Exegetical Commentary: Genesis 1:1-5

Commonly known in Hebrew as Sefer B

e
reshiyth { }, the book of Genesis is the
most criticized and revered document of beginnings known to man. From antireligious atheists to
hyperliteralist creationists, there are many to whom Genesis remains an obsession. This ancient
work has caused much controversy in colleges and judicial settings, having been used to condemn
everything from homosexuality to evolution. Sadly, there is a growing aversion to this ancient work
especially in places of education. Something that was once treasured by kings is now detested by
peasants.
Though it certainly originated with the Divine, the identity of its human author has been lost in the
annals of time. Internal anachronisms indicate that it was written long after the events which it
describes. And tradition reports that the hand of Moses penned it originally though many critics
assert otherwise.
Genesis as a whole establishes the prevailing theme of all scripture introducing concepts such as the
second-born being greater than the firstborn, man as the image of GOD, the affliction of the
righteous seed, the Sabbath, and many others. So it is certainly not a stretch of logic to assume the
books most important episode lies at its opening. This pericope often referred to as creation week is
just as much theological as it is poetic. Many readers fail to apprehend this notion; thus, its true sense is
almost never acquired.
Because Genesis is the foundation of all scripture, acquiring a proper understanding of its premier
account is paramount. Deciphering creation week is the first step to unlocking the Hebrew Bible.








i
i




-




In the beginning GOD fashioned the heavens
and the earth.



1:1.1| In the beginning - Literally in a first or when first. Due to syntactical issues stemming
from the noun reshiyth { } acting as if in construct form to a finite verb { }, this phrase is
translated in various ways: when at first, when (GOD) began to (create), In the
beginning, in the beginning of when The debate over this verses proper translation still
ensues.

1:1.2| GOD fashioned - Not from nothingness (ex nihilo) as is commonly believed. The word
fashioned rendered by most translations as create is the Hebrew word bara { }. It typically
implies creation by means of preexisting matter
1
, though debatable in some instances. This implication
of the word is corroborated throughout the rest of the narrative as bara shows up only where matter
is generated from other matter
2
. In context of creation, it is concerned with achieving order from
chaos, a concept common to ancient eastern creation narratives
3
. And this concept is certainly
present in our creation narrative as the earth was a chaotic mess of darkness and water from which
emerged all that is humanly tangible.
Dated to the 3
rd
century CE, the Jewish midrash, B
e
reshiyth Rabbah, attests to the existence of this
understanding. While, one voice disagrees with the idea that God would use the chaotic matter to
create earth by likening it to a garbage dump, R. Huna appears to have defended the notion of
creation by preexisting matter. The midrash states,

Said Rab: In human practice, when an earthly monarch builds a palace on a site of
sewers, dunghills, and garbage, if one says, This palace is built on a site of sewers, dunghills,
and garbage, does he not discredit it? Thus, whoever comes to say that this world was
created out of formless and void and darkness (Gn 1:2b-3a), does he not indeed impair
[GOD's glory]! R. Huna said in Bar Kappara's name: If the matter were not written, it would
be impossible to say it: GOD created heaven and earth. Out of what (was it created)? (It was
created) out of now the earth was formless and void

Next, note the following case where the verb bara appears functioning in the hiphil (causative) stem:

... and honor your sons above Me, to fatten yourselves { }... (1 Sm 2:29)

1
See entry 1431 Brown, Driver, Briggs, Hebrew and English Lexicon (Unabridged) p. 135. In a few instances
it is debatable that bara { } functions as creating from material, for the intent of the verb is not contingent
upon material existing but rather the creation of order from chaos. However, as with all ancient near-eastern
cosmogonies chaos innately requires something to exist, thus inferring that requires preexisting matter.

2
The word bara { } is used to describe the forming of man (1:27 cf. 2:7) and the work which GOD
formed to do during creation week (2:3-4).

3
See the Babylonian Enuma Elish, the Akkadian Atrahasis, and the Egyptian story of Nun.
1:1


Before matter can be fattened, it must first exist. This is the case in 1 Sm 2:29 where people are the
object of fattening (yourselves). In light the foregoing as well as other reasons, Ive rendered the
verb bara as fashioned rather than created. Evidently matter had already existed in Gn 1:1.

1:1.3| the heavens and the earth - Note the order: (1) the heavens then (2) the earth are
mentioned in the same order that they are later created heavens on day two (1:6-8) and earth on
day three (1:9-13).

1:1.4| In the beginning GOD fashioned the heaven and the earth - At what point in creation
week is this verse describing? Was it on day one that GOD created the heavens and the earth or at
sometime later? Some believe this to be a record of what occurred on day one and others a
summary of what occurred in days one through six with 1:2-3 being where the narration of day one
begins. Furthermore, others believe that an indeterminate gap of time - perhaps millions or
billions of years - lies between 1:1-2, but the answer is not difficult to ascertain. The terms heaven
{shamayim } and earth {erets } are names issued by GOD on days two and three of the
creation week
4
. But before GOD issued these names, the heaven was referred to as firmament
{raqiya }, and the earth was called dry land {yabashah }.
So why does Gn 1:1 refer the reader to names not yet introduced rather than using the original
generic terms firmament and dry land? Further, the heaven and the earth both carry a
definite article the { } in verse 1 which is where they first appear. While this miniscule point would
go unchecked by a reader of English, it runs contrary to the way Biblical Hebrew narratives typically
introduce characters
5
. And, grammatically in the narrative, the heavens and earth are treated as
characters.
Why in the very beginning of the bible is there a chronological and literary anomaly? The key is that
Gn 1:1 provides not merely an introduction but a brief synopsis of the entire creation week; hence,
the appellations Heaven and Earth from later in the narrative are employed as descriptors in the
opening summary. This is similar to how a newspaper summarizes an article into a few words to
create an opening headline. Because 1:1 functions as a synopsis, it is anachronistic
6
to the creation
narrative thereby proving that not everything should be understood chronologically.
Note how complex the very first verse of the Torah is! May this testify to the intricacy of scripture
and why it is prone to be misconstrued by myopic and cursory readers.

4
Genesis 1:8-10

5
Within Biblical Hebrew narratives, it is typical for a character or object (nouns) with a name to be
introduced as indefinite and then afterward referred to as definite. For example, the appellations heaven
and earth are introduced as indefinite but proper nouns (names) on days two and three e.g. GOD called
the firmament heavens { } (1:8). But after their introduction, they are always joined to the definite
article-particle e.g. GOD said let there be light in the firmament of the heavens { } (1:14). Though
there are few exceptions to this way of operating, it remains generally true. Survey these from their first
occurrences onward: light {} Gn 1:3; luminaries { } Gn 1:14-15; mankind { } Gn 1:26;
woman { } Gn 2:22-23.

6
An anachronism is an event that is chronologically misplaced or out of order - cf. Gn 14:14 where the
territory of Dan is referred to but had not yet existed until Jos. 18 and19.


And the earth had been formless and void,
and darkness upon the face of the deep, and
the Spirit of GOD hovering over the face of
the waters.





1:2.1| the earth had been - For how long? Only The Holy One knows. The Hebrew of this verse
indicates a past-perfect verb
7
, according to the subject-verb order where precedes .
Thus, the syntax here conveys to the reader that an unspecified amount of time had already elapsed
in earths history the earth had been Genesis 1:2 isnt declaring what occurred from the very
inception of primeval earth or time. Instead, the narrative picks up at some unknown point in the
distant past after the global matter had already been established.
And, as in 1:1 the term earth (erets) refers to the same dry land that doesnt appear until day 3;
thus, 1:2 is reporting that this would-be dry land had been in a chaotic state proving its existence on
or before day one.

1:2.2| formless and void - In Hebrew this phrase is tohu wavohu { } and conveys an idea of
vain and unusable emptiness. This exact phrase appears in only one other passage (Jer 4:23) where
it also describes the state of the earth. In both passages where it occurs there is (1) a lack of light
from heaven and (2) an uninhabitable earth.

1:2.3| darkness - The noun rendered as darkness is choshekh { } and, besides deep blackness,
is frequently used as a metaphor for death, calamity, wickedness, and the grave.
8
During which
times, it is reminiscent of when the earth was vain and unusable emptiness or formless and void
(of stability and life). So when used in a negative sense, it represents the antithesis of created life or
thriving. It is the place of oblivion and all things dead.

1:2.4| darkness upon the face of the deep - When was darkness manifested for the first time?
Did it simply always exist? Furthermore, where did the deep come from? The text here forces the
reader to assume (1) certain components of the narrative always existed or (2) the documentation of
their origins is purposely neglected. In light of the past-perfect verb discussed in 1:2.1 and other
scripture
9
, the second assumption is preferable.


7
The past-perfect verbal form denotes an occurrence in the distant past preceding some other action.

8
See Jb 10:21, 15:22-23, 30, 17:13; Ps 35:6, 88:11-12; Prv 2:13; Eccl 11:8; Is 5:20; Jer 13:16.

9
Scripture purposefully neglects details at times. Matthew 1:1-17 and Gn 5:4 are both examples wherein the
text is silent on what is seemingly noteworthy. Matthew clearly omits certain people in his genealogical record
that spans from Abraham to Jesus. And Gn 5:4 demonstrates how unimportant the details of Adam's other
children are. It merely mentions their existence in passing.

1:2


1:2.5| the Spirit of GOD hovering upon... - A verse of special importance, for it conveys the
activities of GOD in relation to time and space. This and Gn 2:2 are most peculiar to the narrative in
this respect.
Further, the word rendered as hovering { } occurs in Deut. 32:11 to describe an eagle
hovering over her offspring. This may have allegorical implications.

1:2.6| darkness upon the face of the deep and the Spirit of GOD hovering upon the face of
the waters - This sentence employs a form of literary parallelism called a doublet
10
. Employed as
synonymous thoughts here are the words deep { } and the waters { }. Further, the
phrase upon the face of { } is common to both clauses. The foregoing becomes even more
apparent when this pericope is viewed in its original language. Note the parallel in lines (2) and (4)
below:

(1) And darkness (was)
(2) upon the face of the deep
(3) The spirit of GOD (was) hovering
(4) upon the face of the waters

There is more parallelism within these two clauses to document but not without some explication.
Though not obvious at first, lines (1) and (3) also share symmetry. The phrase and darkness (was)
equates to the phrase the spirit of GOD hovering as lines (2) and (4) equate.
The text indicates that darkness and the spirit of GOD existed at the same location
simultaneously: both were upon the face of { } the same primeval liquid. Well documented
as synonyms in Hebrew are the terms deep and waters

11
. This proves that, at least in regards to
their chronicled locations, the subjects of lines (1) and (3) coalesce.
Further, 2 Sm 22:12 and Deut. 5:23 portray GOD as situated in the midst of choshekh (darkness)
corroborating the idea of GODs spirit existing conterminously to choshekh (upon the deep-waters).
Something else that is shared between GOD and choshekh in this narrative is that both have no
documented origins which may have further implications. And because GOD and choshekh are oft-
antithetical, 1:2 may also be an example of a contrasting parallelism.
12
This complex verse definitely
requires further study if its secrets are to be gleaned.

10
A doublet (alt. couplet) is a synonymous parallelism in which there is a set of two or more words (or
constructions) which occur together each expressing the same thought. Psalm 119:105 is an excellent example
of a doublet:

Your word is a lampx to my feety and a lightx to my pathy.

Above, the same thought is expressed twice where a lamp = a light and my feet = my path.

11
The terms deep {tehom } and (the) waters {mayim } parallel quite frequently. See Jb 38:30; Is
51:10, 63:12-13; Ez 26:19, 31:4.



And GOD said let there be light, and there
was light.



1:3.1| let there be light - The world was created in ten utterances
13
. Light, being the first of these,
is unique from all of the rest because it is the only time GOD commands something into existence
from absolute nothingness
14
. Lights institution meant that life could now be introduced and
sustained possibly explaining why succeeding scriptures use the term light {or } as a symbol
for life and resurrection
15
. Considering the metaphoric usage of light found in other passages, is it
possible that the Holy One did not merely manifest photons on this day but also invented the
concept of earthly life?

1:3.2| there was light Light and the seventh day (Sabbath) are the only things in the narrative
which are not formed from other matter. Rather, these are simply manifested into existence one
by GOD uttering let there be light and the other by Him simply pausing (2:2-3). Subsequently,
neither of the two verbs bara { } and asah

16
{ }, which denote generating matter from other
matter, are used to describe the creation of the Sabbath (seventh day) or light.


12
Contrastive or antithetical parallelism is a literary device that juxtaposes opposite ideas to emphasize
differences or a greater concept. The divisions of the parallelism will sometimes share common components
or words thus linking them. For examples see Ps 1:6, 34:10; Prv 10:1, 14:20.

13
Genesis 1:3, 6, 9, 11, 14, 15, 20, 22, 24, 26

14
Apart from light, everything is created or made by GOD or otherwise brought forth by the earth or sea.
Of the ten utterances, two are followed by the verb bara { } and three by the verb asah { } with the
former often rendered as created (1:21, 27) and the latter as made (1:7, 16, 25). Both of these verbs
denote creating from an already existing matter. Light simply manifested upon command. Refer to the
footnote below (
15
) for details on the verb asah } { .

15
Light {} occurs in numerous doublets and scriptures as a synonym for life and resurrection.
Examples include Jb 3:20, 33:28; Ps 27:1, 36:9, 56:13; Prv 6:23; Jn 1:4, 8:12; 1 Thes 5:5; 1 Tm 6:16.

16
The verb asah } { when used to describe creation denotes formation from an already existing matter in
an even stricter sense than bara { }. The verb asah typically means to do, implement, or perform,
but at times it means to make as is found in the KJV (i.e. Gn 1:16). What decides its function in Gn 1 is
context as in 1:7, 25. Typically the verb simply means to do or implement.
1:3


And GOD saw that the light was good, and
GOD divided between the light and between
the darkness.





1:4.1| GOD saw that the light was good - The Holy One, blessed be He, reviews each days
relative creations. While read cursorily by most, this small clause GOD saw is very important, for it
documents what was created by GOD on each respective day. By taking note of what GOD saw on
day one, we can deduce what He didnt create this day: earth, darkness, and the deep. These already
existed. This is more evidence that 1:1 isnt documenting what occurred on day one and that it is a
synopsis. Nothing in scripture is superfluous.

1:4.2| GOD divided between the light and between the darkness This most pivotal event
should pique the interest of any careful reader. Why? Because during day four (1:18), this same act is
repeated through the implementation of firmamental lights {meoroth } that again are said to
divide the or (light) from the choshekh (darkness). But GOD Himself had already divided the light and
darkness here!
So, why does GOD cause the heavenly luminaries on day four to perform the same action that He
already completed on day one? Did the light and darkness recombine between days one and four?
What is this redundancy hinting at? There are a few possibilities:
(1) Days one and four are actually the same event told twice each time from a different point of
emphasis which holds much probability in light of the framework hypothesis
17
.
(2) Maybe the text is hinting at a special relationship between GOD and the heavenly lights by
equating their actions with GODs actions. Much like theophanic angels, the luminaries are agents
operating in GODs stead. As is the case in other books
18
, perhaps these luminaries represent the
angels and their roles as the ambassadors of GOD. Genesis is a book of theology, so this is possible.
(3) GOD may have created all of the dividing lights on day one when He divided light from darkness
and only chose to implement them on day four. This understanding is feasible based on the conjunct
usage of the two verbs implement {asah } and set {nathan } in 1:16-17. In his
commentary on the Torah, the medieval commentator Rashi
19
put forth this interpretation.


(4) All of the above.
As a final note, darkness is said to have been separated { } from light. If darkness is a nonentity
how was it separated from light? This concept merits further consideration.

17
The framework hypothesis is an interpretation of the first chapter of the Book of Genesis which holds that
the seven-day creation account found therein is not a literal or scientific description of the origins of the
universe; rather, it is an ancient religious text which outlines a theology of creation. The seven day
"framework" is therefore not meant to be chronological but is a literary or symbolic structure designed to
reinforce the purposefulness of GOD in creation and the Sabbath commandment. (source:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_interpretation_(Genesis))

18
See Jb 38:7; Dn 8:10, 12:3; 1 En 86:1-6, 88:1-3; Rv 9:1.

19
Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki) was an eleventh century Talmudic and biblical scholar that many religious
Jews hold to be the premier commentator of all time.
1:4


And GOD called the light Day, and to the
darkness He called Night; and there was
evening, and there was morning a day one.





1:5.1| GOD called the light Day Earths illuminating force is now named day {yom }.
Just as in English, the appellation day not only denotes daylight itself but also one cycle of daylight
and darkness. Often overlooked is that the introduction of daylight into the existing darkness
created not only what we call a day but a means to measure time. This is why the appellation yom
denotes not just daylight but also an entire day. So by introducing light and separating it from
darkness, GOD actually created an entire period of time (called yom) that would serve as a temporal
outline for the rest of creation week as well as holy times and earthly time in general.
Further, the biblical system of reckoning days is modeled directly after what occurred on creation
day one. On Earth, just as darkness was before light, so does a biblical day begin at the darkening of
evening when the sun has set
20
. And then the darkness is followed by light just as light was
introduced after darkness in the narrative. After this state of light wanes, the next evening arrives,
and concludes the day while beginning the next one.

1:5.2| the darkness He called Night - The portion of a day wherein yom is absent is likewise
given a name night {laylah } . This reoccurring state of darkness will forever remind GODs
creation of what the earth was like before He said let there be For this word night is
synonymous with the primeval state known as darkness or choshekh { } from 1:2. Perhaps the
lack of light, life, and harmony in this undefined period of primeval darkness holds the answer to
why evil, death, and misfortune come to be identified with darkness and night in other books
21
as
well as the human psyche.

1:5.3| there was evening - The word evening {erev } is the period of day that scripture
refers to as the suns going.
22
It begins the instant the sun descends beneath the horizon to the
point of invisibility but ends when total darkness seizes the sky. Thus, an erev is only possible with
the presence of light.
Given that days begin at evening, day one may have began when light was first introduced because,
just as at evening, light and darkness were initially tangential see 1:4.2. Therefore, it is likely that
the introduction of light in 1:3 was the first evening and thus the beginning of day one.

20
In the instructions for observing the Day of Atonement, we are told to reckon the day from evening until
evening (Lv 23:32). Also, the Passover is offered between the two evenings (Ex 12:6 & Lv23:5).
An evening begins at sunset and also begins a new day that last 24 hours until the next evening arrives. Also
see Dn 8:14 where twenty-three hundred evenings and mornings denote days.

21
See Jb 10:22, 12:22, 17:13, 30:26; Is 5:20, 45:7; Jer 13:16, Mt 4:16; Rom 13:12; Eph 6:11-12; 1 Thes 5:5;
1 En 41:8, 63:11, 94:9, 107:2.

22
Deuteronomy 16:6 commands the Passover be slaughtered in the evening as the sun
goes. 2 Chronicles 18:34 parallels until the evening with at the time of the going
of the sun.
1:5


1:5.4| and there was morning - The word morning {boqer } denotes a seeking or
breaking through. This is the point of day when light breaks through the darkness and seeks out
all which is not visible.

1:5.5| day one - Paraphrased it maybe one completed period of yom (daylight). Though yom can
mean either daylight or a day, it also can denote a longer or unspecific period of time.
23


1:5.6| and there was evening, and there was morning, a day one Here on day one evening
and morning were first manifested because they require the presence of light to exist. After events
are documented, the reoccurring formula evening morning concludes each creation day. This
proves that day one itself was created as the temporal model for all days thereafter.
Interesting is that only after documenting each days events is when this formula occurs. GODs
activities are recorded but not as they occurred within the timeframe of the day. For example, the
text never says whether GOD created fish in the evening, the morning, midday, or in anywhere
between. Rather it just tells how He created them, and then at the end of day five the evening
morning formula occurs as a conclusion. This mode of narration is common to all of the days of
creation.
Day one is the only of six creation days where the order of events can be determined, but only by
deduction. It transpired according to one of the two scenarios below. In either case, however, there
is an apparent chronological problem:
(1) There was static darkness. GOD then introduced light and then separated the two from a mixed
state which either was evening or preceded evening. He then allowed darkness to ensue again and
then caused light to break through the darkness making morning.
In this scenario, the reader is never told that GOD caused darkness to reemerge. For the evening and
morning to have transpired according to a biblical day, this had to have occurred.
(2) There was static darkness, and then GOD introduced light, and then separated the two from a
mixed state thus causing morning to occur. Then as the light waned, darkness overtook light which
signaled evening. In this scenario, the advent of light wouldve created a morning before an evening
which undermines the basic order of a biblical days beginning as well as the evening morning
formula wherein evening is always stated first with morning following.
24

Though the first scenario is most parsimonious, cases like the above present issues for the literalist
who chooses to read the creation account as a science book expecting a fully detailed order of
events. The evening morning formula is only used to indicate that an entire day occurred. And
it serves to show that the creation of the first day, as a temporal frame for all other days, remained in
use. Even today it still does.

Baruch ADONAI.


23
See this words usage in Gn 2:17, 4:3 & Jer 28:11

24
However, some scholars suggest that the evening morning formula may reflect a morning to
morning reckoning system as observed by the ancient Egyptians.


Including all details in chronological order is not what the inspired author of Genesis had in mind.
This intentional negligence is very important to note because it informs the reader that the narrative
is not meant to be read in a strict scientific or strict chronological sense. Conversely, it is written in
topical order
25
, a method of constructing poetry that was common to the ancient near east. In doing
so, this supremely crafted work employs rhetorical parallelisms, doublets, layers of chiasmi
26
, and
other literary devices. These masterful arrangements will be skeletonized for the reader at the
conclusion of this work.


25
Many are not familiar with the notion of the Hebrew Bible arranging ideas, stories, and events, by
order of topic rather than chronologically. This phenomenon is well documented in the book of Jeremiah
where events occur out of chronological order. Such a style of writing is typical of the thinking system
common in the ancient near east known as block logic and which contrasts the western style of thinking know
as step logic where things are group by order of events or in steps. This suffices to show how easy it can be
for a westerner to read an eastern book and have all everything but the pages backwards. For a more detailed
explanation see this excellent article:
http://www.godward.org/Hebrew%20Roots/hebrew_mind_vs__the_western_mind.htm

26
Essentially the same as an antimetabole, a chiasm (alt. chiasm pl. chiasmi) is a verbal device in which an
expression is divided into two parts with the word order of each mirroring the other (e.g. ABC|CBA).
The Hebrew Bible is replete with these devices. One such example is the command of equal justice GOD gave
to Noah in Gn 9:6a. For clarification, the translation is literal:


one shedding the blood of mankind by mankind his blood will be shed