The REAL World of Genesis 1

Ge 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

I have recently become aware of a troubling new challenge to (and rejection of) the face-value understanding of the creation account in Genesis 1. It claims that the original “world” of Genesis 1 is “lost” to us and can only be “rediscovered” by studying other ancient cosmologies that were being developed in Babylon, Egypt, and Phoenicia.

According to this theory, Genesis 1 does not actually describe God creating anything at all, whether in a seven-day period or otherwise! It does not have anything to do with God initially bringing into existence light, the expanse, the vegetation, the sun, moon, and stars, fish and birds, and beasts and man. It proposes instead that Genesis 1 tells us that God took materials that He previously created, perhaps even millions of years earlier, perhaps through evolutionary processes, and gave them form and function.

The more I have reviewed this approach, the more concerned I have become. I have been surprised to see it being considered, supported, and validated in various conservative, evangelical religious circles. Even some instructors and other leaders in Christian university settings whom I know personally have given it a public hearing without clearly refuting it.

Some are claiming that one may accept, support, and teach this position without compromising the Bible’s inspiration, accuracy, historicity, and reliability.

Obviously, this approach allows for, perhaps even calls for, some form of “theistic evolution” or “evolutionary creationism.” These ideas propose that evolutionary processes may have occurred over eons of time before God’s revelation in Genesis began, but that God oversaw or allowed these processes. This theory then interprets all the scriptures that describe creation within this framework.

I cannot accept this approach because of the clear message to be found throughout the scriptures, even beyond Genesis. I am convinced that the “real world” of Genesis 1 was never “lost,” and I base that conviction on what I read everywhere in the Word of God. I cannot see any inspired scripture which would keep me from taking the Genesis creation account at face value. Rather, the Spirit-led writers treated the text just as most Bible students once did – just for what it says. They did not attempt to “get behind the text” and explain that it meant something different from what it said.

The Law of Moses

Let’s begin with the words God spoke – yes, God Himself – when He gave Moses and Israel the Law, including the Ten Commandments.

Ex 20:9 “Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath of the Lord your God; in it you shall not do any work, you or your son or your daughter, your male or your female servant or your cattle or your sojourner who stays with you. 11 “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore, the Lord blessed the sabbath day and made it holy.”

It's interesting to study the source of the seven-day week in world history. Have you ever considered its origin? From a biblical standpoint, the seven-day week reflected the week of creation as described in Genesis. There is no other explanation given.

When God Himself said, “For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day,” how would the people of Israel have understood “six days?” If they would have taken these words to mean something different from what they say, the burden of proof is on those who would teach such a thing.

Surely those ancient Hebrews were much closer to the “REAL” world of Genesis than anyone living today, whether a scholar or otherwise. After all, it was their world! Surely God could have communicated to them in ways that they could understand. He would not have misled them. If the “seven days” had been related to the ancient cosmologies of other cultures, and not to the days of the week with which they were familiar, He could have indicated that. Why did He not? 

Why didn’t God through Moses explain Himself? The “lost world” hypothesis would perhaps answer that God didn’t need to explain the “hidden meaning” of the seven days because the Hebrews already understood that meaning.

However, God went on to stipulate the “face-value” meaning of Genesis 1 again. Once more, again in Exodus, God Himself interpreted the words of Genesis 1 in this same way.

Ex 31:16 “‘So the sons of Israel shall observe the sabbath, to celebrate the sabbath throughout their generations as a perpetual covenant.’ 17 “It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever; for in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, but on the seventh day He ceased from labor, and was refreshed.”

The Psalms

Let’s continue. What did the psalmists consider to be the truth about Genesis and creation? Granted, they used Hebrew poetry, rather than prose narrative. However, it seems clear enough that they connected Genesis 1 to the God’s original creation, not to His (much) later providing purpose to the heavens and earth that He had already made.

As you read this next text, consider what event was likely in mind when you see, “Of old You founded the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands.” Does this statement not interpret Genesis 1:1 as referring to God’s initial creation? (By the way, these words, first ascribed to Yahweh in this text, are later cited and ascribed to Christ in Hebrews 1:10-12, as another indicator of His full deity.)

Ps 102:25 “Of old You founded the earth, And the heavens are the work of Your hands. 26 “Even they will perish, but You endure; And all of them will wear out like a garment; Like clothing You will change them and they will be changed. 27 “But You are the same, And Your years will not come to an end.”

Again, while using poetic language, this next passage from Psalm 104 also points back to Genesis 1. It affirms the understanding that the first chapter of the Bible was to be taken for what it said.

Ps 104:5 He established the earth upon its foundations, So that it will not totter forever and ever. 6 You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. 7 At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. 8 The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them. 9 You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth.

The Later Prayer of Nehemiah

Notice how Nehemiah affirmed the Genesis creation when he praised God centuries later. In the 400s BC, Nehemiah led the effort to rebuild the wall of Jerusalem after the Jews returned from Babylonian exile.

Ne 9:6 “You alone are the Lord. You have made the heavens, The heaven of heavens with all their host, The earth and all that is on it, The seas and all that is in them. You give life to all of them And the heavenly host bows down before You.

The Teaching of Jesus

Jesus believed and taught that God made male and female from the beginning, apparently pointing to the original creation. Jesus accepted the plain meaning of Genesis and gave no indication that it had been lost. Also, Jesus quoted from both Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 together, as both belonged to one united creation account.

Noticeably absent from His teaching is any indication that the words of Genesis 1 had been misunderstood. There is no evidence that He connected the creation account with ancient cosmologies or anything else that was not stated in the text.

Mt 19:4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’”?

The “Beginning” of John’s Gospel

When the apostle John by inspiration wrote in John 1:1, “In the beginning …” he tied that phrase from Genesis 1:1 to God’s original creation. I see no room here for the idea that the heavens and the earth pre-existed the creation discussed in Genesis 1. To John, “the beginning” of Genesis 1:1 was not the time that God took the pre-existing heavens and earth and gave them form and purpose. No, “the beginning” for John was the point at which God through the Word, Jesus Christ, brought all things into being.

Jn 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.

The Teaching of Paul

When Paul by inspiration wrote regarding Genesis 1-3, he also accepted the text at face value. He did not connect it to the ancient cosmologies of Babylon or Egypt. Neither did he indicate at any point that its meaning had been lost.

Paul believed that when God said, “Let there be light” (Genesis 1:3), that was the point at which He created light. It was not the point at which God took pre-existing light, which had been around for perhaps millions of years, and gave it form and purpose.

2 Co 4:6 For God, who said, “Light shall shine out of darkness,” is the One who has shone in our hearts to give the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ.

Paul accepted the Genesis account of God’s making the first man, Adam. Adam was a real person, created directly by God from the ground, not as the result of an evolutionary process that began long before Genesis 1. In fact, the Bible says, “Then the LORD God formed man (Hebrew, adam) of dust from the ground (Hebrew, adamah), and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being” (Ge 2:7). The very name “Adam” reflects Paul’s conviction that Adam was created from the ground, rather than his having evolved from previous life forms.

1 Co 15:45 So also it is written, “The first man, Adam, became a living soul.” The last Adam became a life-giving spirit.

Genesis presents Eve as a real person, whom God made from one of Adam’s ribs (Ge 2:18-23). Adam called her “woman” (Hebrew, ishshah) because she was taken from man (Hebrew, ish). He also named her “Eve” (from the Hebrew term for life or living), because she was “the mother of all living” (Ge 3:20). From the standpoint of Genesis, it is false to say that Adam and Eve evolved from pre-human beings who existed possibly millions of years before the Bible’s creation account. Eve had no mother; she was the mother!

Paul likewise presented Eve as a real person. He taught that she was taken from the man, just as Genesis said, not as the result of evolution. Paul taught that a real serpent deceived Eve in a real moment in history.

1 Co 11:8 For man does not originate from woman, but woman from man; 9 for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. 10 Therefore the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 However, in the Lord, neither is woman independent of man, nor is man independent of woman. 12 For as the woman originates from the man, so also the man has his birth through the woman; and all things originate from God.

2 Co 11:3 But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.

Paul by inspiration taught that the gender distinctives for men and women originated in the actual historical events described accurately in Genesis. When the simple message of Genesis is questioned, minimized, or rejected, the God-created distinctions between male and female are blurred. We continue to see this in the religious world today.

1 Ti 2:11 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. 12 But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. 13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. 14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 But women will be preserved through the bearing of children if they continue in faith and love and sanctity with self-restraint.

In closing …

The best interpreter of the Bible, and the most ancient and reliable interpreter, is the Bible itself. There is no clear indication (that I can see) in the scriptures themselves that the Jews ever understood Genesis 1 in ways other than its apparent meaning. The idea that no one through the centuries could properly interpret the text or comprehend its “real” meaning is very troubling. I would need solid proof of such a claim.

Here’s another clincher for me. If the real world of Genesis 1 was somehow lost, who lost it? When, how, and why did that happen? Did no one ever write it down and preserve it? Wouldn’t that have been Moses’ role?

I cannot comprehend how the Jews, who so carefully and accurately transmitted the Word of God throughout the centuries, somehow lost the proper understanding of Genesis. I cannot see what reason they would have to start taking the text to mean just what it says. How could a Jew, or a group of Jews, pull such a switch and make such a change? Why is there no record of it? Why weren’t they caught and stopped by those who knew better?

Here are some wise words from an unknown source that are worth considering. “If someone tells you that he has found something in the Bible that no one has seen before in the two thousand years since the Bible was written, be careful! Perhaps what he says he found was never there to begin with.”

Of course, one may choose to reject the Bible completely, including what it says about creation. However, in my judgment, one who accepts the Bible cannot remove from it the claim that God created the heavens and the earth in six days and rested on the seventh day.

And so, I go back to where I started, back to where this post began, “in the beginning.”

Ge 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.