Kurieuo wrote:Establishment of Kingdoms
Day 1 - God establishes the heavens and earth. The Spirit of God broods over earth's formless, void "watery face". Light is commanded to be had, which is then separated from darkness establishing the kingdoms of "Night" and "Day".
This recent thread has led me to do more research into Day 1, specifically the relationship between Genesis 1 and Exodus 20:11. From the narrative structure of Genesis 1 it appears that Genesis 1:1-2 are establishing the context for the "creation days" and Day 1 actually begins with Genesis 1:3 where we have the first "then God said". The implication of this is that the earth had already been created/bara (Genesis 1:1) but was in an unordered state prior to the 6 creation days (Genesis 1:2).
So how does this reconcile with Exodus 20:11?
It just hit me a couple of days ago that Exodus 20:11 does not say...
For in 6 days the Lord created/bara the heavens and the earth
The text of Exodux 20:11 says
For in 6 days the Lord made/asah the heavens and the earth.
Exodus 20:11 is not saying that the heavens and the earth were created/bara (brought into existence) during the 6 creation days. It is saying that the heavens and the earth were asah/made/formed/worked on during the 6 creation days.
So the Genesis 1 narrative and Exodus 20:11 are in agreement that the heavens and the earth were in existence prior to the 6 creation days, and that during the 6 creation days (each beginning with "and God said") God is bring order to the disorder we see in Genesis 1:2.
Day 2 - God separates waters above from waters below, creating a sky separate from the waters below.
Day 3 - God creates dry land and the waters now gathered together on the surface seas. Vegetation if created on the land (in preparation for land creatures).
Filling of the Kingdoms
Day 4 - God fills the heavens, creating stars, Sun, moon, establishing them for signs and seasons. The Sun fills and governs the "Day" (light) sky, the lesser light (Moon) fills and governs the Night (dark) sky which is also filled with stars.
God does not create/bara the sun moon and stars during day 4. He makes/asah the sun moon and stars. The sun, moon and stars are placed in the firmament/sky (not created) on day 4.
Day 5 - God fills the waters which bring forth creatures abundantly, filling the waters in the seas with life, and filling the
skies above with birds.
Day 6 - God fills the land which brings forth creatures, every thing that creeps upon the earth, and finishes with the creation of man and woman.
The literary form employed (creation within a Sabbatical 6-1 day structure) to establish Israel's God as the one true Lord of all creation seems obvious to me. Those who treat the text more rigidly, imposing their own strongly held beliefs into the text (particularly regarding time), are performing eisegesis. Exegesis will stop talking when Scripture stops. Most conflict happens with eisegesis, the exegesis seems now quite straight-forward to me (after many years debating creation) and neutral to many varying positions often had.
The interpretive question for me is...
Is the original intent of the Biblical author the only valid basis for interpreting a Scriptural text or does the inspiration of the Holy Spirit allow for meanings to the Scriptural text that transcend the intent of the original author?
When you look at Messianic prophecies and the Resurrection we see numerous times where the special revelation by the NT authors provides new meaning to OT texts that were unknown to the author of the original text.
I have no problem with the premise that general revelation can also provide meaning to OT texts that transcends the original intent of the author of the original text.
I think the intent of Moses when he wrote the Genesis Creation account was to describe functional origins using temple imagery. The cosmology of Moses and the ancient world was very different from modern cosmology, so I do not think that the day-age theory understood within the context of modern cosmology represents Moses' original intent.
However, I do believe that the inspiration of the Holy Spirit does allow for the meaning of Scripture to transcend the original intent of the original author. Hugh Ross has convinced me that the Genesis 1 creation narrative is also consistent with the material origins of the heavens and the earth as understood within the context of modern cosmology.
All that to say this. I believe that it is possible to arrive at the day-age theory by using a legitimate exegesis of the Scriptural text.