leaning towards - Yes! - all of the above.

I'm actually confounded by the mystery of the questions raised by the answers. Particularly, why is light created on day 1, yet the sources of light and the sources for measuring the intervals of time are created later. 

As I was beating my brain for an answer to these paradoxes, I was reminded of the beauty, harmony, and rhythm of the language of Genesis 1 itself. It feels like a soft and gentle breeze. 

If we let Genesis speak to us, we can find a mystery, wonder, and awe.

We could also interject that some events could represent spiritual level events and not necessarily on the physical.  For instance, the separation of the "light" and "water" describe events that happened on a spiritual level, interwoven with the description of the natural world, with "water" being symbolic of evil. Thus it describes a spiritual war in the heavens which God has already won. The vanquished were sent from Heaven down to earth, for humans to "subdue". In Genesis 3, we find that the man failed at that objective. 

2.  Quandary - Aquatic plants

Interestingly, aquatic plants are not given the same details as terrestrial plants or aquatic animals.  In fact, it is somewhat unclear which day they were created on.  Day Three covers terrestrial plants (v. 11-13) and Day Four covers sea life, but the emphasis is on moving creatures (v. 20-21).  Verse 21 does state that God created every "living and moving thing" in the waters. 

We could also assume that the terrestrial plants were created three days before terrestrial animals so that the animals would have food when they arrived.  If we take this analogy, then aquatic plants would have to be created on Day Three.  

I say this as sort of a joke.  But it does highlight the perspective and biases of people reading this and the targeted audience of Genesis 1.  Genesis 1 does not provide a comprehensive and clear answer of things.

3.  The epoch and eon theory

One theory I have heard to try to harmonize this text with science is that these creation days generally represent epochs and eons from the Big Bang.

This has some logic to it, but also some difficulties, depending on how literal we want to be.

A.  The Big Bang

Generally, the Big Bang model goes as follows:

• 15 billion years ago

All mass of the universe exploded from a central point.  The universe has been expanding ever since.

• 15-5 billion years ago 

Various stars are born and die.  

Note, life as we know it requires heavy metals, for instance iron.  In a naturalistic model, these are only created in stars through nuclear fusion.  The protons of hydrogen atoms fuse and become helium.  This fuses with another hydrogen atom, which becomes lithium, and so forth.  That is how we have all chemicals other than hydrogen.  Consider these as elemental seeds of the earth we know today.

• 5 billion years ago

Our own solar system is born.  

The earth is a gaseous ball.  The solar winds burn off the gases and consolidate the mass of the earth until it is a molten rock.

• 5-3 billion years ago

The earth cools.  Life begins.

• 3 billion years ago- present

Multicellular plants emerge in the oceans.  The release oxygen as a waste product which transforms the atmosphere.  Moving sea creatures form and plant life colonies land.  Sea creatures move from the ocean to land.  

Land creatures give rise to birds and eventually humans.

B.  How does this compare with Genesis 1?

Pre-day one:  God created the heavens and the earth.  If we want to add a "then" to make it a "heavens and 'then' the earth", that roughly equals what scientists say about the first 10-15 billion years.

Day one: a formless earth, separation of lights.  This somewhat matches, especially if we consider the solar winds blowing against the gaseous ball of the earth.  But we can also use this to interpret the prior verse to read:

"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the 'formless' earth."

Thus, the events of Day One and Two give it form.  These are the separation of lights and the separation of water from land.Day Three is the formation of the rise of terrestrial plants.  

Up to now, this generally follows the order events in the Big Bang model, if we allow that "days" are actually eons of time, representing billions of years.

Day Four presents a big problem.  Here, we have the creation of the sun, moon, and stars.  In the Big Bang model, it is the sun and stars that enable the development of the earth.  Here, it is reversed.

Day Five potentially presents another problem - the rise of sea life.  Particularly, if we assume that this includes aquatic plants, since they would need to rise before terrestrial plants.  However, if we read into Day Four that aquatic plants also rose with the terrestrial plants, this problem goes away.

Day Five presents another problem - the birds before terrestrial animals.  The scientific model has dinosaurs rising before birds.

Day Six - the rise of terrestrial animals and finally, man.  That generally follows the scientific model.

4.  The "Gap Theory"

One attempt to get around this problem is that verse 1 covers 15 billion years, up to roughly about 6,000 years ago.  Verse 2 picks up there, thus making a huge gap of time.  In the interim, we had the dinosaurs, etc...and eventually a massive spiritual war that left the earth a formless mess, requiring a re-creation.  This re-creation is the focus of what we know as Creation Week.

I am generally comfortable with this idea, but one problem with this theory is that the sun, moon, and stars are created after the earth has form.  One way of getting around that is to assume that the sun, moon, and stars were already there, but unseen due to something like a "cosmic smog".  On Day Four, God is clearing out this smog.  The text does not explicitly say that the sun, moon, and stars come into existence on Day Four, they just need to "be" - "let there be lights in the expanse of the sky."

5.  The “appearance” of an older earth

Another theory I have heard is that the entire universe was created in Creation Week but has the appearance of a much older universe.  It uses an analogy that Adam and Eve were created in the adult form.  They appeared to be twenty-five - or however old you imagine them - but actually are only minutes, hours, and days old as the story unfolds.

Several problems with this model:

(1) The text explicitly states that Adam and Eve had the appearance of being much older than they are.  They obviously were not created as infants because they carry on conversations.  The text does not state this about the earth, sun, moon, and stars.  

(2) It actually gives deference and acceptance of the scientific principles underlying the rationale for an old earth.  In essence, this model says "yes, the scientist measurements are absolutely right".

(3). What about fossils?  The model would be a lot easier to accept if we were only talking about the abstract expanding universe.  But we have fossils, not just of dinosaurs, but of plants that show continuous plant growth cycles that go back 10,000s of years.  

If God made the appearance of an older earth, then God made the fossils to give the appearance of an older earth.  Why would God do this?  This idea walks a fine line of making God to out like a liar.

To harmonize this, some go as far as to say that devil put fossils here to confuse scientists.  This saves God's reputation for honesty, but lacks intellectual satisfaction.  It also comes across paranoia, as if a person's faith hinges on whether or not God made the earth 6,000 years ago.  If a person accuses the devil of making fossils, then the person's faith is threatened by the existence of fossils.

Another problem with this is that it gives an attribute of God to the devil.  This is the creative power of God.  One of the things that makes God distinct and Holy is that God can create.  God created the world and the universe and this makes God amazing.  God is distinct in this ability to create the world.  In the Bible, only God is given credit for the creation of the world or any part in it. That said, mankind is made in the image of God and given the ability to create things.

If we believe the devil created fossils or the appearance of past life, then we are giving an attribute to the devil something that prior to that was a distinctive characteristic of God.

6.  Does the Bible even say that the earth is 6,000 years old?

Despite the quandaries and lack of information, I actually do not have much problem with a literal six day Creation Week.  I do have a problem with the extrapolation from this that the earth is 6,000 years old.

I have done a quick survey of the logic of this and it seems to be as follows:

1. God created the earth in six literal days and rested on the Seventh.
2. God likes the number "Seven". 
3. Humanity with rest with the Millennium (Rev. 20).  Essentially, it will be like a Sabbath for Humanity since Satan will be bound.
4. The Millennium has not happened yet.
5. A day is "like a thousand years to God" (2 Peter 3:8).  The rest of the verse is usually omitted, that the "a thousand years is like a day".  The following verses emphasize the patience of God.
6. Combining these principles, then if Humanity will experience a Thousand Year Sabbath, and a day is a thousand years to God, then on creation week, God created six thousand years for age of humanity, pre-Millennium.
7. Therefore, the earth and humanity is less than six thousand years old.

Nowhere in the Bible does it actually state that the earth or humanity is less than six thousand years old.  This is something people put together based on combining verses from three different areas of the Bible devoid of the context that the verses appear.

The worst part of the logic is the application of the day is a thousand years.  In context, it emphasizes the patience of God.  Likewise, the rest of the verse that a thousand years is like a day shows the interchangeability of time for God, rather than providing a road map to conclude about the age of the earth or humanity.

Likewise, there is is no reason to expect that the number "Seven" is more important than other numbers that God uses elsewhere in the Bible.  For instance, "Three" marks the Trinity, "Twelve" is the number of Tribes of Israel and the number of Apostles, and "Fifty" sets the years of Jubilee and the date of Pentecost.  Why use "Seven" as a special number for use in a way the Bible does not instruct - multiplied by a 1,000 to set the age of the earth or humanity? 

Rather, in context, the number Seven is used to set a date of rest.  This is what we do - every seven days - rest.  Culturally, we observe rest every seven days.  In fact, it lasts for two days.  We call them weekends.

7.  A metaphorical approach

This is my personal favorite.  If you consider the ancient near east creation myths, particularly the Enuma Elish, then the symbolism falls into place.

People in the ancient near east worshipped stars, God created them on Day 4, almost like an after thought.  It is literally like this:  "He also made the stars".  (v. 16).

The people feared the deep waters, symbolic of evil.  Here, God shows dominance and power over it.  In fact, God's spirit hovered over it.  (v. 2).

They also feared chaos.  Here, God reaches into the chaotic universe simply by speaking.  Through speaking alone, God draws out light, land, life, and eventually humans.

Dawn of Dawns - Time (Genesis 1)

The Dawn of Time

The opening verses of Genesis also provides the dawn of time, as we know it.

On Day One, God separated light from darkness.  (v. 4) God then called the light "day" and darkness "night".  This resulted in "evening" and "morning", the first day.  God declaring that light is "day" and darkness is "night" creates a time interval of a day, the first day.  God even declares that this is a “day”, the first day, which is a unit of time.  Prior to this part of the text, there is no mention of any time intervals.  

God declares time and it happens.  This happens before our celestial clocks even exist.

Days One, Two, and Three each happen before the creation of the sun, moon, and stars.  These celestial bodies are necessary to mark the passage of time.  

Without our sun, how would we know when a day ends and another begins?  We can look to our clocks, but the ancients could not do this.  Rather, the sun was the clock.

The author does not explain a resolution to this mystery of time before time-pieces, aside from stating that Days One, Two, and Three happened.

So when we get to verse fourteen and the celestial time markers, they are for us, not God.  God does not need them to understand the passage of time.  Verse fourteen says the sun, moon, and stars are there to serve as signs to mark seasons, days, and years.  

Still though, an enigma remains and it makes one wonder - prior to the creation of the sun, what did a day look?

The Dawn of Dawns - The Bible (Genesis 1)

The Dawn of the Bible

The Bible opens with a description of the light of a dawn. Verses 1-2 describe a darkness before the dawn.  The heavens and earth exist, but "the earth was formless and empty, darkness over the surface of the deep".  Darkness is present and needs subjugation by "light".

Dawn breaks in when God said, "Let there be light" and the result - "there was light".  (Verse 3).

If we consider this as the "dawn" of the Bible, what would be the "sunset?".  Relatedly, how does this pattern work elsewhere in the Bible.

The Biblical text itself as well as the organizers of the Bible provide several answers.

A sunset over Israel: Malachi

Malachi is the final book of the Old Testament.  Historically, several centuries spanned between the life of the prophet Malachi and the birth of Jesus.  Thus, that makes it a "sunset".  

In Malachi, we see God' frustration with the people of Israel.  For instance, the sacrifices the priests use are crippled and diseased animals  (1:8).  Malachi points out that even by human standards, this is unacceptable.  ("Try offering them to your governor").  

Likewise, Malachi also emphasizes a coming day of immense action by God.  Granted, the emphasis is on the day of judgment, but also speaks of God in the temple.  (3:1)

A New Dawn:  The Birth of Jesus

The Gospels are the dawn of the new day.  They primarily do this by drawing elements from the Old Testament to show that this is the promised day.  But we also see reminders of Creation Week and the beginning of Man.  Here is what we have:

1.  Genealogies - a link to the prior days

• Matthew 1:2-16 - a genealogy of Jesus extending to Abraham (connection with the past, the prior days)
• Luke 3:23-38 - the genealogy connects Jesus with Adam, the first of man.  This literally connects Jesus with Genesis and the Dawn of Man.

2.  Light and stars

The Gospels also use the element of "light", which was a predominant focus in Creation Week.  This literally shows us a new light for a new day.

• Matthew 2:2-11 - a star in the east directs the magi to the home of Jesus
• John 1:5 - Jesus is the light that shines in the darkness

3.  "In the beginning" (John 1:1-5)

The literal text of John 1 explicitly links Jesus to Creation Week.  In fact, John 1 seems modeled after Genesis 1 with its verbatim use of "In the beginning".  Verses 2-3 state that Jesus not only was in the beginning with God, but also had a hand in the creation of everything else.  

4.  A messenger to prepare the way

We saw this in Malachi, the sunset of the Old Testament.  Here, the Gospels state that John the Baptist is the messenger predicted by the prophets.

• Matthew 3:1-12 - citing Isaiah 40:3
• Mark 1:1-8 - citing Malachi 3:1 and Isaiah 40:3
• Luke 3:1-6, citing Isaiah 40:3-5
• John 1:19-28, citing Isaiah 40

A Sunset:  The Book of Revelations

The Book of Revelations is the final book of the Bible.  It is the revelation to the last living apostle, the Apostle John.  He writes a letter to the seven churches of Asia detailing what he sees.  

The Book of Revelations provides a sunset to the overall Biblical narrative. It is the last revelation to the last apostle who knew Christ in the person.  Its placement as the final book highlights this finality.

Like the sunset of the Old Testament, Malachi, it looks forward to a future day.  According to Revelations, there will be a New Heaven, a New Earth, and a New Jerusalem.  (21:1-4).  The final words of Jesus in the Bible are recorded in the penultimate verse of Revelations, making it the penultimate verse of the entire Bible.  

At the sunset of the Bible, we look forward to a new dawn and a new day with these words:

"Yes, I am coming soon."