The Moody Bible Commentary

GENESIS

MULTIPLE FACULTY CONTRIBUTORS

OUTLINE

Introduction

I.  Primeval History: Establishing the Need for Redemption (1:1–11:26)

A.  Perfect Creation: The Absence of Sin (1:1–2:25)

1.  An Overview of Perfection (1:2–2:3)

a.  Inanimate Perfection (1:1-19)

b.  Animate (Animal) Perfection (1:20-25)

c.  Human Perfection (1:26–2:3)

2.  A Close-Up on the Human Ideal (2:4-25)

a.  The Ideal Creation of Man (2:4-7)

b.  The Ideal Place of Man (2:8-14)

c.  The Ideal Responsibility of Man (2:15-25)

B.  Fallen Humanity: The Advent of Sin (3:1-21)

1.  The Lead-up to Sin (3:1-6)

a.  Step One: Wrongly Recalling God’s Word (3:1-3)

b.  Step Two: Wrongly Assessing God’s Purpose (3:4-5)

c.  Step Three: Wrongly Approving What Seems Good (3:6)

2.  Humanity’s Response to Sin (3:7-8)

a.  Conviction (3:7a)

b.  Division from Each Other (3:7b)

c.  Division from God (3:8)

3.  God’s Response to Sin (3:9-21)

a.  Gentle Confrontation (3:9-13)

b.  Merciful Chastisement (3:14-20)

c.  Gracious Forgiveness (3:21)

C.  Dire Consequences: The Aftermath of Sin (3:22–4:26)

1.  Exile: The Communal Aftermath of Sin (3:22-24)

a.  The Problem (3:22)

b.  God’s Gracious Solution (3:23)

c.  The Eastward Paradigm (3:24)

2.  Murder: The Personal Aftermath of Sin (4:1-22)

a.  The Priority of Heart Attitude (4:1-8)

b.  God’s Mercy, Again (4:9-12)

c.  Cain’s Repentance and God’s Grace (4:13-22)

3.  Injustice: The Legal Aftermath of Sin (4:23-26)

a.  Injustice as a Result of Ignoring God’s Example (4:23-24)

b.  Injustice Not Preclusive of God’s Blessing (4:25)

c.  Injustice as a Catalyst for Turning People to God (4:26)

D.  Fallen World: The Attachment of Sin (5:1–11:26)

1.  Break in the Prosecution: God’s Blessing Despite Depravity (5:1–6:8)

a.  Hope of Redemption (5:1-32)

b.  God’s Gracious Cap on Depravity (6:1-4)

c.  Measure of True Spirituality (6:5-8)

2.  The Flood: Humanity’s Chance to Come Clean of Depravity (6:9–9:29)

a.  Prelude: A Righteous Remnant in a Depraved World (6:9-10)

b.  Corruption of the Land (6:11-12)

c.  God’s Covenant with Noah (6:13-20)

d.  God’s Provision for Life (6:21-22)

e.  Entering the Ark (7:1-9)

f.  Prevailing of the Flood (7:10-24)

g.  Subsiding of the Flood (8:1-14)

h.  Exiting the Ark (8:15-22)

i.  God’s Provision for Life (9:1-7)

j.  God’s Covenant with Noah and All Life (9:8-17)

k.  Corruption of the Land (9:18-19)

l.  Postlude: A Righteous Remnant in a Depraved World (9:20-29)

3.  The Depth of Depravity in Post-Flood Humanity (10:1–11:26)

a.  Setting the Stage for Universal Rebellion (10:1-32)

b.  Rebellion Expressed: The Rise and Fall of Universal Human Pride (11:1-9)

c.  Transition to Pardon (11:10-26)

II.  Patriarchal History: Delineating the Path of Redemption (11:27–50:26)

A.  Descendants of Terah: God Making His Own Name for Man (11:27–25:11)

1.  The Abrahamic Covenant: God’s Promise for Israel and the Nations (11:27–12:20)

a.  God’s Sovereign Choice: Abram’s Passivity (11:27-32)

b.  God’s Gracious Promises: Resetting Abram’s Direction (12:1-9)

c.  God’s Unshakable Hold: Abram’s Deep Depravity (12:10-20)

2.  Living in the Land: God’s Affirmation of the Covenant (13:1–14:24)

a.  Affirming Abram’s Right to the Land (13:1-18)

b.  Affirming Abram’s Might and Prosperity (14:1-16)

c.  Affirming Abram’s Blessing and Status (14:17-24)

3.  Ratifying the Covenant: God’s Compromise with Weak Faith (15:1-21)

a.  Answering Abram’s Doubt about the Son (15:1-5)

b.  Affirming Abram’s Imperfect Faith (15:6)

c.  Answering Abram’s Doubt about the Land (15:7-21)

4.  Doubting God: The Fall Reprised (16:1-16)

a.  The Temptation (16:1-4a)

b.  The Human Consequences (16:4b-6)

c.  The Divine Response (16:7-16)

5.  Circumcision: The Sign of the Covenant (17:1-16)

a.  The Effected Covenant as the Basis of the Rite (17:1-8)

b.  Content of the Rite (17:9-16)

c.  Abram’s Response to the Rite (17:17-27)

6.  An Expression of Divine Fellowship (18:1-33)

a.  God Affirming His Empathy with Abraham (18:1-8)

b.  God Affirming His Grace toward Abraham (18:9-15)

c.  God Affirming His Justice to Abraham (18:16-33)

7.  A Paradigm of Corporate Judgment (19:1-29)

a.  Cause of Judgment (19:1-11)

b.  Distinction of Judgment (19:12-22)

c.  Purpose of Judgment (19:23-29)

8.  Persistence of Sin (19:30–20:18)

a.  Struggles of Lot’s Household (19:30-38)

b.  Struggles of Abraham’s Household (20:1-16)

c.  God’s Faithfulness and Grace in Sanctification (20:17-18)

9.  Sovereignty of God in Blessing (21:1-34)

a.  God’s Sovereignty in Blessing Abraham and Sarah (21:1-8)

b.  God’s Sovereignty in Blessing Hagar and Sarah (21:9-21)

c.  God’s Sovereignty in Blessing Abimelech and His People (21:22-34)

10.  The Pinnacle of Abraham’s Faith (22:1-19)

a.  God’s Call to Faith (22:1-2)

b.  Abraham’s Expression of Faith (22:3-9)

c.  The Angel’s Affirmation of Faith (22:10-19)

11.  Family Matters (22:20–23:20)

a.  Keeping Up with the Relatives (22:20-24)

b.  Mourning Sarah (23:1-2)

c.  Purchasing the Family Burial Plot (23:3-20)

12.  Finding Rebekah in Mesopotamia (24:1-67)

a.  Abraham’s Petition (24:1-9)

b.  God’s Answer (24:10-49)

c.  The People’s Response (24:50-67)

13.  Transferring the Torch to Isaac (25:1-11)

a.  Abraham’s Affirmation of Isaac (25:1-6)

b.  Isaac and Ishmael’s Burial of Abraham (25:7-10)

c.  God’s Affirmation of Isaac (25:11)

B.  Descendants of Ishmael: A Locus of Conflict with God’s People (25:12-18)

C.  Descendants of Isaac: Learning to Wait on God (25:19–35:29)

1.  Jacob and Esau: The Sons of Isaac (25:19-34)

a.  Barrenness of Rebekah (25:19-21a)

b.  Birth of Jacob and Esau (25:21b-26)

c.  Sale of Esau’s Birthright (25:27-34)

2.  Isaac: Struggles of a Patriarch (26:1-33)

a.  Struggling to Trust in God’s Promises: Isaac Lies about Rebekah (26:1-17)

b.  Struggling to Live with Sinful Men: Isaac Quarrels with the Men of Gerar (26:18-25)

c.  Struggling to Recognize the Sovereignty of God: Isaac Makes a Covenant with Abimelech (26:26-33)

3.  Jacob: Successor of Isaac (26:34–35:29)

a.  In the Land: Striving with Esau (26:34–28:9)

(1)  Prologue: Esau Marries Foreign Women (26:34-35)

(2)  Body: Jacob Strives for a Blessing (27:1–28:5)

(3)  Epilogue: Esau Marries Foreign Women (28:6-9)

b.  Outside the Land: Striving with Laban (28:10–31:55)

(1)  Jacob’s Journey (28:10-22)

(2)  Jacob’s Marriages (29:1-30)

(3)  Jacob’s Children (29:31–30:24)

(4)  Jacob’s Prosperity (30:25-43)

(5)  Jacob’s Flight (31:1–32:2)

c.  Return to the Land: Striving Resolved with People and God (32:3–35:29)

(1)  The Restoration of Jacob and Esau (32:3–33:20)

(a)  Jacob’s Fear of Esau (32:3-23)

(b)  Jacob’s Fight with God (32:24-32)

(c)  Jacob’s Restoration with Esau (33:1-17)

(d)  Jacob’s Restoration to the Land (33:18-20)

(2)  The Rape of Dinah (34:1-31)

(3)  The Close of the Jacob Story (35:1-29)

D.  Descendants of Esau: Another Locus of Conflict with God’s People (36:1–37:1)

E.  Descendants of Jacob: God’s Providence over Joseph and Israel (37:2–50:26)

1.  Joseph in the Pit (37:2–40:23)

a.  Joseph Is Sold into Slavery by His Brothers (37:2-36)

b.  Judah Receives a Male Heir by Deception (38:1-30)

c.  Joseph Is Falsely Accused by Potiphar’s Wife (39:1-23)

d.  Joseph Is Forgotten by the Cupbearer (40:1-23)

2.  Joseph as Prime Minister (41:1–50:26)

a.  Joseph Becomes Prime Minister (41:1-57)

b.  Joseph Tests His Brothers (42:1–44:34)

(1)  The Conscience Test (42:1-38)

(2)  The Character Test (43:1-34)

(3)  The Compassion Test (44:1-34)

c.  Joseph Reconciles with His Brothers (45:1-28)

d.  Joseph Cares for All Egypt (46:1–47:26)

(1)  Joseph Provides for the Family of Israel (46:1–47:12)

(2)  Joseph Provides for the People of Egypt (47:13-19)

(3)  Joseph Provides for Pharaoh (47:20-26)

e.  Joseph Receives the Blessing for His Sons (47:27–48:22)

f.  Jacob Blesses the Twelve Tribes (49:1-33)

g.  Joseph Believes God to the End (50:1-26)

INTRODUCTION

Author—Traditional View. Jewish and Christian traditions consistently affirm that Moses was the writer of the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible.

Moses is identified—either explicitly or implicitly—as the writer of the Pentateuch more often than any other writer is identified with any other biblical book(s). Mosaic authorship can be supported with several lines of evidence. (1) The Pentateuch claims this for itself (Ex 17:14; 24:4, 7; 34:27; Nm 33:1-2; Dt 31:9). (2) Other OT books claim Mosaic authorship (see, e.g., Jos 1:7-8; 8:32, 34; 22:5; 23:6; 1Kg 2:3; 2Kg 14:6; 21:8; Ezr 6:18; 2Ch 25:4; Dn 9:11-13; Mal 4:4). (3) Mosaic authorship is also the view of the NT (Mk 12:26; Lk 24:27; Jn 5:46; 2Co 3:15). (4) The details included in the Pentateuch point to an eyewitness author (Ex 15:27; Nm 2:1-31; 11:7-8), not an author writing centuries later. (5) The author was knowledgeable about Egyptian names, words, customs, and geography. Such knowledge indicates a writer from Egypt (Gn 13:10; 16:1-3; 33:18; 41:43), as Moses was, not an author or editor from Israel many centuries later. (6) Above all, the Lord Jesus Christ identified Moses as the author of the Torah. He stated (Jn 7:22) that Moses gave the Israelites the account of circumcision (Gn 17), whereas the rite itself was given to and handed down from the fathers, that is, the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This shows that the Lord Jesus did indeed recognize Mosaic authorship.

Author—Documentary Hypothesis. The Pentateuch was one of the first portions of the Bible in the post-Enlightenment period to be seriously reexamined by humanist-inclined scholars. The starting point for these scholars’ research was the conviction that the Bible is a purely (or primarily) human literary product, representing a collection of various ancient Near Eastern sources, both historical and mythological, which were collected, systematized, edited, and refashioned over centuries of time.

The application to the Pentateuch (and thus to Genesis) of this less-than-traditional approach was consolidated toward the beginning of the 19th century under the rubric of what has come to be known as the documentary or JEDP theory of the Pentateuch’s origins. According to this theory the Pentateuch is comprised of at least four different sources (Jahwistic, Elohistic, Deuteronomic, and Priestly), each of which is characterized by certain distinct features and emphases.

The ideological starting point of this view and its attendant methodology is, necessarily, that Moses did not write (or, at the very least, may not have written) the Pentateuch. A review of some of the proofs of this assertion illustrates the tenuousness, and even the circular logic through which the data are sifted:

1. The Different Names for God. In the Torah, different names for God are used in different passages, so advocates of the documentary hypothesis claim that this indicates different sources. For example, God is called Elohim in Gn 1:1–2:3 but called Yahweh Elohim (the LORD God) in Gn 2:4–3:24. This, however, does not derive from two separate sources but rather two distinct emphases. Elohim is the name for God as the Almighty Creator of the universe, while Yahweh is the relational, covenant name for God. It makes sense therefore, that the passage that describes the creation of the world would use Elohim, but the passage that describes the creation of humanity would use His relational name. Moreover, multiple names for God appear in other literature, such as Homer’s epics and the Quran, without requiring different sources.

2. The Presence of Duplications. In the Torah, there are several accounts that some claim are repetitions of the same event. For example, it is claimed that there are two creation accounts (1:1–2:3; 2:4-25), two covenant accounts (chaps. 15, 17); two banishments of Hagar (chaps. 16, 21); two name changes for Jacob (32:28; 35:10); two times Abraham claims Sarah as his sister, as does Isaac once (12:11-13; 20:11-13; 26:7); two complaints about food resolved by manna and quail (Ex 16:1-21; Nm 11:4-35); and two times water came from the rock (Ex 17:1-7; Nm 20:8-13). However, several possible reasons exist for these repetitions that do not require multiple sources. These events happened repeatedly, and the author included them for emphasis, or to show patterns of behavior, or to complement one another. In each case, there are good literary reasons for these repetitions.

3. The Presence of Anachronisms. It is claimed that when the text notes that the Canaanite was then in the land (Gn 12:6; 13:7) it reflects authorship at a time long after Moses when the Canaanites no longer were the dominant people in the land. Hence, the author was informing the audience of a prior state of affairs. However, the statements may simply imply that Moses, writing to the generation about to enter the land, sought to remind them that the Canaanites were also there in the days of the patriarchs. Another alleged anachronism is that the ancient city of Laish is called Dan (Gn 14:14), a name only given to that city after the conquest of Canaan (Jos 19:47; Jdg 18:29). However, calling the city Dan in the account of Abraham may be a result of a later scribe, when copying the Torah before the close of the OT canon, updating the city name, so that later generations would be able to identify the city under discussion. Another alleged anachronism is the statement that certain kings reigned in Edom before any king reigned over the sons of Israel (Gn 36:31), implying that this was written many years after Moses when there was kingship in Israel. But this could merely be Moses anticipating that Israel would one day have a king (cf. Dt 17:14-20) or even an editorial comment by a later scribe, copying the text before the close of the OT canon, and reflecting that Israel did indeed have kings later.

Clearly, these and other alleged anachronisms are easily resolved by recognizing that later scribes, writing before the close of the OT canon, would bring place names and circumstances up to date so that the readers could better understand the text.

4. The Characterization of Moses. This claim is that the Torah speaks of Moses as if he were a character in the narrative and not the author. For example, in the Torah, Moses is spoken of in the third person. This claim presupposes that the early Israelites were either unacquainted with or literarily too unsophisticated to employ the technique of third-person self-reference. However, this technique is attested in many instances throughout the OT (as in Ezra, Nehemiah, and most of the prophetic books) as well as in the NT and early postbiblical Hebrew literature. Another example is that the Torah reports that Moses was very humble, more than every human on the face of the earth (Nm 12:3). It is difficult to picture the humblest man on earth writing these words. However, this is a problem only if the concept of humility is understood as marked by meekness or modesty, low in rank, or deferential. But the Hebrew term ’anav conveys the fundamental idea of unworthiness, needy, or even afflicted (see, e.g., Pss 10:16; 34:3; Is 29:19; 61:1). One other example is that the Torah includes an account of Moses’ death (Dt 34). However, all that this indicates is that Moses did not write the last part of Dt and that God used a later prophet to add these words.

Date. Moses probably wrote the Pentateuch during the Israelites’ 40-year sojourn in the wilderness (c. 1446–1406 BC), completing the literary work shortly before his death (see Dt 33:1). The dating of the Pentateuch is derived from dates mentioned in 1Kg 6:1. There it says that Solomon began construction of the temple in the fourth year of his reign, approximately 967/966 BC, also stating that it was 480 years after the exodus. This would make the date of the exodus 1447/1446 BC. With a 40-year wilderness wandering, the date of the Pentateuch’s completion would be approximately 1406 BC.

Additionally, the text of the Pentateuch was copied repeatedly between the time of composition by Moses and the close of the Hebrew canon (in approximately 400 BC). As such, these scribes frequently included inspired updates, making historical comments, changing the names of cities to more contemporary names, and even adding sections, such as the account of the death of Moses, likely added by Ezra or one of his contemporaries (see comments on Dt 34:1-12).

Purpose. Genesis, like the rest of the Pentateuch, is both a sophisticated piece of literature as well as a thematically and theologically multilayered revelation. It therefore has not just one but several purposes.

As expressed by Christ, quoting from Dt 6:5, the greatest commandment requires a person’s all-consuming love for God (Mt 22:37). Fulfilling this commandment occurs when one loves other humans, those who are made in God’s image. Jesus then quoted from Lv 19:18 the complementary commandment, You shall love your neighbor as yourself. These commandments are really two sides of the same coin, and in fulfilling the first, a person fulfills the other. And in effect he is fulfilling the whole Law and the Prophets (Mt 22:40), a first-century Jewish way of referring to the entire Scriptures. Thus, the purpose of Scripture (including Genesis) is to direct people toward worshiping and loving God.

The secondary purposes of Genesis are reflected in (1) 1:1–11:9, a record not simply of early human history, but more specifically of humanity’s overarching depravity and therefore their need for a saving Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth according to the NT writers; and in (2) 11:10-50:26, which is a record not simply of Israel’s patriarchal history, but specifically of the path through which humanity’s need for the Messiah can be met.

Other purposes show humanity’s need for the Messiah by (1) establishing that humanity was not meant for sin (1:1–2:25); (2) showing how sin entered the world; (3) highlighting the negative consequences of sin; and (4) emphasizing that sin is an ongoing problem endemic to human nature, which people are incapable of resolving apart from God. In the larger part of Genesis, the path by which this need would be met becomes the focus—specifically, God’s work in laying the foundation for that nation through which Jesus would come. The Abrahamic covenant (12:1-3) consists of three essential elements: a defined location (the land of Israel 12:1); a distinct people (12:2); and an authoritative moral standard (12:3). The rest of Genesis shows how these three elements were realized and refined, so that in the fullness of time (Gl 4:4) would come the one through whom man’s need is fully met, Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham (Mt 1:1).

Christology. For the Christian who affirms the inspiration of Scripture and its divine authorship there can be no question that Genesis—as every part of the Hebrew Bible—has much to say about the Messiah. This was affirmed by Jesus Himself, who, when appearing unrecognized to those two disciples on the road to Emmaus, explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures beginning with Moses and with all the prophets (Lk 24:27). Christ may have begun with Genesis, the first book of Moses (here intended as a metonymy for the Pentateuch).

The Christology of Genesis accordingly may be divided into two general categories: direct Christology and indirect Christology. Direct Christology comprises those passages in which direct verbal reference (i.e., a predictive utterance) is made to the person and work of the Messiah, such as Gn 3:15 on the Messiah’s victory over Satan. Also belonging to this category is the culminating Abrahamic promise in 12:3 of blessing for all the families of the earth (this blessing being salvation in Abraham’s seed, Christ), as well as Jacob’s statement in 49:10, in which he referred to a future ruler to come from Judah, to whom shall be the obedience of the peoples.

To the category of indirect Christology belong those symbolic portents of the person and work of Christ otherwise described in the NT by the term type (typos) or shadow (skia) (both terms are applied to the temple and its sacrificial ritual in Heb 8:5). Among those indirect representations of Christ and His work in Genesis are Adam, a type of Him who was to come (Rm 5:14), and Isaac, whom Abraham received … back as a type (Heb 11:19).

A third category is by far the most extensive, though it does not pertain to Christology proper. Christology, whether direct or indirect, concerns the person and work of Christ, which began with His incarnation by conception in Mary. In Genesis, however, as throughout the OT, the Son of God appears (usually in the form of a man) in various situations that are not connected to his future role as Christ. These preincarnational appearances of the Son, otherwise termed theophanies (meaning appearances of God), or more precisely Christophanies (i.e., appearances of the Christ), are of great significance. That the many appearances of God throughout the OT are indeed always appearances of the Son is made clear by John’s pointed statement at the beginning of his gospel (Jn 1:18), that no one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him. John’s point is that the triune God is made known to man—whether in the past, present, or future—always and only by the manifestation of the Son.

Patterns and Themes. Genesis, by virtue not only of its place in the canon but also in the time line of biblical and revelatory history, is filled with events and concepts that are intended both logically and theologically to be viewed as patterns, or paradigms. These paradigms are for understanding those same or similar events and concepts whenever they appear later on, both in Scripture as well as in history generally. In this vein Paul wrote that some of the experiences that befell Israel happened to them as an example, and they were written for our instruction (1Co 10:11). By studying the details of the biblical record, in other words, one can better understand the details and patterns of behavior, both positive and negative, divine and human, as seen time and time again in both biblical and post-biblical history, within Israel as well as within the church. The following are some of the significant patterns and concepts established in Genesis.

Blessing. Blessing is the bestowal or experiencing of something favorable, whether material or immaterial. Considering the blessings at the outset of the two thematic sections of Genesis (e.g., in chaps. 1 and 12), readers can see that blessing has to do with the expansion of life. The expansion of spiritual life, however, was inhibited by Adam’s sin. Therefore, though all men possess a living soul (Gn 2:7), the full and expanded life of that soul is realized only when reconnected to the divine by grace through faith (Eph 2:8). Thus blessing is the expansion, that is, the full realization, of spiritual life that God intended when He established the path of man’s redemption in His initial expression of the Abrahamic promise—that in Abraham’s seed all the families of the earth will be blessed (Gn 12:3; cf. 22:18; Gl 3:16-17.).

Temptation. Genesis 3 not only tells of the past event of humanity’s first encounter with temptation, but it also gives a present paradigm by which to understand the process of temptation. Though the forms of temptation may change over time, the fundamental lure of every temptation remains the same—specifically, as delineated in Gn 3:6, the lure will be to improperly satisfy one or more of the following three needs fundamental to humanity: our physical need (good for food), our intellectual-emotional need (pleasing to the eye), and our spiritual need (desirable for gaining wisdom). These three needs or categories encompass all temptation in the world a person in any place or time will ever face. The apostle John affirmed this in 1Jn 2:16, and Jesus experienced victory over the same three categories of temptation (Lk 4:1-13).

Death. The typical understanding of death as the cessation or termination of life contrasts with the overall biblical data on this topic. God told Adam that in the day that you eat from it [the tree of the knowledge of good and evil] you will surely die (Gn 2:17). Of course when Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit, they did not cease to live physically. The fundamental idea of death is not cessation, but separation. In death the soul is separated from the body, and for the unredeemed, from God.

God’s paternal mercy. God responded to the first sin not with anger but with gentle patience and loving mercy. Knowing what they had done, the LORD God entered into the garden, in the form of a man, walking among the trees (3:8). He asked gentle, leading questions intended to draw the first couple out of the dark seclusion prompted by their awareness of having sinned and into the light of confession to their Father. After they confessed, God chastised them and forgave them. This shows how He will respond to the sins of all those who are likewise His children.

Forgiveness/atonement. After responding to the first sin with gentleness and merciful chastisement, God undertook a profound act of forgiveness which clearly set the pattern for the way in which all future sin is to be properly forgiven. In Gn 3:21, three indispensable elements of the atonement process (e.g., forgiveness conclusively realized on a divine level) are presented. (1) Atonement requires a blood sacrifice (cf. Heb 9:22: without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness). (2) Providing the sacrifice is ultimately God’s work alone (the subject of both the verbs made and clothed is God alone). (3) God’s work of atonement, once achieved, is durable (e.g., permanent) as born out by the clear contrast between the fig leaves with which the couple attempted to cover their shame and the leather garments (animal skins) God applied. For more details on this, see the comments on 3:21.

Human depravity. Gn 3:22–4:26 describes three consequences of the fall epitomizing characteristics of the overall human experience—both throughout the Bible as well as in human history generally, up to the present day. These three are (1) exile for disobedience (as would later happen to Israel for disobedience to the Torah (3:22-24), indicating communal depravity; (2) first-degree murder (4:1-18), expressing personal depravity; and (3) wrongful execution (4:19-26), signifying legal depravity.

God’s grace in election. In Gn 2, immediately after creating Adam, and before Adam did or said anything (hence underscoring the absence of merit), God proceeded to set him at rest (lit., v. 15), an expression that throughout the Bible denotes the granting of spiritual rest, through faith and God’s grace (cf. Ps 95:11; Heb 4:1-11). In Gn 12:1-3 God chose Abram to be both the recipient of personal blessing (material and spiritual) as well as the means through whom that same blessing will be extended to all the families of the earth (v. 3). Nothing that Abram did or said prior to God’s choosing him indicates he merited that choice.

The Days of Creation. Few other interpretive issues in Genesis have received more attention or been more debated in modern times than the meaning of day in Gn 1 and its consequent bearing on the chronology and nature of the creative process described therein. Several facts need to be noted regarding the days of creation.

•  That the Bible is a literary and theological work does not preclude its being scientifically accurate.

•  The words of the biblical text in describing the creative process are to be understood in a manner consistent with the use of those words (both in meaning as well as syntax) attested elsewhere in the OT.

•  Where the meaning of the biblical text runs (or seems to run) contrary to the theories or conclusions of contemporary science, precedence should be given to the biblical text.

When considering the days of creation in a manner consistent with these principles, the inevitable conclusion is that these days are to be understood as 24-hour days. While acknowledging that the term day (yom) may signify an indeterminate period of time, such as in the expression day of the Lord, or in Gn 2:4, where yom does indeed appear as a period of time (in that case, the six days of creation are called a day), it seems likely that yom in Gn 1 refers to a 24-hour day for the following five reasons:

(1) Each of the six days of creation is specifically defined by the terms evening and morning, both of which are consistently employed throughout the OT to denote those two parts of a literal (24-hour) day (e.g. Ex 16:8; 18:13). The few exceptions are in poetic passages, which Gn 1 is not.

(2) The immediate and complete creation of the various parts of the world is consistent with the immediate and complete creation of man and woman. The creation of humans is not presented as a gradual process, nor were they created as children whose physical and intellectual capacities still needed to develop. Adam and Eve were created as physically and mentally mature individuals with a fully developed capacity to physically and intellectually enjoy the home into which they were placed. Given that the world was created specifically for humanity (cf. Gn 1:28), there would be no reason for God to draw out its creation over billions of years. The modern scientific consensus of what constitutes evidence of age is founded on a presuppositional analysis of the geologic data that precludes the testimony of Scripture. It is just as logically valid for Christians to view these geologic and other such data as evidence of maturity rather than of age. Just as God immediately created man with the full and mature capacity to enjoy his world, so too did He immediately create that world at a full and mature state to be enjoyed.

(3) The coupling of the word day (yom) with an ordinal number (e.g., second day, third day, etc.) is consistently employed throughout the history of the Hebrew Bible as the conventional way to designate a literal day in a literal seven-day week (e.g. Gn 7:4; 17:12).

(4) The fourth of the Ten Commandments logically implies that all six days of creation, as well as the seventh (Sabbath) day of rest, were literal 24-hour days. In Ex 20:9-11 the Israelites were told to work for six days and rest on the seventh day in commemoration of God having done precisely the same thing. He worked for six days and rested on the seventh day. Also, the verbal expression the LORD rested in Ex 20:11 is a completed action/past tense verb, which disallows the notion, sometimes put forth by day-age proponents, that the seventh day (and hence the previous six) was/is an age, and that in fact we are still in it (for then God would still be resting).

(5) An age of time for each day is irreconcilable with the specific genealogy of Adam and his descendants presented in Gn 5. According to that genealogy Adam’s third son, Seth, was begotten when Adam was 130 years old. In other words, no more than 130 years (hardly an age!) had passed from Adam’s creation early on the sixth day to a point well after the seventh day when Seth was begotten. The genealogy in chap. 5 cannot be dismissed as abridged, since (a) this runs counter to the references to each person’s age when he became the father of his son, and (b) the expression he became the father of, which is used throughout this genealogy, is always used in connection with one’s immediate children (i.e., the generation immediately following the father).

Background. Genesis is volume one of a five-part work known as the Pentateuch in English and the Torah (law) in Hebrew. Despite the division into five parts, the Torah was intended to be read as a single book by one author. The Hebrew Bible always views it as one book (Jos 1:8; 23:6; 2Ch 25:4; 35:12; Ezr 6:18; Neh 13:1) as does the NT (e.g. Mk 12:26) and the Apocrypha (Ecclesiasticus, Prologue; The Letter of Aristeas 15). As such, Genesis functions as a prologue to the entire Pentateuch.

Structurally, the opening of Genesis focuses on an extended period of time, covering all of primeval history in just 11 chapters, followed by the patriarchal history of Israel, covering four generations in 39 chapters. Following the emphasis of the author (the law of proportion), Genesis should be viewed more as the book of the beginnings of Israel rather than the beginning of the world.

Additionally, Genesis uses the Hebrew word toledoth (commonly translated as generations) as a structural marker. Although some have mistakenly thought of this word as a summary of the previous material, rather it functions as a forward marker. Hence, the phrase these are the generations of … (KJV; this is the account of … NASB) would best be paraphrased, this is what became of….. Thus, after the opening account of creation (1:1–2:3) and beginning in 2:4, the author stated 10 times, this is what became of the heavens and the earth (2:4), Adam (5:1), Noah (6:9), the sons of Noah (10:1), Shem (11:10), Terah (11:27), Ishmael (25:12), Isaac (25:19), Esau (36:1, 9), Jacob (37:2). In each case, the text proceeds with the story of what follows. So for example, the Abraham narrative follows the statement this is what became of Terah (11:27–25:11), the Jacob story comes after this is what became of Isaac (25:19–35:29), and the Joseph narrative follows this is what became of Jacob (37:2–50:26).

The first three chapters of Genesis introduce all the major concepts that are developed in the rest of the Bible: God’s nature, man’s purpose, the divine image, divine mercy, divine grace, temptation, human depravity, atonement, blessing, the future Messiah, etc. Thus more commentary space is devoted here on these three chapters. Where these concepts and paradigms appear later, therefore, readers should refer back to the more substantive comments in these opening chapters.

COMMENTARY ON GENESIS

I.  Primeval History: Establishing the Need for Redemption (1:1–11:26)

As discussed in the introduction, Genesis is thematically-theologically divisible into two major sections. In this first section God established man’s need for redemption. He did this by presenting not a comprehensive and objective history of humanity from creation to Abram, but rather a careful selection of specific events, viewed from a specifically biblical-theological perspective, and logically sequenced so as to provide a clear explanation of this section’s central thesis (i.e., why humanity needs divine redemption). This section may be characterized as a divine prosecution of depraved humanity, opening with an account of all the best that God gave to humanity, both materially and spiritually, and ending with the account of humanity’s willful, corporate rejection of God at Babel. Genesis 1:1–11:26 is divided into four discrete trial parts, each one of which makes a specific point (or answers a specific objection that mankind might raise). By the end of the fourth trial part God rested His case concerning human depravity.

A. Perfect Creation: The Absence of Sin (1:1–2:25)

In these opening two chapters God established the point most fundamental to His prosecution of human depravity, namely that humanity was meant for something better. Were humanity meant to be depraved, like Satan and the evil angels, there would be no need for redemption—just as there is none for Satan and the evil angels. In response therefore to man’s first potential objection—Why is redemption necessary if this (i.e., depraved) is what we are?—God’s answer in these two chapters carries with it the seeds of hope: that people were meant for something better—for complete and unbroken communion with God in the tabernacle of an incorruptible and untainted creation.

1. An Overview of Perfection (1:1–2:3)

This opening section does not present a comprehensive survey of all that God created, but rather, in keeping with the theme of 1:11–11:26, with those aspects of creation that are specifically relevant to the good of man. This is underscored by the repetition of the statement And God saw that it was good after each creative act that bears specifically on the need of man, as is consistent with the use of this same expression throughout the rest of the OT. Therefore certain aspects of the creative process are left out entirely because they are not directly relevant to the need or good of man (e.g., the creation of the angels, of space/black matter, of the raw material of planet earth and its waters). This enhances the theological value of the creation account by emphasizing, both by what it presents as well as how it presents it, that God’s motivation and focus throughout the creative process was ultimately on humanity and providing what is best for people. In other words the motivation for God’s work of creation and the plumb line that guides all that He does in the process is His love for humankind.

On a literary level the idea of perfection in this section is underscored in a sophisticated manner by the repeated use of the number seven into the structure of the narrative itself. Although it is possible to overdo the interpretive significance of numbers in the Bible, in this instance the evidence and import of the number seven is undeniable. Umberto Cassuto (A Commentary on the Book of Genesis [Jerusalem: Magnes, 1996] 1: 13-15) notes the following. (1) This section is divided into seven paragraphs (one for each day). (2) Each of the three foundational nouns in this section—God (elohim), land (ereṣ), and sky (shamayim)—occurs a multiple of seven times. (3) The expression And God saw (that) it was good occurs seven times. (4) There are seven acts of creation preceding the crowning event of humanity’s creation, and each of these seven acts is initiated by the expression Let (there) be. The creation of man is the only creative act that God does not verbalize, but in fact performs physically. (5) There are seven words in the Hebrew text of v. 1. (6) There are 14 words in the Hebrew text of v. 2. (7) The words light (or) and day (yom) occur altogether seven times in the first paragraph. (8) The expression the waters occurs altogether seven times in paragraphs 2 and 3. (9) The expression living creature (hayya) occurs altogether seven times in paragraphs 5 and 6. (10) The three center sentences of the seventh paragraph (2:2-3a) contain seven words each. (11) The total number of words in the seventh paragraph is 35 (five times). The point of all this structural emphasis on the number seven is clearly to highlight the perfection and completeness of the home God made for humanity.

On the first three days God created and/or separated (i.e., lit., isolates) the realms to be occupied, and on the next three days He created the living things that are to occupy those realms. Both the third and sixth days, moreover, contain two acts of creation.

a. Inanimate Perfection (1:1-19)

1:1-3. Throughout the history of English Bible translation these opening three verses have typically been rendered as three independent sentences: (1) the first act of ex nihilo (out of nothing) creation, specifically, the creation of the earth and the surrounding universe/empty space (the heavens) (v. 1); (2) the earth was in an unfinished state, though waters are already in place, with creative power of the Holy Spirit moving (or hovering) at the ready (v. 2); (3) in another act of creation God called light into existence and separated it from the darkness (v. 4).

The Days of Creation

However, how can something that was just created—thus implying both form and substance—have at the same time neither form nor substance (this being the plain meaning of the expression formless and void)? Moreover, the idea that v. 2 presents the earth in an unfinished or semi-finished state runs contrary to the way in which God created everything else in this chapter, namely, immediately and completely, without any suggestion of a pause during which the creative act remains an unfinished or incomplete creation.

The terms heaven (or heavens) and earth that are employed in most English translations of v. 1, though not strictly wrong, are inaccurate in light of how these English words are commonly defined. The word translated heaven can indeed denote space (i.e., the universe), yet always as an extension of the sky as perceived by men. On the other hand many times in the Hebrew Bible the term shamayim refers only to the sky. Therefore to determine whether the reference is to the sky or to the sky plus the space beyond it, one must consider how the word is used elsewhere in the same context. In v. 8, shamayim refers to the expanse in the midst of the waters, that is the sky alone (without extending to the rest of space).

The translation of the Hebrew word ereṣ by the English word earth is similarly misleading, since the former is regularly used throughout the Hebrew Bible to designate some or all of the 25 percent of the planet humanity lives on, that is, dry land (as opposed to the oceans and the land underneath them), which is exactly how God applied the term in v. 10 ("and God called the dry land ereṣ"). The term ereṣ, therefore, does not refer here to the entire planet (though this is the typical idea conveyed by the English word earth).

How, therefore, should v. 1 be understood and what is its relationship to what follows? And, if the reference here is specifically to the sky and the dry land, when was the actual planet created along with its raw material of submerged land and covering waters? And when did God create the darkness, the existence of which as something (as opposed to nothing) is implied by the light being separated from it (v. 4; see also the explicit reference to God creating darkness in Is 45:7)?

The answer to all these questions has to do with the specific perspective by which the creative acts in this chapter are presented, coinciding with God’s specific motivation for undertaking these creative acts in the first place, namely, to demonstrate His love for humanity by providing humanity with what is best. God’s purpose here in Genesis was not to fill in all the blanks in one’s knowledge of history, science, or even theology, but rather to reveal those things that relate specifically to His love and plan for man. Thus the creation account begins in 1:1 not with the very first act of creatio ex nihilo (creation out of nothing, for which one can refer to any number of other passages, such as Is 44:24a; Jn 1:3; Heb 11:3), but rather at that point when, with the raw materials of creation already in place, that is, darkness (space/black matter [?]), the planet with its land and overlaying waters—and the angelic host standing ready to sing God’s praise (Jb 38:4-7)—He undertook the first creative act that bears specifically on the good of man (hence the recurring assessment, And He saw … that it was good).

This reading of the first three verses has long been recognized by Jewish interpreters. Verses 1-3 constitute one complex sentence, the first two being composed of dependent clauses and v. 3 composing the main clause (i.e., describing the event itself). These three verses thus read: In the beginning of God’s creating the sky and the (dry) land—while the land was (still) uninhabitable and unproductive, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the surface of the waters—God said, ‘Let there be light.’ And there was light.

In v. 2 the Hebrew expression (tohu va-vohu) is usually translated formless and void. But this is not satisfactory because the land—though it has not yet appeared as dry land (v. 9)—is nonetheless there, under the waters, and hence had a certain form (as opposed to formless) and mass (as opposed to void). In fact in its only other biblical occurrence, Jr 4:23, this expression is applied to land that has both form and substance—the land of Israel—but which is characterized at that point as being uninhabited (vv. 25-26: there was no man … all its cities were pulled down) and unproductive (v. 26: the fruitful land was a wilderness). Verse 2 states that the Spirit of God was hovering (ESV, HCSB, NASB). The word here translated Spirit (ruah) may also denote wind. But Spirit is intended because hovering is not the action of wind. This verb, which may also be translated poised, implies the Spirit’s readiness to empower the first act of creation specifically intended for the good (v. 4) of humanity. (On the Holy Spirit’s empowering role in creation see Jb 33:4). This picture of God hovering, or poised, to lovingly supply the need and ensure the welfare of His people is also seen in Dt 32:11.

Since vv. 1-3 pertain to the same stage in the creative process, it is impossible to infer any historical gap between any of the clauses in these three verses. Some interpreters infer such a historical gap, claiming that billions of years elapsed between the end of v. 1 and the beginning of v. 2. According to this gap theory, in which its proponents seek to reconcile the Bible to the current scientific opinion concerning the earth’s age, the creation of the world and all life was originally completed before v. 2, and yet a catastrophe of some sort took place and the earth became formless and void. However, v. 2 has the word was not became. Moreover, v. 2 indicates a contemporaneous situation, not a subsequent one (as required by the gap theory).

1:4-5. The light God created and that separates from the darkness is not the light of the sun, but simply light, employed by God to enforce the distinction between night and day until that task is relegated to the sun (i.e., the greater light) that He clearly created on the fourth day. The existence of light (i.e., photons) as distinct from the solar source that produces it (such as the sun) is a well-recognized fact, but in fact the existence of light in the absence of the sun is here theologically consistent with the description of creation restored to its ideal at the end of the Bible, in Rv 22:5 (humanity shall not have need of the light of a lamp nor the light of the sun, because the Lord God shall illumine them; see also Rv 21:23).

The statement God saw that the light was good underscores the human focus of all that God did in this chapter. The verb saw may also convey the meaning provide (similar to the English idiom to see to it). This same verb is used in Gn 16:13-14, where Hagar described God as the One who sees because He provided for her need, and in Gn 22:8, 14, where this verb is translated will provide. The reference to God’s seeing in Gn 1 suggests the specific assessment of the good, that is, the benefit, of that creative act for man.

God’s naming the light day and the darkness night underscores His dominion over these fundamental parts of creation. The act of naming conveys the idea of dominion, e.g., man’s naming the animals (2:19); and God’s naming of individuals, such as Abraham/Abram (17:5), Isaac (17:19, before his conception), and Jacob/Israel (35:9), John (Lk 1:13, before his conception) and Simon/Peter (Jn 1:42).

In 1:5, the evening is reckoned first no doubt because the darkness was created before the light, and therefore in the Bible and Jewish tradition, days are reckoned from sunset to sunset. The complete day, as presented at the end of v. 5 and comprising both evening and morning is unquestionably to be understood as a literal (i.e., 24-hour) day (for further discussion see "The Days of Creation" in the Introduction).

1:6-8. The expanse that God created and called heaven, employing the same word used in v. 1, is clearly the sky, since it divides the waters which were below (i.e., the worldwide ocean) … from the waters which were above (i.e., the clouds and water vapor of the troposphere). Whether this expanse, or firmament (NASB), is just the peplosphere (the lowest layer of the atmosphere) or more (perhaps including all the layers of the atmosphere) is unclear. The creation of the expanse is concisely represented from a human (i.e., earthbound) perspective, and is no more indicative of a primitive or inaccurate understanding of the natural world than the statement of a modern climatologist who refers to the sunrise or sunset. To the contrary, the Hebrew word translated expanse (raqia’) is elsewhere used to describe a thin layer of gold that completely encompasses an idol (Is 40:19), the implication being that the expanse completely encompasses the planet, which therefore suggests that the planet is conceptualized as a sphere. And when one looks at satellite images of the earth, the atmosphere clearly is seen as an unbroken halo enveloping the earth.

The statement, God made (v. 7) is not another creative act, but rather a reiteration of the single creative act on the day described in v. 6. The purpose of this is to emphasize that the sky is a part of creation, and therefore not something to be worshiped (vv. 16, 21). The relevance of this point becomes evident when considering that in the ancient world the sky was viewed as a deity that could withhold or release rain along with other meteorological phenomena. God wanted the Israelites to know that He controls all aspects of the weather, and does so in a way that is consistent with His revealed character and purposes.

1:9-13. On the third day God formed the dry land and filled it with vegetation (flora in the broad sense), and both actions were paralleled on the sixth day by His acts of creating the land animals and creating man. This clear balance in the structure and relationship of God’s creative acts in this chapter is not evidence of the purely literary origin of the creation account, but rather a reflection of the process itself. The dry land here was not called into being, but rather called out from under the worldwide ocean, thus affirming what has been said above about this chapter picking up at that point in the creative process where the raw materials of space (dark matter?) and planet Earth, with its waters and submerged land mass, are already in place. The stage is set for God to begin working with and within this raw setting to prepare a home specifically designed for the good of humankind. The anthropocentric perspective of the creation account is especially evident in the way the second creative act on this day is described: after describing the creation of flora generally (Let the earth sprout vegetation), reference is made to two specific groups, namely, plants yielding seed (i.e., cultivatable plants consumable by man) and fruit trees. These are the same two groups of flora mentioned in v. 29 as being for food for humanity. Yet v. 30 refers to a third group of flora, the green plant, intended for the food of animals. This third group is not mentioned in this description of the third-day events, not because that group (the green plants) was not created, but rather because it was not relevant to the good of humankind. The green plants are mentioned only in connection with man’s charge to rule over the animals once they have been created.

Verse 9 refers to God’s removal of the barrier of water from a land that is brought to a state of floral (agricultural) maturity for the good of His people before they were brought into it.

1:14-19. On the fourth day God filled the darkness, that is, the void of space extending from the expanse—with stars (i.e., suns and planets), referred to here as lights. All these stars, including the sun (the greater light) and the moon (the lesser light) are here (v. 14) called into being—not, as some interpreters claim, being placed in their fixed positions or orbits (having been created with the light on the first day). This is clear from the observation that the word lights in v. 14 lacks the definite article the which, as a grammatical rule, is normally required when referring to defined nouns that have already been noted (implicitly or explicitly) in a narrative.

More significant is the purpose assigned by God to the stars. In addition to marking the passage of days and years, God indicated that they are primarily intended for signs and for seasons (not as signs for [marking] seasons, etc.). The Hebrew word translated signs (otot) is commonly employed in Scripture to denote miracles, that is, to testify to God’s active involvement in human history, usually in connection with a redemptive purpose (as in Ex 4:8-9 and Dt 34:11). The word translated seasons (mo’adim) is typically employed to denote the appointed times or holy days of Israel (Lv 23:2-3). These are also intended to serve as testimonies to God’s redemptive activity in human history, specifically with respect to God’s plan of messianic redemption, as Paul wrote in Col 2:16-17. In other words knowing full well that man would sin and be in need of redemption, God graciously and lovingly wove into the fabric of creation itself—even before humans were created—those elements that would serve as postfall signposts of redemption, the festivals of Israel, intending to point humanity back into relationship with the Creator-Father through the redemptive work of the Messiah.

The statement in v. 16 (God made) is not an additional act of creation, but a reiteration, as in v. 7, of what God already had made, the purpose of which was to dissuade man from worshiping these parts of creation (a problem relating to the sun and moon in the ancient world) rather than the Creator Himself. With respect to the stars (e.g., planets and suns), from humanity’s perspective the number of stars visible to the naked eye (as noted already by the time of Ptolemy in the second century AD) in the solar system is seven (the sun, moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn), which, consistent with the significance of this number elsewhere (especially throughout the creation account), seems to be another divinely intended memorial to the perfection of prefall creation. Even with the advent of modern telescopy this number has been maintained, for while Neptune and Uranus are now included in the number of the solar system’s planets, the sun and moon have been excluded from this category in view of their distinguishing characteristics.

b. Animate (Animal) Perfection (1:20-25)

1:20-23. Parallel to God’s single act on the second day of creating the sky and isolating the lower waters, on the fifth day He created, likewise in a single act, the animal life whose activity occurs in those realms: birds and water life (not just fish). In v. 21 God reiterated that among the living creature[s] He created in v. 20 were the great sea monsters lit., the great reptiles, perhaps referring to marine dinosaurs like the plesiosaur. The point is that these awe-inspiring creatures, like the sky in v. 7 and the sun and moon in v. 16, as mere parts of creation are not to be worshiped in place of or in addition to the Creator Himself. The need for this warning is underscored by the observation that Leviathan, who was clearly one of these great reptiles (his description in Jb 41 closely fits that of a plesiosaur), was well known to the ancient peoples. The Leviathan is mentioned again in Is 27:1 and Pss 74:14 and 104:26. Recent archeological evidence has also shown that among the people of ancient Ugarit, a coastal city just north of biblical Canaan that flourished during the time of the Israelite conquest (c. 1450–1200 BC), Leviathan (in Ugaritic pronounced Lotan or Litan) was viewed and revered as the god of the sea. In ancient Egypt the smaller species of tannin (crocodiles) were objects of worship in the crocodile god Sobek.

The first reference to blessing is in v. 22. From this first occurrence, and as borne out by its following application to humanity, it may be reasonably deduced that the fundamental idea or purpose of blessing in Genesis and the Pentateuch is the expansion of life.

1:24-25. Parallel to the two third-day acts of drawing out the dry land and filling it with vegetation, God completed creation on the sixth day with the two acts of creating the animate life for which the dry land and its vegetation were intended. The first act presented in these two verses is that of creating animal life, from which humanity is excluded (contrary to the method of modern scientific classification). The land animals, moreover, are divided into three groups: cattle, creeping things, and beasts of the earth. The first of these, cattle (or livestock, HCSB) denote domesticated animals. In other words—and again contrary to modern scientific theory—a certain number of animal species have always been tame and of a nature given to husbandry by man. This further underscores the human-focused nature of creation in this chapter.

c. Human Perfection (1:26–2:3)

1:26-27. These verses present the final and crowning act of God’s creation. As the seventh creative act in this chapter, God’s creative work is finished. This point is underscored by the fifth and final repetition of the phrase, And God saw that it was good (1:25). The presentation of humanity’s creation in v. 27 as a single collective event (God created man … male and female He created them) does not contradict the more specific description of the two-stage process in chap. 2, but is rather intended to emphasize here that the image of God imparted to humanity is equally presented in both sexes.

As to identifying the meaning of that image, it relates to plural language used here (Let Us make man in Our image). This phrase has been interpreted in a variety of ways. First, some believe this is merely a plural of majesty, i.e. God speaking in royal We. A second view held is to understand the plurals as reflecting God’s deliberation, as if He were talking to Himself. A third approach is to understand the plurals here as God’s statements to the heavenly court, i.e. the angels. This is least likely since humanity is clearly made in the image of God and not of the angels. Although the first two options seem possible, the most contextually and grammatically tenable explanation of the plural language is that it is an expression of the plural nature of the one true God. That is not to say that this passage is giving a fully expressed statement of the Trinity. Rather, it seems to be saying that even as God is one, He also has a mysterious plural aspect to His essence. And thus, the singular ‘human being’ is created as a plurality, ‘male and female.’ In a similar way, the one God created humanity through an expression of his plurality. (John H. Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1992], 95). Thus, the divine plurality anticipates the human plurality of the man and the woman as a reflection of God’s own personal relationship within Himself (John H. Sailhamer, NIV Compact Bible Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994], 13).

The image of God in humanity pertains to the capacity for spiritual relationship. Just as God has the capacity for relationship, so humanity, male and female, have been made to reflect that image and enter into a relationship with their creator. This is also seen in the use of the word the soul. The soul most distinguishes humanity from the rest of created life, for only into man did God breathe in a living soul (2:7), and it is only human individuals, regardless of their mental capacity, physical ability, or material circumstances, who by virtue of having a soul can experience spiritual communion or relationship with God.

1:28-31. The image of God in humanity also includes human beings created to represent God on earth and rule as His regents under Him. Of all created living beings, only humanity has been given dominion over God’s creation, and it extends over all other living beings, whether in the sky, sea, or land animals (v. 28; Sailhamer, The Pentateuch as Narrative, 95).

God’s blessing of humankind, like His blessing on the animals in v. 22, is fundamentally concerned with the expansion of life. Further, God then charges both the man and the woman (God said to them) to subdue the land and rule over its animal life. The same command to subdue the land, moreover, was given by God to the Israelites with reference to the land of Canaan.

The picture of this day closes with God instructing the couple on what they are to eat (a pattern repeated after God’s resetting of the world in chap. 9). They are to eat of the same two groups of vegetation (plant[s] yielding [lit., sowing] seed [i.e., crop plants] and fruit trees) mentioned in vv. 11-12 that were created on the third day. Verse 30 also refers to a third group of vegetation, the green plant, mentioned here for the first time not because it was here created, but because it is only now relevant for man. The chapter concludes for the seventh time (and for the first time with the intensifying adverb very), And God saw … that it was very good. The addition to this utterance of the adverb very is equivalent to what one might otherwise express in English as, "It was the very best that it could possibly