essay about creation story

A Summary and Analysis of the Creation Story in the Book of Genesis

By Dr Oliver Tearle (Loughborough University)

‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth’: so begins the Book of Genesis and, with it, the Old Testament, and, with that, the Bible. But where did this Creation story come from, ‘in the beginning’? How was it shaped? Did it rely on earlier accounts? And is there really one Creation story in the Book of Genesis, or are there, in fact, two? And how many gods, after all, did the creating, according to the Bible?

Let’s take a closer look at the Creation story – or rather, stories – in the Book of Genesis, offering a close analysis of their meaning and origins.

Disclaimer: as an Amazon Associate, we get commissions for purchases made through links in this post.

Genesis creation story: summary

The Book of Genesis famously opens with the words:

1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Although we know the first book of the Bible as the Book of Genesis, in Hebrew, where this book begins the Torah, the book is known as Bereshith , which literally means ‘in the beginning’, as the Hebrew practice was to call each book after its opening words.

‘Genesis’ is from the Greek translation of the Hebrew book, and means literally ‘coming into being’ or, if you will, ‘origins’.

Curiously, although the English translation of this Greek translation uses the word ‘God’, the Hebrew word used is Elohim , which is actually a plural form: so ‘gods’, rather then God. The earliest version of the Book of Genesis (as it’s now known), then, may well have begun with a polytheistic rather than monotheistic account of Creation.

Even when the authors of these early books of the Bible came to co-opt this earlier account for a monotheistic vision of the world, the term Elohim was, as Isaac Asimov notes in his Asimov’s Guide to the Bible: The Old Testament , too familiar and too firmly ingrained to change.

Indeed, as Asimov goes on to observe, some traces of this polytheism may have remained in later passages from Genesis. So, for instance, when Adam and Eve eat of the forbidden fruit, God says, ‘Behold, the man is become as one of us’ (Genesis 3:22). And when God sees the Tower of Babel , he says, ‘Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language’ (Genesis 11:7).

Even if we grant the use of the royal ‘we’ (and surely God, if anyone, is allowed to use that), in this second passage we’d also have to accept that he was talking to himself and telling himself to go down there. It makes more sense to think of ‘Elohim’ as addressing each other and deciding to act collectively.

1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Once the writers have established God as the Creator of everything, they then describe the early state of the earth as soon as God (or gods) had brought it into being. There is no light as yet.

1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

In a famous quotation, God merely has to command that light should exist, and light exists. Night and day are quickly established:

1:4 And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.

1:5 And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

Now night and day have been created, as a time-division between the two halves of the day, God creates the sky or ‘firmament’:

1:8 And God called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day.

On the third day, grass and flowers and trees are created at God’s command:

1:12 And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

Next, on the fourth day, he creates a ‘greater light’ for the day (the sun), and a ‘lesser light’ for the night (the moon), as well as all the stars:

1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

On the fifth day, the creatures of the sea and the birds in the sky are brought into being:

1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth.

On the sixth day, God creates cattle, ‘creeping’ things, and the various beasts of the earth:

1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so.

1:25 And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good.

He also makes man in his own image, and lets him have dominion over all of these animals:

1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

On the seventh day, he rests, and this is the basis of the Sabbath, the ‘seventh day’ of the week (Saturday in Judaism, but this became Sunday in Christianity), on which God’s followers are supposed to rest in honour of the Creation and not work, because God didn’t work on the seventh day.

Genesis creation story: analysis

As Kristin Swenson points out in her engaging book on the Bible, A Most Peculiar Book: The Inherent Strangeness of the Bible , there are some rather curious inconsistencies between the account of Creation given in chapter 1 of Genesis and the details we find in chapters 2 and 3. In chapter 1, the most familiar version of Creation, God creates man last, on the sixth day, having created the other animals already.

Yet in chapter 2 of Genesis, we are told that God created Adam and then created the animals for Adam to give names to:

2:18 And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.

2:19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof.

Note that in this account, God clearly creates the animals after he has created man, so that man (i.e., Adam) will have some ‘help meet’ and company. Yet in the earlier account in chapter 1, the cattle, creeping things, and beasts are all mentioned first, and then God gives man dominion over them after he has created man.

Some scholars have maintained that this doesn’t necessarily mean God created the animals first in chapter 1: it may be that the authors simply mentioned them before the creation of man. But the wording certainly implies that the creation of man came after the other creatures.

God also had to invent rain, because although he had created the flowers and crops, nothing was growing in the Garden of Eden:

2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, 2:5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

What such inconsistencies suggest is that there were (at least) two slightly different accounts of Creation which the authors of Genesis fused together.

So although the first few chapters of Genesis broadly follow a chronology (God creates the heavens and earth, then he creates man, and then the focus turns to Adam and Eve), some details remain in the second chapter, which is clearly from a different source than chapter 1, and these details contradict what was set out in chapter 1.

Discover more from Interesting Literature

Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.

Type your email…

The Creation Story: Summary and Study Guide

Find out what happened on each of the seven days of creation

LearnReligions / Hugo Lin

Christianity Origins
The New Testament
The Old Testament
Practical Tools for Christians
Christian Life For Teens
Christian Prayers
Inspirational Bible Devotions
Denominations of Christianity
Christian Holidays
Christian Entertainment
Key Terms in Christianity
Catholicism
Latter Day Saints

General Biblical Studies, Interdenominational Christian Training Center

The creation story begins with the opening chapter of the Bible and these words: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (NIV) This sentence summarizes the drama that was about to unfold.

We learn from the text that the earth was formless, empty, and dark, and God's Spirit moved over the waters preparing to perform God's creative Word. Then began the seven most creative days of all time as God spoke life into existence. A day by day account follows.

Watch Now: A Simple Version of The Bible Creation Story

The creation day by day.

The creation story takes place in Genesis 1:1-2:3.

Day 1 - God created light and separated the light from the darkness, calling light "day" and darkness "night."
Day 2 - God created an expanse to separate the waters and called it "sky."
Day 3 - God created the dry ground and gathered the waters, calling the dry ground "land," and the gathered waters "seas." On day three, God also created vegetation (plants and trees).
Day 4 - God created the sun, moon, and the stars to give light to the earth and to govern and separate the day and the night. These would also serve as signs to mark seasons, days, and years.
Day 5 - God created every living creature of the seas and every winged bird, blessing them to multiply and fill the waters and the sky with life.
Day 6 - God created the animals to fill the earth. On day six, God also created man and woman ( Adam and Eve ) in his own image to commune with him. He blessed them and gave them every creature and the whole earth to rule over, care for, and cultivate.
Day 7 - God had finished his work of creation and so he rested on the seventh day, blessing it and making it holy.

A Simple—Not Scientific—Truth

Genesis 1, the opening scene of the biblical drama, introduces us to the two main characters in the Bible: God and man. Author Gene Edwards refers to this drama as "the divine romance." Here we meet God, the Almighty Creator of all things, revealing the ultimate object of his love —man—as he concludes the stunning work of creation. God has set the stage. The drama has begun.

The simple truth of the biblical creation story is that God is the author of creation. In Genesis 1, we are presented with the beginning of a divine drama that can only be examined and understood from the standpoint of faith. How long did it take? How did it happen, exactly? No one can answer these questions definitively. In fact, these mysteries are not the focus of the creation story. The purpose, rather, is for moral and spiritual revelation.

God was very pleased with his creation. Six times throughout the process of creating, God stopped, observed his handiwork, and saw that it was good. On final inspection of all that he had made, God regarded it as "very good."

This is a great time to remind ourselves that we are part of God's creation. Even when you don't feel worthy of his pleasure, remember that God made you and is pleased with you . You are of great worth to him.

The Trinity in the Creation

In verse 26, God says, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness ..." This is the only instance in the creation account that God uses the plural form to refer to himself. It's interesting to note that this happens just as he begins to create man. Many scholars believe this is the Bible's first reference to the Trinity .

The Rest of God

On the seventh day, God rested. It's hard to come up with a reason why God would need to rest, but apparently, he considered it important. Rest is often an unfamiliar concept in our busy, fast-paced world. It's socially unacceptable to take an entire day to rest. God knows we need times of refreshing. Our example, Jesus Christ , spent time alone, away from the crowds.

The rest of God on the seventh day sets an example for how we ought to spend and enjoy a regular day of rest from our labors. We should not feel guilty when we take time each week to rest and renew our bodies, souls, and spirits.

But there is a more profound significance to God's rest. It figurately points to a spiritual rest for believers. The Bible teaches that through faith in Jesus Christ, believers will experience the delights of resting in heaven forever with God: "So God’s rest is there for people to enter, but those who first heard this good news failed to enter because they disobeyed God. For all who have entered into God’s rest have rested from their labors, just as God did after creating the world." (See Hebrews 4:1-10)

Questions for Reflection

The creation story clearly shows that God enjoyed himself as he went about the work of creation. As noted previously, six times he stopped and savored his accomplishments. If God takes pleasure in his handiwork, is there anything wrong with us feeling good about our achievements?

Do you enjoy your work? Whether it's your job, your hobby, or your ministry service, if your work is pleasing to God , then it should also bring pleasure to you. Consider the work of your hands. What things are you doing to bring pleasure to both you and God?

25 Bible Verses About Creativity
What Is the Firmament in the Bible?
Summaries of Ancient Creation Myths
33 Bible Verses About Nature
Introduction to the Catholic Religion: Beliefs, Practices and History
The Story of Noah and the Flood Bible Study Guide
Meet Adam: The First Man and Father of the Human Race
What Does the Holy Spirit Do?
Learn the Meaning of Numbers in the Bible
Who Is the Holy Spirit?
35 Bible Verses About Life
Scripture Readings for Holy Week
Scripture Readings for the Second Week of Lent
Christian Symbols Illustrated Glossary
Introduction to the Book of Genesis
Scripture Readings for the Third Week of Lent

Featured Essay The Love of God An essay by Sam Storms Read Now
Faithfulness of God
Saving Grace
Adoption by God

U.S. Edition

Arts & Culture
Bible & Theology
Christian Living
Current Events
Faith & Work
As In Heaven
Gospelbound
Post-Christianity?
TGC Podcast
You're Not Crazy
Churches Planting Churches
Help Me Teach The Bible
Word Of The Week
Upcoming Events
Past Conference Media
Foundation Documents
Church Directory
Global Resourcing
Donate to TGC

To All The World

The world is a confusing place right now. We believe that faithful proclamation of the gospel is what our hostile and disoriented world needs. Do you believe that too? Help TGC bring biblical wisdom to the confusing issues across the world by making a gift to our international work.

A Biblical Theology of Creation

Other essays.

A biblical theology of creation helps us to see the patterns of creation, fall, redemption, and new creation that are repeated throughout the creation story; though the chaos of sin leads to judgment, God will ultimately redeem and renew his creation.

To trace a biblical theology of creation, we must begin with God’s rule and intent in his creation. Though sin brings chaos into the creation order that ultimately leads to judgment, God is committed to redeeming his creation. Throughout the story of redemption, we see a series of “new creation” events following the judgments of the flood, the Tower of Babel, the exodus, and the exile. In the commission of Noah, the covenant with Abraham, the Mosaic law, and the promises of the new covenant, God begins his creative work anew. However, except for the new covenant, all of these new creation events are followed by another “fall.” In the new covenant, the decisive new creation begins with the person and work of Jesus. Though it is not yet complete, at the end of the age, God himself will make all things new and come again to dwell among his people in the new creation.

The Beginning

It is important to begin a biblical theology of creation with God’s original intent in his creative work. In Genesis 1, we see God forming and filling the creation, and at the end of his work, he pronounces that this ordered creation is “very good.” This very good creation is the place that God has always intended to dwell with his people. Contrary to some views of the created order, the creation itself is intrinsically good and should be regarded as such. In spite of the judgments that sin has brought on God’s creation, God is committed to making it new and redeeming a people who will live in it forever.

Moreover, while Christians may disagree about some of the details and timing of the creation week, all can agree that the biblical account of the creation week in Genesis 1 clearly teaches that God made all things and orders all things. As a result of this, he is sovereign over his creation. That is to say, he is in charge of his good creation.

Yet it is clear to us that something happened to mar this good creation. In Genesis 3, we discover that sin has entered the world through the rebellion of Adam and Eve. They were entrusted as the stewards of God’s good creation, but instead they turned away from him and sought to establish themselves as the true kings (Gen. 3:6-7).

Alongside of the consequences of sin that human beings personally experience, sin has cosmic effects. In Genesis 3, we learn that the creation itself is transformed by sin. The ground itself is cursed (Gen. 3:17). No longer do human beings have a harmonious and peaceful relationship with the creation. Instead, we have to fight with the ground in order to cultivate it.

However, God did not leave human beings without hope of redemption, and the creation itself shares that hope. Romans tells us that the creation itself “waits in eager expectation” for God to redeem his people, for when we are redeemed it too will be (Rom. 8:19). But right now, we are waiting for that hope to be fulfilled. As we wait, God has given us tastes of that new creation to come. He has revealed his plan to redeem the world through a series of “new creations,” and these new-creation type events are preparing us for the ultimate new creation yet to come.

Adam and Eve were waiting for God to act to renew his creation, but in the generations that followed, the sin of the human race continued to increase. Instead of renewal, the creation was moving toward greater chaos as humans ran headlong into greater sin (Gen. 6:1). As a result, God looked at the chaos that sin had brought to his creation and condemned it to judgment. Through the waters of the flood, he judged the rebellious human beings and even the fallen creation itself.

But even in the chaos of that judgment, God remained committed to his creation. Almost all of humanity had turned against him, but one man was righteous in God’s eyes. God rescued that man, Noah, along with his family, through the waters of the flood. From these eight people, God’s creation began anew, and he pronounced the same blessing on Noah that he did on Adam and Eve (Gen. 9:7). Yet like Adam and Eve, Noah and his sons turned away from God. Again, God’s creation work was soon followed by the chaos of sin, and the rebellion of the human race continued unabated until the tower of Babel.

At Babel, humans were again attempting to establish their own authority and power. They wanted to “make a name” for themselves (Gen. 11:4). Again, God came down to judge his people, this time by confusing their language so they could no longer communicate with each other clearly.

In the midst of this chaos, God again chose a single human through whom he would continue his commitment to the creation. The covenant with Abraham is a type of new creation in which God began anew, calling his people to remain faithful to him, and giving them a commission to fill the earth (Gen. 12:3). With the family of Abraham, we have another new creation. But as we observe the life of Abraham, his sons, and his grandsons, the corruption of the old creation remains. Abraham lied about his wife being his sister to preserve himself (Gen. 12:10–17). His son Isaac did something similar (Gen. 26:1–11). His grandson Jacob deceived his own father to get a greater inheritance (Gen. 27:1–29) and his great-grandsons sold their own brother into slavery (Gen. 37:18–36). Yet God did not abandon this new creation people, even when they ended up in the chaos of slavery in Egypt.

After judgments of the flood and the Tower of Babel, God remained committed to his people and his creation. As we’ve seen, following these judgments, there is a kind of new creation; however, this is more evident in the exodus from Egypt. As God worked to bring the Hebrews, the descendants of Abraham, out of slavery, we see judgment on Egypt that brings chaos to that nation while the rescue of the Hebrews echoes God’s work in the creation itself.

Through the plagues he brought to Egypt, God was bringing judgment in the form of chaos. Instead of water being sent to its proper order, water is turning to blood (Exod. 7:17–18). Instead of animals coming to life, you have animals dying (Exod. 9:1–4). Rather than light appearing, the ninth plague shrouds the land in darkness (Exod. 10:21–22). And then, at the crossing of the Red Sea, the waters are divided so that dry land appears (Exod. 14:21) after a wind (Spirit) from God blew over the sea (Exod. 15:12).

The new creation language continues after Israel emerged from the Red Sea. The tabernacle that God commanded his people to build reminds us a little of the Garden of Eden. When it was finished, everything was done just as the LORD had commanded—just as the first creation was just had God had intended it to be. Some scholars even argue that the seven speeches in Exodus 25-31 point us back to the seven days of creation! Whether that is true or not, the imagery is pretty clear—when God called his people out of Egypt, he was pointing us back to the new creation, reminding us that he is bringing order out of chaos for the salvation of his people. 1

However, the pattern of creation followed by a fall continues in the history of Israel. Shortly after emerging from the Red Sea, Israel came to Mount Sinai. While Moses met with God and received the law on the mountain, Israel again began to doubt God’s care for them, and wanted to create a god that they could see and manage for themselves. Once again, God’s “new creational” people failed to trust his care for them, and the result was judgment and chaos; the pattern of creation followed by fall continues.

This pattern continues throughout Israel’s history. God graciously brought them into the land he had promised (another kind of new creation), but they continued to turn away from him. While there were periods of more or less faithfulness, the overall trajectory of the nation’s history was away from the Lord and toward idolatry. And this pattern ultimately led to the judgment of the exile.

Exile and Return

If the exodus and settlement in the Promised Land is the clearest picture of new creation, then the judgment of exile is perhaps the clearest picture of the fall and its consequent chaos. For centuries, the prophets in Israel warned God’s people to turn away from their idolatry or else the Lord would send foreign invaders to conquer the land and take the people captive. In fact, before they even entered the land, Moses himself warned of exile for ongoing unfaithfulness (Deut. 28–30).

The prophets sometimes use language that seems to reverse the original creation when anticipating the judgment of the exile. For example, when envisioning the land after the exile, Jeremiah echoes Genesis 1:2 before God ordered the creation: “I looked on the land, and behold, it was without form and void; and to the heavens, and they had no light” (Jer. 4:23). Yet the promise of restoration and return from exile points forward to a new creation. When Isaiah looked forward to the return from exile and the restoration of God’s people, he often used creation language (Isa. 40:28; 42:5; 43:15; 45:18; 57:19; 65:17; 66:18). In fact, the return from exile is nothing short of a new heaven and a new earth (Isa. 65:17).

The New Creation

As the people of God were waiting for God to act and decisively end the exile, they were in reality waiting for the new creation, when God would make all things new. However, when we come to the New Testament, something surprising happens. The new creation arrives in the person and work of Jesus, but the chaos of the fallen creation is still present with us. As with many other parts of God’s saving plan, the new creation is both already and not yet.

The greatest judgment for sin was found at the cross. There, the sin of God’s people was placed on the Messiah, Jesus, who suffered in their place (Isa. 53:6). Yet the decisive work of new creation began with the resurrection of Jesus. He is the firstborn from the dead, the beginning of God’s final new creation work (Col. 1:18). Though he is the firstborn from the dead, everyone who is united with him can look forward to sharing in his creation in the new creation (1 Cor. 15:20–23).

The new creation is a way of talking about God’s new work in redemption. But with the coming of Christ, it is not simply a step toward the promised new creation. The new creation is in some sense already present. This is why Paul could write, “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!” (2 Cor. 5:17, NIV). The work of Christ is the beginning of this new creation. Through his death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and present reign, Christ has brought the long-promised new creation into existence. We are truly living in the age of the new creation.

But when we look around at the world as we experience it now, it does not feel like we are living in the new creation. As we noted above, the Scriptures also teach us about the ongoing longing of the creation itself to be set free of its corruption. We look forward to the day when “the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay” (Rom. 8:21, NIV).

The new creation has come, but the creation itself continues to wait with eager longing. Living in this overlap of the ages should affect the way we see creation both now and in the future. Now, we can remember that God has remained committed to his creation through many judgments, both of individuals and whole nations (and, in the flood, the entire world). We ought to remember that the created world is not an afterthought. God is committed to removing its “bondage to decay.”

Consequently, we ought to care for God’s good world and seek to steward it well, just as he commanded Adam and Eve so many years ago. God intends not only to redeem disembodied people, but also the world itself. However, we should guard against an ecological idealism in which we equate the good work of environmentalism with gospel ministry or the idea that our creation care will somehow usher in the new heavens and the new earth. The restoration of the creation is ultimately God’s work alone.

The New Heavens and New Earth

In Revelation 21, John paints a picture of the final consummation of the new creation. Heaven comes to earth, and the dwelling place of God in heaven and the dwelling place of his people on earth become one. It is a total transformation of the universe. There is no threat of another fall, for every sorrow and pain will be removed (Rev. 21:4). All of the dangers and threats of the old creation will be wiped away, because no sinful things are admitted to this new creation (v. 8). The creation will once again reflect the glory of God and be full of beauty that all people can enjoy (vv. 22–26). Death itself will be finally defeated, and God’s resurrected people will live forever, enjoying his good creation.

But of all the glories of the new creation, the greatest is God’s very presence among his people (vv. 3, 22–23). This very good creation is the place that God has always intended to dwell with his people. At the end of the story of redemption, God’s resurrected people will enjoy his presence once again to the fullest degree. The goal of God’s creation and new creation has always been the same: to glorify himself by providing a place where his people can enjoy him forever. And in the new creation, this goal will be accomplished for all of eternity.

Understanding the Creation Story from Genesis

May 1, 2018
Share Twitter Facebook

How did the world begin? Was the world a cosmological mistake or an intentional creation? What existed before the universe as we know it? Questions like these have generated tons of discussion (and arguments) in the historical, scientific, and religious communities.

While most people are familiar with the creation story found in Genesis, there’s a richness that’s often lost. In The Torah Story online course , Gary E. Schnittjer, Cairn University’s professor of Old Testament, plumbs the depth of the creation story while answering important questions like:

How did the author of Genesis receive the creation story?
How does the narrative style of the creation story provide the backdrop for the rest of the biblical story?
What does the creation story reveal about God?
How are humans different than the rest of creation?
What is mankind’s responsibility to creation?

This post is adapted from Dr. Schnittjer’s course.

What is the origin of the creation story?

The Torah begins with a beginning—“in the beginning.” It simultaneously serves as the introduction to the book of Genesis, the Torah, the Hebrew scriptures, and the entire Bible.

You may wonder, “The beginning of what?”

The story that follows reveals that this is the beginning of the human world—the setting for God’s story. Whether there are other beginnings or not remains a significant issue. The opening of Genesis, however, attempts to tell the story of the beginning of the human realm.

You may also ask, “How did the author learn of this story since there were no people to observe it?” We, as readers, can make guesses.

Perhaps the author learned the story from an ancient oral tradition. He could have imaginatively adapted his narrative as a polemic against an ancient written account like the Babylonian creation story, Enuma Elish. Perhaps he offered his own interpretation of how it might have happened based on his understanding of God, humanity, and creation. Or, perhaps God revealed it to him in a special way, such as through an oracle or vision.

The author does not disclose the source of the Genesis creation story . From ancient times, Judaic and Christian believers have embraced Genesis and its account of creation as Scripture—God’s word. The other biblical authors found in the pentateuchal creation narrative an account on which to construct their own writings.

Biblical readers are free to wonder about the source or sources of the creation account. An apprentice of the biblical writers, especially one who regards their writings as Scripture, needs to put the weight of his or her studies on what the biblical authors have written rather than on what they have omitted.

In this case, the author is not primarily explaining in historical or scientific terms the beginning of the human realm. Instead, the opening of Genesis theologically interprets the relationship between God and the human world, namely, that he created it by the power of his word.

Learn more in The Torah Story online course .

Formed from the wild and the waste

According to the storyteller, the world God created in the beginning was unformed and unfilled—wild and waste. The unformed and unfilled state of the earth set up the six creation days—three in which God formed the world and three in which he filled it. The relationship between the preformed and pre-filled world and the creation days is important for this passage and for the entire Torah (not to mention all Scripture).

In the creating days, the power of God’s word tamed what was wild and brought to life what was desolate. The Torah closes with the people at the end of a trek through the wild and barren wilderness hoping for blessing and life in the land God promised to their ancestors (see Deut. 32:9–11). What God did at the beginning and in the wilderness he can do again . Indeed, the Torah portrays a gracious God with a powerful voice that all readers need to obey.

The style of the creation story

Within these first verses readers are introduced to a distinctive biblical literary style that, in some ways and to varying degrees, was emulated by later biblical writers. In Genesis 1:2, for example, a “special word” is used, or better, an ordinary word is used in a special way.

The Hebrew word rûaḥ can signify one of several meanings depending on context. Here it seems to mean spirit—“the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.” In the following chapters rûaḥ is applied in other contexts that at once give it a new sense and invite readers to consider the new use in light of this context.

In Genesis 3:8 God is said to have walked in the garden in the rûaḥ of the day (traditionally, in the “cool” of the day). If rûaḥ here means windy, then perhaps cool of the day or evening is appropriate. Still, the reader may easily think of the rûaḥ of the day in reference to the rûaḥ of God hovering over the waters in Genesis 1:2. The hiding humans and the chaotic empty world provide the contexts in which God is seeking and hovering.

In Genesis 8:1 God remembers Noah and sends the rûaḥ (wind) to make the waters of judgment subside so that Noah can again live on the earth. The fact that rûaḥ is sent by God to clear the waters for human life on earth to resume and that previously the rûaḥ of God hovered over the unformed and unfilled world prior to the creation days invites readers to compare and consider this word in a special way.

The dual imagery of the flood and the wind—judgment and new beginning—is similar to the imagery of Israel’s salvation from the Egyptians at the sea in Exodus 14. There God sends an east wind ( rûaḥ ) to provide deliverance to Israel and uses the waters to destroy his enemies.

The narrative of the sea crossing in Exodus uses imagery from Genesis 1 in order to depict the theological significance that God is creating a nation for himself (Gen. 1 language in italics):

“Then Moses stretched out his hand over the sea, and all that night Yahweh drove the sea back with a strong east wind [ rûaḥ ] and turned it into dry land. The waters were divided, and the Israelites went through the sea on dry ground, with a wall of water on their right and on their left” (Ex. 14:21–22).

The imagery here can also be thought of in terms of “denotation” and “connotation.” The narrative of the sea crossing denotes or refers to the acts of God to save Israel from the Egyptian threat. Yet, the specific language used to tell the story of the sea crossing connects it by its imagery with the account of creation in Genesis. Thus, the sea crossing narrative connotes God as the Creator of his nation .

Genesis’ textual depth

Many biblical words are used in special ways that both reveal a need for close reading and show a depth, another dimension, to the text. This textual depth is among the reasons that ancient biblical interpreters—before and after the New Testament era—considered the Bible a cryptic writing with subtle and hidden meanings.

In a manner similar to the use of special words, Genesis 1:1–2:4a begins the biblical precedent for special numbers. The seven days set a pattern for a complete week—God finished his work and rested. Thus, in the biblical writings, seven often signifies completion or perfection.

In the following chapters of Genesis other numbers become special, such as three, ten, twelve, and forty. The special numbers become part of the fabric of classic biblical style. The use of special numbers invites readers to reflect on the later events in relation to earlier ones. The forty years that Israel was wandering in the wilderness, for example, encourages the reader to compare it to the forty days of rain in the flood narrative.

The use of special words and numbers are among the many distinctive characteristics of biblical narrative that begin in Genesis 1. The narrative style—somewhere between prose and poetry—displays:

Rhythmic lines
Characteristic repetition
Symmetrical imagery
The manifold use of “and” to connect lines and scenes
Frequent intertextual allusions
Earthy symbolic language

The literary features effectively create a narrative almost poetic with its intertwined realistic and surreal qualities so familiar to biblical readers. Later biblical narrators emulated, whether by intention or otherwise, many of these literary characteristics, always with their own flair, in such a way that their writings “sound like” the Bible .

What does it mean to create: the creation days

The creating days themselves demonstrate the significance of the entire story. Throughout chapter 1 there is a repetition of “God” plus verb—the fourfold repetition in Day 1, for instance: “God said,” “God saw,” “God separated,” “God called” (1:3–5).

The rhythm of God-plus-verb demonstrates several things: the power of God’s word; the relationship between God and creation, namely, the dependence of creation on God and God’s power over and ownership of creation; God’s interest in measuring the character of creation (i.e., “God saw that it was good”); and so forth. Above all else, the reader is confronted by God the Creator.

What does it mean to create? Whatever it means to form and to fill is synonymous with creating in the context of Genesis 1. To understand the Creator, therefore, one must comprehend what it means to form and to fill. In the first three creating days God formed the realms for existence in this world—light and darkness, skies and seas, land and vegetation. During the next three creating days God filled these realms successively with celestial lights, birds and marine life, and the land animals and humankind. The six creation days demonstrate, among other things, the power of God’s word to order and to grant life.

The first three creation days expose the difference between unformed and formed, chaos and order. The difference is separation. To create, in these cases, is to separate. The light was separated from the darkness, the skies from waters, and the land from the seas. Without grasping the essence of order as separation, the call to be holy, to be separate toward God, in Leviticus will not be rightly appreciated. The holiness required of worshipers is the basic characteristic for relating to the Creator.

The fourth, fifth, and sixth creation days likewise display the difference between unfilled and filled. The difference, in large part, is life. To grant life, or to fill realms with life, is, in these instances, what it means to create. The realm of illumination was filled with life-sustaining cosmic lights (these lights also function as time separators; thus the fourth day is transitional), the skies with flying beings, the waters with aquatic creatures, and the land with terrestrial beings. The Creator is the life-giver.

By conceiving of creation as forming and filling, separating and life-giving, the tools are in hand for uncovering the meaning of judgment. To be specific, to die is at once separation and life-losing. Death is the effect of the anti-creational acts of sin . Death is not separation to form but from form. It does not give but takes life. Therefore, the death that comes from defying God’s commanding word contradicts creation. Life, by analogy, is to accord with the word of God. When the nature of creation and judgment is recognized, the oneness of God as Creator and Redeemer comes into sharp relief.

Where does humanity fit in creation?

The story of the creating days not only reveals the relationship of God and the created realm and the meaning of creation itself, but also the place of humanity within creation. Specifically, creation is viewed in human-centered terms; the created realm itself tells of God’s grace toward humankind. The creation is the home or context for human life. Human beings make sense within their realm, namely, the creation of God. The human-centered view of the created world can be seen in the case of each of the six creation days. I will illustrate the human-centered orientation of the fourth day. On the fourth day according to Genesis 1, God created the celestial lights. The entire description is geocentric.

The earth-centered viewpoint of the fourth day is the opposite of the modernist perspective of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The “objective” perspective of modernity saw the rather ordinary star that is our sun as located in a remote area of the rather unexceptional Milky Way galaxy, which is one of billions of such galaxies.

This is one of the points made in the 1997 motion picture Contact , based on the late Carl Sagan’s book. Three times during the movie lead characters say something to the effect, “If human beings are the only life in the vast universe, then it sure is a waste of space.”

The objective view from “out there” makes the earth seem inconsequential within the universe of planets and stars and galaxies. One of the biblical poets, by contrast, reflecting on Genesis 1, marveled at God’s grace toward humans given the enormity of the skies and the celestial lights: “ When I look at your heavens, the work of your fingers, the moon and the stars that you have established; what are human beings that you are mindful of them? . . . . You have given them dominion over the works of your hands; you have put all things under their feet” (Ps 8:3–4a, 5 NRSV).

The vantage point of the fourth creating day is that of the earth-dwellers—“from here.” The great lights are those that rule the earth days and the earth nights, namely, the sun and the moon. Even describing the cosmic lights in terms of “day” and “night” is an entirely earth-centered point of view. The stars, moreover, are regarded according to their function of measuring the earth-dwellers time.

“And God said, ‘Let there be lights in the dome of the sky to separate the day from the night; and let them be for signs and for seasons and for days and years, and let them be lights in the dome of the sky to give light upon the earth.’ And it was so” (Gen. 1:14–15 NRSV; italics added).

By interpreting creation in a human-centered manner, the stage is set for the entire biblical drama. The story unfolds from this beginning. It is the story of humankind within the human world—both created by God—and their progressive relationship with the God who speaks, creates, evaluates, and gives.

Comparing humans to the rest of creation

On the sixth day God made land animals after their kind and humankind in his own image and likeness. The phrases “after their kind” for animals and “in his image” for human beings underscore the categorical difference between humankind and all other created beings—the unique ability to relate personally to God.

Although God prohibits making images of himself in the Ten Commandments, he made humanity in his image. Human beings reflect and represent God in a special sense. Their creational design defines them according to the Creator. This image is displayed vertically in responsible dominion over the creation and horizontally in mutual social relationships.

Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them ” (1:26–27 NRSV; italics added).

The two great commandments—love God and love others—are direct implications from and applications of humanity’s being created in the image of God. Because humans are created in the image of God, it is their intrinsic responsibility to love him. And because all other human beings are created in his image, it is each one’s responsibility to love others as oneself.

The great commands of Leviticus and Deuteronomy are the natural extensions of creational design .

Human responsibility toward creation

Beyond the responsibility humans have toward their Creator and toward fellow humans is their responsibility toward the rest of creation. Humankind is related to but distinct from the Creator and the creation at the same time.

Human beings are creatures among other creatures who live within the created realm. Yet with respect to dominion, humans are responsible to rule over the other creatures by virtue of humankind’s distinction of being created in God’s image. Humans are creatures, but not like any other because they are like God. The idea of image signifying dominion was part of the ancient Near Eastern idea that statues or images of a king could be used to mark or define the realm of his domain. It is in this sense that humankind is the Creator’s royal representative ruler on earth. Human beings are the lords of creation because they are specially created in the image of God .

The creation days move in a direction. They move toward the seventh day, the day of God’s rest. The nature and significance of time itself is thus defined. Time is measured in earth days and counted in sevens or weeks. Each week moves invariably toward its completion—the sabbath. The perpetual repetition of celebrating the day of God’s rest provides a constant reminder of the human place within the world. Humankind lives in a world created by God, forever moving toward the day of God’s rest.

The creation story provides history’s backdrop

The biblical story, thus, begins with the human world created by God. Genesis 1 defines the manner in which the story is told and the way to hear and read the story. Moreover, the beginning provides the cosmological backdrop against which the rest of the story—the book of Genesis, the Torah, and the Bible—unfolds.

The events narrated in the remainder of the biblical story did not just happen in a remote historical context. They happened within the context of the entire human world, the world God created by his word. Because the beginning of the story is God’s creation of humankind within the human context, the story line is, in some way, about the relationship between God and humankind as they exist within his creation.

Books and articles that equip you for deeply biblical thinking and ministry.

9.5 hours of video

Thank you! Sign up complete.

A Few Reflections on Creation in Genesis 1

Lutheran Theology: Kill Your Passions

Cyril of alexandria: lull your passions to sleep, gregory of nyssa: direct the passions, by david adams & charles p. arand.

Introductory Note: In the previous posts , we have surveyed three camps in the faith–science debates regarding origins among contemporary Evangelicals. Three issues arise in these debates: (1) the exegesis of Scripture, (2) the methods and conclusions of science, and (3) the attempt to harmonize theology with science. Without adequate background or knowledge to discuss the methods and conclusions of science, we will leave that aside in this and upcoming posts and discuss the first and third issues only.

This post will consider some of the key biblical texts where our interpretation of Genesis 1 conflicts with the conclusions drawn by many scientists from their reading of nature (and its history). How to deal with these texts is crucial for the three evangelical camps in their quest to show that God’s “two books” (the book of Scripture and the book of Nature) do not contradict each other.

Because of their central role in these debates, I want to set forth the historical interpretation of these texts in Genesis 1 within the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS). We will then explore the larger theological approach that seeks to develop a theological–scientific synthesis.

My thanks to David Adams for writing much of this as we talked together. Also thanks to my faculty colleagues for looking over this post as well

Reflection #1: The God of Creation

When we read the creation account in Genesis 1 we typically focus on what it says about us, that is, about the world of creation and our place in it. While these are important truths, they are not the most important thing that Genesis 1 teaches. All the religions of the Ancient Near East taught that the gods they worshiped were responsible for shaping the world in which we live.

And so before looking at a few passages or words, and before bringing our questions to the text, it is helpful to understand God’s purpose and goal in using Moses to write Genesis 1 for his people past and present. This begins with the question regarding the context in which Moses wrote this chapter and what it would have meant for the people of Israel. What questions was Moses seeking to address for the people of Israel as they looked at the world?

What is fundamentally distinctive about Genesis 1, when compared with creation accounts from the Ancient Near East, is what it teaches about who God is. While most of us think of this difference primarily in terms of the Hebrew Bible being monotheistic and other religions of the Ancient Near East being polytheistic, there are at least three other fundamental differences reflected in the creation account.

FIRST , what Genesis 1 says about how God created the world shows us that the God revealed in the Bible is radically different from the gods worshiped in the Ancient Near East with respect to the relationship between the divine and the material. There is no such thing as creation ex nihilo (out of nothing) in any Ancient Near Eastern religion that we know of outside the Bible. For all other religions of the Ancient Near East both the gods and the material world are thought to be derived from a single fundamental but undifferentiated substance which is understood to be eternal. [1]

This leads to a SECOND important difference. While the gods of the Ancient Neat East were not limited by what we call space and time, they were understood to be a part of the perpetual cycle of the cosmos. They are born, they age, they mate and produce offspring, they may become sick or injured, and they may die. When the cycle is complete and the world returns to its primitive state (i.e., chaos), the gods will cease to exist and the process will begin again.

THIRD and finally, no god in the ancient world was truly supreme. None had absolute power. To be sure, polytheistic systems often had a chief god or top god (e.g., Zeus, Odin) who had more power than the other gods. But that “top god” did not have all power, that is to say, he was not Almighty . As a result, they were subject to the same “fates” that shaped the destinies of humankind, and even the most powerful of them could be thwarted by the combined efforts of the other gods.

The biblical creation account, indeed the whole of Scripture, reveals a radically different God. There is only one God. God is not a part of the continuum that includes the material world but brought into being even the unformed substance from which all things were made (the “empty and void” deep of Genesis 1:2). God is not subject to the cycle of the cosmos, but the distinctions that he introduced into the material world brought about time (Gn 1:3–4, resulting in the day as the fundamental natural cycle of time) and space (Gn 1:6–7). Since no part of the material cosmos is a manifestation of his being, he may not be worshiped using any image (Ex 20:4; Dt 4:11–12, 15–19). God and God alone, of all the things worshiped as gods, is all-powerful and can bring about whatever he wills. In this way, the creation account reveals that YHWH stands apart, and YHWH stands alone.

Reflection #2: The Creation Week of Genesis 1

Another unique feature of the biblical account of creation quickly emerges when compared with other “creation” accounts in the ancient world.

Genesis records God creating both time and space and everything that fills them within the span of six days after which God rested on the seventh day. It is the only creation account that is temporally structured. Not only is this temporal ordering one of the biblical account’s most distinctive features, but the period of time in which God creates the world lays the foundation for key elements of the theology of the Bible.

The “liturgical calendar” for the religions of the Ancient Near East is based on the naturally occurring cycles of nature: the year, the season, and the month (including some half-monthly elements). The Bible alone recognizes a period of time that is not based on the naturally occurring cycles of nature but on God’s distinctive activity. In other words, the week as we know it is both unique to the religion of Ancient Israel and fundamental to the theology of the Bible.

This pattern, based purely upon the account of God’s activity in which he created the world over the course of a week, is fundamental to the theology of the Bible in three ways. FIRST , it provided the basis for the rhythm of the Israelite’s own life within creation, especially, with the observance of the Sabbath as the central element of Israel’s worship. SECOND , it provides the framework for almost all of the chief promises and blessings that God gives to Israel. And THIRD , it unites God’s creative work (Ex 20:11) and his redemptive work (Dt 5:15) to understand Christ’s saving work as the fulfillment of God’s plan to restore the state of “rest” that was lost as a result of the fall, and by whose grace we are brought into that rest.

For these reasons we can hardly overstate the significance of the Sabbath to the theology of the Bible and the importance of the creation account’s temporal structuring in laying its foundation. Confessing the pattern of God’s creative work in seven days, culminating and including the Sabbath rest, is confessing what God did, is doing, and will do both in creation and in redemption. This literal weekly pattern lays the foundation for our understanding that God’s redemptive work in Christ brings about what is sometimes called the “eighth day,” the day when all things become again as God intended them to be.

God makes a special connection between the first week of creation and the dawn of the new creation with Jesus’s resurrection. At times, the early church focused on the days of creation in its preaching during the days of Holy Week. The parallels are striking. God creates humans on the sixth day—the second Adam dies on the sixth day, namely, Friday. And so when Jesus was tried, Pilate said, “behold the man.”

During the first week of creation, God rested on the seventh day, Saturday. Jesus in turn “rested” in the tomb on the seventh day, Saturday. Then on the next day, Sunday, the Gospel of John stresses that it was “the first day of the week,” the beginning of a new week, the beginning of a new creation. Thus, it became known as the “eighth day” of creation for which our baptismal fonts often have eight sides.

Reflection #3: The Age of the Earth and Genesis 1

So how old is the earth? Although the Scriptures do not give a specific age to the earth or a specific date for its creation, the Scriptures portray a world that has been created in the relatively recent past, that is, within a historical span of time measured in thousands of years rather than millions or billions of years. [2]

To be sure, the exegetical reading of the creation account raises certain questions but does not give clear and definitive answers to them. For example, how long was the Spirit hovering over the waters? How long were Adam and Even in the garden before the fall?

More importantly, possible gaps in the biblical genealogies may not allow us to pin down a specific age as advocated by many in the Young Earth Creationist movement (especially by the influential organization Answers in Genesis). What is the purpose or the function of those genealogies within their literary context? What is their role or place within the narrative? Genealogies perform one (or more) of three functions in relation to narratives.

First they may serve to establish the bona fides (or identity) of someone in the account. The genealogy of Moses and Aaron in Exodus 6:14–26, for example, does this. Similarly, Matthew’s account of Jesus’s genealogy establishes the identity of Jesus. Matthew organizes Jesus’s genealogy through his mother, Mary, into three patterns of fourteen generations each. The first fourteen generations following Abraham are a period when the people had no king. The next fourteen generations beginning with David focus on the period when Israel had a king. The third fourteen generations again focus on a time when Israel had no king, and end with Jesus who is born to be king. Matthew’s genealogies thus serve to identify who Jesus is.
Second, they may be used to “wrap up” the account of a person, summarizing their history and descendants. Many of the smaller genealogies in the book of Genesis function in this way. For example, the short genealogy of the descendants of Abraham by Keturah (25:1–4) serves to wrap up the discussion of all of Abraham’s descendants except those who come from the line of Isaac.
The third literary function that genealogies sometimes perform is to “fast-forward” from one major event to the next by summarizing the generations in between. This is how the genealogy of Genesis 5 functions. It moves the narrative quickly from the end of the aftermath of the fall in chapter 4 to the account of the conditions that led God to decide to bring about the flood at the beginning of chapter 6.

While genealogies do sometimes provide chronological information, we must also assess the purpose of the narrative so that we can understand the significance of that chronological information. Therefore, it is both legitimate and necessary to ask whether the biblical authors are providing genealogies for deducing the age of the earth or whether they are using the genealogy to perform a different function.

A consideration of the literary or theological purposes of genealogies does not mean that one can or should discount the chronological information. The challenge is to make sure that we honor the chronological and historical significance of these genealogies as well as their literary or theological function.

In other words, these genealogies give us a sense of the flow of time within the narrative in terms of actual years (even without a precise computation of the age of the earth). To that end, Moses records the age of each father at the son’s birth, as well as each father’s total years of life. Thus

even if the genealogies are selective and incomplete (but not inaccurate), and
even if the genealogies are not exhaustive in a way that one can add them up in order to arrive at firm date from which to calculate the age of the earth, [3]

it is difficult not to conclude that the cumulative year totals in the genealogies contribute to the impression that God created everything in the relatively recent past. [4]

For a good article on genealogies, see Andrew E. Steinmann, “Gaps in the Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11?,” Bibliotheca Sacra 174, no. 694 (April 2017): 141–158. Steinmann responds to those who maintain that there are no gaps in the genealogies that such views are not correct. Steinmann also cautions that this does not imply that the earth is millions or billions of years old. “Instead, it simply argues that the earth is older than the 6,000 years that can be obtained by a simple arithmetic calculation based on the Genesis 5 and 11 genealogies” (158).

For an older discussion of science, genealogies, and age issues, I recommend Paul Zimmerman’s chapter “The Age of the Earth” in Darwin, Evolution and Creation (CPH, 1959). Zimmerman held a PhD in chemistry and served as president of Concordia Teachers College in River Forest, Illinois. The five-point summary of his chapter bears repeating:

1. The Bible does not give us sufficient information to date the time of creation and the age of the earth. 2. We cannot be certain how long a period of time is involved in Genesis 1:2 in the moving of the Spirit over the deep. It is not clear if this is before the reckoning of days begins. If it is outside the days, we cannot set a limit. However, important ordering of the world comes during the first three days. This includes the succession of day and night, firmament, separation of waters and dry land. 3. The creative days are best accepted as days of ordinary length. This is the obvious meaning. However, we must remember that God’s creation is vastly different from His present preservation where present-day laws of nature obtain. God created a dynamic, operating earth. To attempt to probe these beginnings by using modern conditions is to ignore the fact that creation was a once-in-eternity event to which present laws do not apply. This actually takes the question out of the realm of the scientific and places it into the purely theological and philosophical. 4. If the days of Genesis are days of normal length, then man is about as old as the earth. There is then no point in attempting to stretch the genealogies of Gen. 5 and 11 to cover more than thousands of years…. The really vast age estimates deal with the age of rocks whose condition possibly is the result of the initial creation of God. They did not need to wait for crystallization and recrystallization to achieve their present form. Moreover, we would expect that things were created in chemical and physical balance. 5. Scripture, then, does not give a precise calendar. But it does give the impression of an earth far younger than the theories of some scientists indicate. Neither side can be definite. However, the Christian must be sure that any conclusions he reaches must be in harmony with the very clear picture of a great creative act, of man specially created by God in his image, of man’s fall from perfection into sin, and of the first promise of the Savior in Genesis 3:15. To lose those precious truths would be tragic indeed! (Zimmerman, 165–166)

Exactly how recently did God create it? We simply can’t say definitively on the basis of Scripture. We can offer suggestions and guesses . . . but that is as far as we should go. LCMS President Matthew Harrison clearly stated as much in his own LCMS blog post of January 4: “it is true that the Synod has not defined as biblical doctrine a specific age of the earth” ( https://blogs.lcms.org/2018/64959 ).

Reflection #4: A Day is a Day in Genesis 1

The question regarding the length of the days of creation arises especially in connection with the new geological sciences that appeared in the century before Darwin. The idea of interpreting them as representing long geological epochs became a popular way to account for the conclusions of geology regarding the age of the earth. We also see this in the “day-age” theory popular among many Fundamentalists in the twentieth century.

Although the Scriptures are silent on defining the number of hours in a day (the Hebrew does not have a word for “hour,” which is why we have not made this a doctrine binding on consciences), exegetically strong arguments exist to regard it as what we ordinarily experience a day to be. Paul Zimmerman (above) referred to them as “days of normal length.”

In other words, the interpretation of “ yom” in Genesis 1 to mean something other than a day is exegetically unconvincing. For example:

There are no linguistic or literary grounds—either in the etymology of the word “day” in Hebrew or the grammar, syntax, context, or in any figure of speech related to its usage in Genesis 1—that can justify an understanding of the term in any way other than as a day as we ordinarily experience it.
Genesis 1:5 defines what is meant by a “day” in this context: a day is a period of light (daylight) and a period of darkness (night) separated by two transitional periods (morning and evening). [5]
All of the other time-related words in Genesis 1 appear from the context to be used in what we might call their natural sense. [6]
Most importantly, in Exodus 20:8–11 Moses speaks of the “days” of creation and relates them to the “days” of Israel’s week that culminates in the Sabbath. Moses reiterates this in Exodus 31:15–17. Here, as in Genesis 1, Moses intended “six days” to be what we ordinarily experience six days to be.
Interpreting a “day” as what we ordinarily experience as a day is the cleanest way of interpreting the text in that it creates no difficulties for interpreting other portions of Scripture. Put another way, it best fits the overall scope or stream of Scripture.
Over the course of these six days, we have “eight originating miracles” (as my colleague Paul Raabe refers to them). One on each day with two on the third day and two on the sixth day. These creative acts (the initial opera ad extra of the Trinity) are miracles , and miracles are by definition not accessible to human reason or empirical science (in the same way that Jesus’s calming of the storm is not accessible to science).

Horace Hummel expressed it well in his classic introduction to the Old Testament, The Word Becoming Flesh (CPH, 1979):

Grammatically , it is impossible to try to calculate a date for creation on the basis of the meaning of “day” ( yom ). The word is undeniably used in Hebrew as in English in a variety of extended senses. Yet in the context of Gen. 1, its ordinary 24-hour sense is certainly the most natural or “literal” sense, if external criteria are not invalidly introduced. The problem of Gen. 1–11 is not primarily exegetical, but hermeneutical (philosophical and epistemological starting points). (64)

Reflection #5: Animal Death and the Fall

One of the questions that arises both for Old Earth Creationism and Evolutionary Creationism is whether or not animal death existed before the fall.

The narrative of Genesis 2, and the scriptures that follow, focuses on those two human creatures that God made in his image and to whom he gave dominion over his creation. It focuses on their life, their death, and their renewal of life as the gift of eternal life. Thus Paul writes, “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned ” (Rom 5:12, italics added). Paul follows with, “For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many ” (Rom 5:15, italics added).

Although the biblical record focuses primarily on human history, human life, human sin, human death, and human restoration, it does not do so in isolation from the wider creation of which Adam and Eve were members. As the catechism puts it, “God made me together with all creatures.” Consider the following connections.

FIRST , in Scripture, animals and humans were both created on the sixth day and both seek their food from God (Ps 104:27). In addition, God’s human creatures and non-human creatures possess the breath of life and thus are both regarded as “living creatures” ( nephesh chayyah— Gn 2:7, 19; Ps 104:29–30). This linkage binds them together in both life and death after the fall. Plant “death” is not of concern since plants do not have nephesh or breath (thus humans and animals were given plants to eat).

SECOND , given the role of humans as stewards of creation, it follows that all creation is impacted by human dominion, sin, and restoration. Scripture repeatedly suggests that animal life and death are closely bound with humanity’s fall and restoration. On the ark, God preserved Noah’s family and the animals. Outside the ark, everything that had the breath of life died. After the flood, God made a covenant three times with humans and every living creature (Gn 9:9, 12, 15; cf. Hos 2:18–20).

THIRD , we might also note that animals were not given to humans for consumption in the initial creation. Genesis 1:29–30 portrays a world in which both animals and humans are given plants to eat. This would further support the idea of no animal death prior to the fall. Then, following the flood, God grants humans the right to kill animals and consume their flesh. At the same time, he puts the fear of humans into animals that they might flee and preserve their life (Gn 9:2–3).

FOURTH , animal life was analogous enough to human life that substitutionary sacrifice was logical and acceptable to God, for the life is in the blood.

Finally, when Paul talks about the fall in Romans 8, he speaks about how all creation was impacted and subjected to futility (pointlessness or meaninglessness). The same language is used in Ecclesiastes to describe life hemmed in by death. In humanity’s restoration the animal creation will participate as well; in the eschaton when humanity is liberated, animals will be, too. Hence Isaiah describes what has been called the “peaceable kingdom” (Is 11 and 65) in terms of humans and beasts living in harmony, and an end of predation.

Luther comments on Genesis 3:17–19 about the curse making the earth resistant to bringing forth its bounty:

Moreover, it appears here what a great misfortune followed sin, because the earth, which is innocent and committed no sin, is nevertheless compelled to endure a curse and, as St. Paul says in Rom. 8: 20, “has been subjected to vanity.” But it will be freed from this on the Last Day, for which it is waiting. Pliny calls the earth a kind, gentle, and forbearing mother; likewise, the perpetual servant of the need of mortals. But, as Paul points out, the earth itself feels its curse. In the first place, it does not bring forth the good things it would have produced if man had not fallen. In the second place, it produces many harmful plants, which it would not have produced, such as darnel, wild oats, weeds, nettles, thorns, thistles. Add to these the poisons, the injurious vermin, and whatever else there is of this kind. All these were brought in through sin. (Luther’s Works , vol. 1, 204, italics added)

A few paragraphs later, he reiterates, “The earth indeed is innocent and would gladly produce the best products, but it is prevented by the curse which was placed upon man because of sin” (LW 1, 205).

But even as we identify these similarities or correspondences between humans and animals, we cannot ignore the scriptural differences with regard to their role and telos within Scripture. Even though they both are “living creatures,” only humans were made by the hands and breath of God. Only humans were made in the image of God, and only humans are given the task of serving as God’s vice-regents upon the earth.

These are a few of the significant exegetical issues raised for those searching for harmony or synthesis between theology and science, or faith and reason. We have crafted these reflections so as to say neither less than Scripture says nor more than Scripture says. In such matters, about which people quite rightly have strong opinions and deep concerns, it is difficult to provide answers without saying more than what the Word of God itself says.

When we encounter conflicts between the conclusions reached by Scripture and science it is natural for us to ask how they can be resolved. God created us to want to understand the world around us, and to find answers to all the questions that our study of the Bible and of the world raises. We want answers, but sometimes we cannot find them.

In this we share Habakkuk’s dilemma as we wonder how long it will be until we see all things fully revealed. It can be hard to hear God say, “Wait for it” (Hab 2:3). Like Habakkuk, God calls us to wait in faith. Until that day, genuine faithfulness requires us to confess the truth of God’s Word while having enough humility to recognize that when the Word of God does not speak directly to a question, we may have to live without answers. This we can do by the grace of God that constantly recalls us to the cross, the empty tomb, and the risen Christ who is both the source and the object of our faith, and who is the answer to the one question that we must ultimately know, “How can I be saved?”

[1] This primitive substance, which we often call “chaos,” is typically given a name and regarded as a god, but it is also a material substance. It is commonly pictured in these texts as “water.” The ancients employed this way of talking about the undifferentiated divine/material substance because water was the only thing commonly known to them that had a physical substance but no natural form.

[2] Paul Zimmerman, for example, in “The Age of the Earth,” in Darwin, Evolution, and Creation (Concordia Publishing House, 1959) writes, “Scripture, then, does not give a precise calendar. But it does give the impression of an earth far younger than the theories of some scientists indicate” (166).

[3] For a very good discussion on the topic of genealogies in Genesis, see Andrew E. Steinmann, “Gaps in the Genealogies in Genesis 5 and 11?,” Bibliotheca Sacra 174, no. 694 (April 2017): 141–158.

[4] I personally prefer this language to keep the focus on God’s creative act rather than the language of “young earth” which too easily gets into the issue of whether or not the earth looks young. By relatively recent past, I would understand a time scale measured in thousands of years rather than in millions and billions of years.

[5] This passage provides us with the one certain exception to the basic rule that we have just stated. In its first usage in Genesis 1:5 the Hebrew word for day is used in the sense of the period of light (what we commonly term “daylight”) in contrast to the night. This is within the common use of the term, both in Hebrew and in Greek (cf. Jn 9:4 and Rom 13:12) as well as in English, and does not invalidate the general point.

[6] These would include terms “night, “evening,” and “morning” all in 1:5, and “seasons” and “years” in 1:14. Genesis 1:14 includes the only ambiguous usage of the term “day,” there in the plural for the only time in the chapter. While the matter is debatable, the apparent meaning of 1:14 is that the “lights” function as signs to indicate the passage of two things, the “seasons” and the “days and years” (the grouping in this case suggested by the pattern of the usage of the prepositions in Hebrew). By this interpretation the term “days,” while plural, still refers to normal days. The other possibility, that the term “days” is being used euphemistically to refer to some other period of time, perhaps a “month” or a “week,” seems unlikely. The former (month) is unlikely because Hebrew has two other words (both related to the new moon) regularly used for a month and “days” is never elsewhere used that way. The latter (week) is unlikely since it is not a period of time for which the lights function as a sign, and thus makes no sense in the context. In either case the context requires that the term “days” as used in Genesis 1:14 refers to some naturally occurring period of time, apparently less than a year.

Unforgivable? – Dr. Mark Rockenbach and Ted Kober

Coping with hurt by ignoring it or reliving it can lead us to sink deeper into bitterness. Ted Kober and Dr. Mark Rockenbach share the radically different approach that Jesus offers. Their new book "Unforgivable?: How God’s Forgiveness Transforms Our Lives" explores the psychological and spiritual impact of forgiveness.

Sanctify Them in the Truth!

This is one of the petitions of the so-called High-priestly Prayer of Jesus in John 17. The prayer was spoken (made) before Jesus’s ascension and even before his passion. In church, however, it is heard on the Sunday after the Ascension and before Pentecost. What matters (and seems to be...

Do you Have Good Theology? – Dr. Joel Okamoto and Dr. Charles Arand

Dr. Joel Okamoto and Dr. Charles Arand, professors of systematic theology, discuss the difference between knowing a lot of theology and having good theology. Their conclusion might surprise you.

About author

Charles Arand

Pastor Tom Eckstein March 6, 2018

This is an excellent, well balanced article on this issue. Thanks!

Charles Paulson, retired LCMS pastor May 12, 2018

Excellent article. I agree, Genesis 1 is the inspired truth of God’s own Word, but it does nothing to establish the age of the earth in geologic terms. I would refer you to an excellent article by Henry B. Smith, “MT, SP or LXX? Deciphering a Chronological and Textual Conundrum in Genesis 5,” Bible and Spade 31 1 (2018), 18-27. He makes a compelling argument that the Masoretic Text was shortened to conform to the time frame of the Book of Jubilees. He notes that the LXX, Samaritan Pentateuch and Josephus all have higher begetting dates of 100 years for almost every generation, raising the creation event to 5500 and the Flood to 3300 B.C.

Daniel Pech November 15, 2021

According to the universal self-evidence of life-affirming, Divine Design, there is a particular hierarchy of natural dependencies in the Completed Creation. For example, creaturely life depends on the Earth’s ecology, and the Earth’s ecology depends on the Sun.

Indeed, the Day Four portion of Genesis 1 (vs. 14-18) mentions the value of the luminaries for life on Earth. This is the account’s textual central portion, being essentially halfway between v. 1 and v. 31. Indeed, by word count in the Hebrew, the central word or phrase of the account is firmly within this portion. By my count, this is the word translated ‘the light’ in v. 18. Or, leaving out v. 31, it is the word or phrase translated ‘to shine’ or ‘give light’ in v. 17.

But vs. 14-18 is the only part of the account to outright mention the luminaries at all. This has caused a deep debate regarding when, in the Creation Week, the account intends to say that the luminaries were created. Were they created on Day Four? Or, instead, were they created in the ‘in the beginning’ of v. 1?

Part of the issue of this debate is whether the account presupposes the universal self-evidence of Divine Design, not only of the Completed Natural World, but of Natural Language. For example, is the account

(X) straightforward, in that each verse in turn is to be understood on the basis of any and all prior verse(s)? or, instead, (Y) a bit of a ‘botch job’ that involves a measure of the less or more arbitrary kinds of ‘inside secrets’?

In other words, (X), is vs. 1:1-5 the context for interpreting vs. 14-18? Or, instead, (Y), are vs. 14-18 the context for interpreting vs. 1-5?

According to most readers, Believer and skeptic alike, the account teaches that the luminaries were created on Day Four (vs. 14-18). Let us call this the Earth Created Before Luminaries interpretation, or the ECBL.

But my impression of the ECBL is that the ECBL fails to take the account as a straightforward narrative. For, it can be charged that the ECBL ignores the particulars of the entire first thirteen verses, specifically of these particulars in terms of the universal self-evidence of Divine Design. For, these are particulars that, in their own terms—that is, aside from the ECBL—would seem to compel the impression that the luminaries are created in v. 1.

Of course, the account nowhere mentions the luminaries except in vs. 14-18. So, if we suppose that the account’s author intends to be understood as saying that the luminaries are created in v. 1, then why does he not ensure, contrary to vs. 14-18, that that is what all readers understand? I mean, it would be very easy for the author to have outright stated, as part of v. 1, that the luminaries are created at the beginning. For example, he could easily have said in v. 1,

‘In the beginning, God created the heaven and all its host, and created the Earth.’

That way, when a reader gets to vs. 14-18, the reader can sense that vs. 14-18, as a way of mentioning the value of the luminaries for life on Earth, are merely recapitulating the fact that the luminaries were created at the beginning.

But, countering this last problem is the very fact, as already stated, that the particulars of the first thirteen verses, in their own terms, would seem to compel the impression that the luminaries are created in v. 1. For, if one had only the first thirteen verses, and if one did not know of any of the rest of the account, one normally would never expect that any part of the rest of the account would contradict that impression.

Moreover, the universal self-evidence of Divine Design implicitly affirms the hierarchy of natural dependencies.

Moreover still, if one were an ancient Hebrew, one would be familiar with the common usage, on the part of one’s people, of the word ‘darkness’ as implying or identifying dense cloud cover (ex: Job 3; Job 38:9; Deuteronomy 4:11).

So again my issue: Does not the ECBL fail to take the account as a straightforward narrative? Is not the ECBL just an act of alternately arranging the Inspired-as-already-assembled pieces of the ‘jigsaw puzzle?’ What, regarding the luminaries, is the picture that the account’s author intends to present? And is his intention effective in the account’s own terms? What, exactly, are those terms. Do the account’s terms involve some elements that are foreign to the bulk of its terms?

Or, instead, are all its terms in keeping with one sole standard? If so, what is that standard?

And, what is the first thing the account is concerned to tell us was created, and why? According to a reading that may well be the simplest and most intuitive, childlike reading, the answer is ‘the heaven and the Earth’ (v. 1). Only an ‘aloof’ kind of reading would say ‘light’ (v. 3), in that an ‘aloof’ reading allows that v. 1 can be seen as constituting a mere title or summary title. This allowance, in effect, disparages the childlike observation that a things’ rightly servicing a need does not equate to the idea that that service is that thing’s own most proper purpose. By analogy, the service of Adam as Title Human in no way negates Adam’s historicity. If anything, it is that historicity that ‘puts the meat on the bones’ of that very service. By a clearer analogy, despite the service which 2+2=4 has as polemic against financial fraud, that service in no way negates the truth of the equation itself. On the contrary, it is the equation itself that makes that service both logically possible and right.

It may not be untrue, as far as it goes, to say that ‘In the chronologically absolutely first instant, God created space and matter.’ But, consider the depth to which vs. can express Divine Design:

1. the general cosmos and the special Earth. 2. The Earth, as its own general subject, implying that which we all intuit is most valuable about the Earth unto itself in all the cosmos: its abiding maximal abundance of open liquid water. 3. that water and its special relation to the Sun’s light, hence the water cycle; 4. The water cycle and its special beneficiary and member, biology; 5. biology and its special category, animal biology (plant/animal/mineral = animal); 6. Animal biology and its special category, human; 7. The man and his wife (Genesis 2:21-23)

Therefore, v. 1 can well afford merely to imply a blandly ‘creationary’ kind of ‘cosmic ‘physics’ information. This is because Genesis 1:1 can be found to be entirely concerned to affirm the fact that, since God designed and created us, we are—contrary either to a Godless or Platonic outlook—not insignificant.

Indeed, had God created everything together in a single durationless instant, and had He told us this, it would not show us His wisdom and goodness, but only His power. The Almighty is not defined merely as the Almighty. He also is wise, good, and relational toward us. He wants us to know of Him as He is, not merely that He is almighty.

So, we might want to ask, ‘One, how does the completed creation hold together, or operate; and Two, how did God created it?’ I think Genesis 1 constitutes a single recognizable answer to both questions.

Daniel Pech February 28, 2023

The pagan gods ‘were subject to the same “fates” that shaped the destinies of humankind, and even the most powerful of them could be thwarted by the combined efforts of the other gods.’

How did the pagan peoples come to believe in such gods in the first place? What is the cause for the fact that such god’s were imagined to exist? Was it not by the common practice of historical revisionism on the part of delusional, superstition-inclined tyrants? Today, such revisionism is one of the means by which tyrants convince a people that those tyrants’ tyrannical ways are justified. So it seems highly doubtful that Genesis 1 is a *reaction against* the popular ancient belief in pagan god’s. For, how else can these ‘pagan gods’ even come to exist in anyone’s superstitious minds except by the first tyrants’ co-opting some original, naturally widely respected account of origins (an original, totally benevolent account that was, to begin with,, the only account to have any currency)?

Alex Goodwin September 11, 2023

Perhaps I am just missing something but I don’t think you ever got around to the second half of what you were aiming to write in response to the Evangelical positions you surveyed.

You said, “Because of their central role in these debates, I want to set forth the historical interpretation of these texts in Genesis 1 within the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS). We will then explore the larger theological approach that seeks to develop a theological–scientific synthesis.”

You and Dr. Adams did a wonderful job with the first part, but in the years since this was published I cannot find anything pertaining to the second part.

Thank you again for your wonderful posts! Hopefully someone actually is made aware when comments are made to old posts, otherwise I have little confidence in this series ever being finished (unless it was meant to end with this post and I am missing something).

Emmanuel Chidziva 21 days ago

This answers a lot of questions that go around. I wish this information could be ready by many.

Registration

Desired role:

Choose Your Style

The Biblical Creation Story

The Biblical account of the creation story portrays God as the creator of all matter who exists beyond time. The Christian understanding of the creation is that God as the master architect whose power is unfathomable. The Middle Eastern texts, however, propose the versions of the creation which appeal to intellectualism and science rather than faith.

Although science does not always contradict the Christian view of the creation, Bible scholars must exercise caution when reading philosophies that solely rely on logic to explain creation. The far Eastern philosophy propagate different possibilities for existence that do not acknowledge the role of God in creation and therefore potentially weaken the Christian faith.

Near eastern interpretations of the creation have no harmony and pose dilemmas rather than provide answers. While basing their argument on intellectualism, Eastern thinkers on creation propose divergent possibilities and fail to adequately address the question of the origin of species. The Big Bang theory, for instance, proposes that the world is a product of a big explosion that took place fourteen billion years ago (Adebola, 2018). The evolution theory, on the other hand, proposes that species have advanced due to the natural selection but fails to explain the explain the existence of the first organisms.

The Biblical account comprehensively explains the origin of species by attributing the creation to God. In Genesis, the Bible records how God created both living and non-living components in a systematic manner. The explanation builds faith in the all-powerful God and constraints Christians from solely relying on logic to explain creation. Eastern literature proposes varied explanations for existence but is not sufficient for understanding creation.

Christian scholars must interpret every explanation of the creation from the Biblical account. The Middle Eastern accounts of the creation rely on intellectualism and diminish the place of faith in understanding nature. Faith in God is essential in appreciating unexplainable phenomenon in nature especially for Christian scholars. While logically explaining creation, the Near Eastern religious scholars create diverse views and fail to fully explain the origin of species. Near Eastern explanations of the existence overlook the role of God in the creation by advancing intellectualism and, subsequently, weaken a Christian’s faith.

Adebola, G. O (2018). The Big Bang Theory as a premise in a cosmological argument for God’s existence . International Journal of innovative research and Advanced Studies (IJIRAS), 5(8). Web.

Cite this paper

Chicago (N-B)
Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, June 21). The Biblical Creation Story. https://studycorgi.com/the-biblical-creation-story/

"The Biblical Creation Story." StudyCorgi , 21 June 2022, studycorgi.com/the-biblical-creation-story/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'The Biblical Creation Story'. 21 June.

1. StudyCorgi . "The Biblical Creation Story." June 21, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-biblical-creation-story/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "The Biblical Creation Story." June 21, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-biblical-creation-story/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "The Biblical Creation Story." June 21, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/the-biblical-creation-story/.

This paper, “The Biblical Creation Story”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: June 21, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Mesopotamian creation myths.

Ira Spar Department of Ancient Near Eastern Art, The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Stories describing creation are prominent in many cultures of the world. In Mesopotamia, the surviving evidence from the third millennium to the end of the first millennium B.C. indicates that although many of the gods were associated with natural forces, no single myth addressed issues of initial creation. It was simply assumed that the gods existed before the world was formed. Unfortunately, very little survives of Sumerian literature from the third millennium B.C. Several fragmentary tablets contain references to a time before the pantheon of the gods, when only the Earth (Sumerian: ki ) and Heavens (Sumerian: an ) existed. All was dark, there existed neither sunlight nor moonlight; however, the earth was green and water was in the ground, although there was no vegetation. More is known from Sumerian poems that date to the beginning centuries of the second millennium B.C.

A Sumerian myth known today as “ Gilgamesh and the Netherworld” opens with a mythological prologue. It assumes that the gods and the universe already exist and that once a long time ago the heavens and earth were united, only later to be split apart. Later, humankind was created and the great gods divided up the job of managing and keeping control over heavens, earth, and the Netherworld.

The origins of humans are described in another early second-millennium Sumerian poem, “The Song of the Hoe.” In this myth, as in many other Sumerian stories, the god Enlil is described as the deity who separates heavens and earth and creates humankind. Humanity is formed to provide for the gods, a common theme in Mesopotamian literature.

In the Sumerian poem “The Debate between Grain and Sheep,” the earth first appeared barren, without grain, sheep, or goats. People went naked. They ate grass for nourishment and drank water from ditches. Later, the gods created sheep and grain and gave them to humankind as sustenance. According to “The Debate between Bird and Fish,” water for human consumption did not exist until Enki, lord of wisdom, created the Tigris and Euphrates and caused water to flow into them from the mountains. He also created the smaller streams and watercourses, established sheepfolds, marshes, and reedbeds, and filled them with fish and birds. He founded cities and established kingship and rule over foreign countries. In “The Debate between Winter and Summer,” an unknown Sumerian author explains that summer and winter, abundance, spring floods, and fertility are the result of Enlil’s copulation with the hills of the earth.

Another early second-millennium Sumerian myth, “Enki and the World Order,” provides an explanation as to why the world appears organized. Enki decided that the world had to be well managed to avoid chaos. Various gods were thus assigned management responsibilities that included overseeing the waters, crops, building activities, control of wildlife, and herding of domestic animals, as well as oversight of the heavens and earth and the activities of women.

According to the Sumerian story “Enki and Ninmah,” the lesser gods, burdened with the toil of creating the earth, complained to Namma, the primeval mother, about their hard work. She in turn roused her son Enki, the god of wisdom, and urged him to create a substitute to free the gods from their toil. Namma then kneaded some clay, placed it in her womb, and gave birth to the first humans.

Babylonian poets, like their Sumerian counterparts, had no single explanation for creation. Diverse stories regarding creation were incorporated into other types of texts. Most prominently, the Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish is a theological legitimization of the rise of Marduk as the supreme god in Babylon, replacing Enlil, the former head of the pantheon. The poem was most likely compiled during the reign of Nebuchadnezzar I in the later twelfth century B.C., or possibly a short time afterward. At this time, Babylon , after many centuries of rule by the foreign Kassite dynasty , achieved political and cultural independence. The poem celebrates the ascendancy of the city and acts as a political tractate explaining how Babylon came to succeed the older city of Nippur as the center of religious festivals.

The poem itself has 1,091 lines written on seven tablets. It opens with a theogony, the descent of the gods, set in a time frame prior to creation of the heavens and earth. At that time, the ocean waters, called Tiamat, and her husband, the freshwater Apsu, mingled, with the result that several gods emerged in pairs. Like boisterous children, the gods produced so much noise that Apsu decided to do away with them. Tiamat, more indulgent than her spouse, urged patience, but Apsu, stirred to action by his vizier, was unmoved. The gods, stunned by the prospect of death, called on the resourceful god Ea to save them. Ea recited a spell that made Apsu sleep. He then killed Apsu and captured Mummu, his vizier. Ea and his wife Damkina then gave birth to the hero Marduk, the tallest and mightiest of the gods. Marduk, given control of the four winds by the sky god Anu, is told to let the winds whirl. Picking up dust, the winds create storms that upset and confound Tiamat. Other gods suddenly appear and complain that they, too, cannot sleep because of the hurricane winds. They urge Tiamat to do battle against Marduk so that they can rest. Tiamat agrees and decides to confront Marduk. She prepares for battle by having the mother goddess create eleven monsters. Tiamat places the monsters in charge of her new spouse, Qingu, who she elevates to rule over all the gods. When Ea hears of the preparations for battle, he seeks advice from his father, Anshar, king of the junior gods. Anshar urges Ea and afterward his brother Anu to appease the goddess with incantations. Both return frightened and demoralized by their failure. The young warrior god Marduk then volunteers his strength in return for a promise that, if victorious, he will become king of the gods. The gods agree, a battle ensues, and Marduk vanquishes Tiamat and Qingu, her host. Marduk then uses Tiamat’s carcass for the purpose of creation. He splits her in half, “like a dried fish,” and places one part on high to become the heavens, the other half to be the earth. As sky is now a watery mass, Marduk stretches her skin to the heavens to prevent the waters from escaping, a motif that explains why there is so little rainfall in southern Iraq. With the sky now in place, Marduk organizes the constellations of the stars. He lays out the calendar by assigning three stars to each month, creates his own planet, makes the moon appear, and establishes the sun, day, and night. From various parts of Tiamat’s body, he creates the clouds, winds, mists, mountains, and earth.

The myth continues as the gods swear allegiance to the mighty king and create Babylon and his temple, the Esagila, a home where the gods can rest during their sojourn upon the earth. The myth conveniently ignores Nippur, the holy city esteemed by both the Sumerians and the rulers of Kassite Babylonia . Babylon has replaced Nippur as the dwelling place of the gods.

Meanwhile, Marduk fulfills an earlier promise to provide provisions for the junior gods if he gains victory as their supreme leader. He then creates humans from the blood of Qingu, the slain and rebellious consort of Tiamat. He does this for two reasons: first, in order to release the gods from their burdensome menial labors, and second, to provide a continuous source of food and drink to temples.

The gods then celebrate and pronounce Marduk’s fifty names, each an aspect of his character and powers. The composition ends by stating that this story and its message (presumably the importance of kingship to the maintenance of order) should be preserved for future generations and pondered by those who are wise and knowledgeable. It should also be used by parents and teachers to instruct so that the land may flourish and its inhabitants prosper.

The short tale “Marduk, Creator of the World” is another Babylonian narrative that opens with the existence of the sea before any act of creation. First to be created are the cities, Eridu and Babylon, and the temple Esagil is founded. Then the earth is created by heaping dirt upon a raft in the primeval waters. Humankind, wild animals, the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, the marshlands and canebrake, vegetation, and domesticated animals follow. Finally, palm groves and forests appear. Just before the composition becomes fragmentary and breaks off, Marduk is said to create the city of Nippur and its temple, the Ekur, and the city of Uruk, with its temple Eanna.

“The Creation of Humankind” is a bilingual Sumerian- Akkadian story also referred to in scholarly literature as KAR 4. This account begins after heaven was separated from earth, and features of the earth such as the Tigris, Euphrates, and canals established. At that time, the god Enlil addressed the gods asking what should next be accomplished. The answer was to create humans by killing Alla-gods and creating humans from their blood. Their purpose will be to labor for the gods, maintaining the fields and irrigation works in order to create bountiful harvests, celebrate the gods’ rites, and attain wisdom through study.

Spar, Ira. “Mesopotamian Creation Myths.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History . New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000–. http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/epic/hd_epic.htm (April 2009)

Additional Essays by Ira Spar

Spar, Ira. “ Flood Stories .” (April 2009)
Spar, Ira. “ Gilgamesh .” (April 2009)
Spar, Ira. “ Mesopotamian Deities .” (April 2009)
Spar, Ira. “ The Gods and Goddesses of Canaan .” (April 2009)
Spar, Ira. “ The Origins of Writing .” (October 2004)

Related Essays

Flood Stories
The Isin-Larsa and Old Babylonian Periods (2004–1595 B.C.)
Mesopotamian Deities
The Akkadian Period (ca. 2350–2150 B.C.)
Art of the First Cities in the Third Millennium B.C.
Assyria, 1365–609 B.C.
Early Excavations in Assyria
The Gods and Goddesses of Canaan
The Middle Babylonian / Kassite Period (ca. 1595–1155 B.C.) in Mesopotamia
The Old Assyrian Period (ca. 2000–1600 B.C.)
The Origins of Writing
Mesopotamia, 1000 B.C.–1 A.D.
Mesopotamia, 1–500 A.D.
Mesopotamia, 2000–1000 B.C.
Mesopotamia, 8000–2000 B.C.
10th Century B.C.
1st Century B.C.
2nd Century B.C.
2nd Millennium B.C.
3rd Century B.C.
3rd Millennium B.C.
4th Century B.C.
5th Century B.C.
6th Century B.C.
7th Century B.C.
8th Century B.C.
9th Century B.C.
Agriculture
Akkadian Period
Ancient Near Eastern Art
Aquatic Animal
Architecture
Astronomy / Astrology
Babylonian Art
Deity / Religious Figure
Kassite Period
Literature / Poetry
Mesopotamian Art
Mythical Creature
Religious Art
Sumerian Art

Creation Stories Essays

A comparison and contrast of the creation accounts from genesis 1 and rig veda, popular essay topics.

American Dream
Artificial Intelligence
Black Lives Matter
Bullying Essay
Career Goals Essay
Causes of the Civil War
Child Abusing
Civil Rights Movement
Community Service
Cultural Identity
Cyber Bullying
Death Penalty
Depression Essay
Domestic Violence
Freedom of Speech
Global Warming
Gun Control
Human Trafficking
I Believe Essay
Immigration
Importance of Education
Israel and Palestine Conflict
Leadership Essay
Legalizing Marijuanas
Mental Health
National Honor Society
Police Brutality
Pollution Essay
Racism Essay
Romeo and Juliet
Same Sex Marriages
Social Media
The Great Gatsby
The Yellow Wallpaper
Time Management
To Kill a Mockingbird
Violent Video Games
What Makes You Unique
Why I Want to Be a Nurse
Send us an e-mail

Home — Essay Samples — Religion — Creation Myth — The World On The Turtle’s Back: Creation Myth

The World on The Turtle's Back: Creation Myth

Categories: Creation Myth Mythology

About this sample

Words: 690 |

Published: Mar 5, 2024

Words: 690 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

Expert in: Religion Science

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 796 words

3 pages / 1323 words

2 pages / 1008 words

5 pages / 2400 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Creation Myth

The debate between creationism and evolution has deep-rooted historical, cultural, and religious significance. While the perspectives may seem irreconcilable to some, the ongoing dialogue between science and religion continues [...]

When it comes to the origin of life, creationism and evolution stand out for their differing views. Creationism is a religious theory that God created everything in the universe, while evolution is based on scientific principles [...]

The Celtic culture is rich with myths and legends that have been passed down through generations. One of the most fascinating aspects of Celtic mythology is the creation myths that explain how the world and everything in it came [...]

The book of Genesis, the first book of the Hebrew Bible and the Christian Old Testament, is one of the most widely read and studied texts in religious and academic circles. Within Genesis, the first two chapters are particularly [...]

Different cultures globally all have various creation narratives that they live by. With that in mind, the world was only made one time so many of these creation stories are very similar. From a Christianity perspective, they [...]

The creation of religions can be attributed to a complex interplay of psychological, social, and cultural factors. Humans have an inherent need for meaning, seeking answers to existential questions, and religions provide a [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Modern Science and the Creation Story Informative Essay

Introduction, the creationist theory, the big bang theory, the evolution theory, the intelligence design, the steady state theory.

Since time immemorial, the world has been in war for varied reasons, differences in ideological beliefs, aggression from other states, scramble for resources, and territorial violations. However, the longest lasting and most contested battle, pitting the world’s largest groups, Christians and Scientists, against each other, is of the origin of man and the universe.

Religious groups like Christians, Muslims, and Jews believe in the biblical story of creation. The creationism theory states that God created Adam and Eve in his own image and placed them in the Garden of Eden where all forms of life began. According to this theory, the universe is approximately 6000 years old as calculated by Archbishop Ussher in the sixteenth century.

Scientists, who claim life form existed in the world millions of years ago, have watered the credibility of the creation theory. Fossils excavated from seabeds and sedimentary rocks ascertain this claim. Scientists’ attempts to explain the origin of the universe have led to the development of many theories, all having their shortfalls.

As a result, none of the theories has gained universal acceptance as the most probable origin of man and the universe. This has left moral, religious, and cultural forces to play a great role in shaping people’s stand on the origin of the universe.

To establish the reason for the many scientific researches on the origin of the universe, it is prudent to explain the theory all works of science seem to tear apart, The Creationism Theory. Widely held by Christians, Muslims, and Jews, the theory explains that God is the creator and controller of the universe.

In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night.

And the evening and the morning were the first day…And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree…Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven.

And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth…after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind and God saw that it was good… Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind…

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth…So God created man in his own image ( New International Version BIBLE , Gen. 1.1-29).

The creationists believe that God created living creatures on earth and can take them away at will. According to this theory, the world is 6000 years old. The theory draws its strength from the complexity of human life that science cannot explain. Furthermore, research has proven that some major occurrences mentioned in the bible are true.

The big flood that swept the whole World and the Ark of Noah are examples of proven happenings. Balsiger (2010) supports the flood’s occurrence by saying, “Geologists who have climbed mount Ararat, the landing site of Noah’s Ark, have discovered a varriety of seashells and other evidence that this mountain was once under water.”

Similarly, Harris (1997) provides crucial evidence of the detention and enslaving of the Israelites in Egypt as mentioned in the bible.

It is easier to believe the creation story and let life continue. However, scientists are leaving nothing at stake in their bid to answer questions on the existence of the universe they consider not addressed by the theory. Further, they claim incorrect timing and unmentioned crucial facts about the creation theory “cast doubt” on the overall theory (Caputo, 2006).

First, the creation theory’s timeframe calculated by Archbishop Ussher, and generally accepted by creationists, is far from what scientists consider the true age of the world.

“The discovery of fossil types of man or manlike organisms…from South Africa, in the early Pleistocene strata of 1,000,000 million years ago…now classified as Homo erectus…” is evidence that the world has existed for at least a million years, as opposed to the 6000 years advocated by the theory (Adler, 1993).

In fact, according to Fortey (2009), the oldest documented case of living animals is over 540 million years. The theory is also under condemnation for failing to explain the beginning of human races just as it explains language diversity. If all human beings, as explained by the theory, are descendants of Adam and Eve, why is the world’s population so diverse?

Why do we have Whites, Blacks, Reds, and the Colored races? Lack of answers for such crucial information has led to the emergence of many theories attempting to provide the much-needed answers. These theories include, Evolution proposed by Charles Darwin, Intelligent Design, the Steady State Theory, and the Big Bang Theory.

In 1984, Long claimed, “The big bang theory is the most popular of all the scientific theories that attempt to explain the origin of the universe.” Georges Lemaitre, a Belgian priest and professor who lectured at the University of Louvain, developed the theory. Georges’ argued that the fast movement of other galaxies away from our own in all directions is symbolic of an ancient force pushing them away from our universe.

Long (1984) confirms that the proponents of the big bang theory believe the vast universe was compressed into a tiny finite volume, which exploded and has been flying apart as the universe ever since. This compressed state is believed to have existed for just split seconds before the big bang.

According to this theory, a massive explosion caused the universe’s matter and energy to disperse ten to twenty billion years ago. Immediately after the big bag, the universe expanded with speed beyond understanding from the tiny size to the current astronomical scope. Even though the expansion continues, it is now happening at a much slower speed. Fox (2002) describes this phenomenon in details.

In the beginning, there was nothing…nothingness in which packets of energy fleeted in and out of existence, popping into oblivion as quickly as they appeared…One of these fluctuations had just enough energy to take off. It inflated wildly out of control – one-moment infinitesimally small, moments later, light-years across. All of space and time was created in that instant, and as that energy slowed, it cooled and froze into matter (p. 9).

The theory seeks to justify the occurrence of a massive blast by pointing out the existence of cosmic microwave background radiation throughout the universe. The theory asserts that these waves are leftovers from the big bang.

Despite its wide acceptance by scientists as the most probable origin of the universe, the big bang theory is equally criticized as it leaves many scientific questions unanswered. For example, the theory gives no explanation on the evolution of the universe after the big bang.

Worst still, the theory completely fails to explain the “origin of the big bang” itself (Edwards, 2001). How then can it be good enough to explain the origin of the universe when its own origin is blurred?

In 1959, Charles Darwin published his book, “The origin of Species” in which he explained that man evolved from tiny living creatures through environmental adaptation over millions of years (Darwin, 1958). He further argued, “Animals that were incapable of adapting to environmental changes perished” (p. 27).

The depth and breadth of Darwin’s research findings easily convinced many scientists that natural selection provided the most concrete and firm foundation on origin of man. In fact, Darwin himself exuded a lot of confidence in his findings when he said, “I cannot possibly believe that a false theory would explain so many classes of facts” (p. 27).

Darwin’s study of evolution was triggered by observation of life in South America. He stated, “When on board H. M. S. Beatle as a naturalist, I was much struck with certain facts in the distribution of organic beings inhabiting South America, and the geological relations of the present to the past inhabitants of that continent” (p. 1).

Darwin further explained that the facts “seemed to throw some light on the origin of species” and went ahead to give a detailed account of the facts (p. 1). In furthering his explanations, Darwin gives the example of a giraffe. He said taller giraffes had a better chance of survival because they could reach taller tree leaves even during drought as compared to shorter ones.

In order to survive, the giraffes gave birth to progeny that grew taller and taller over time. In this same manner, Darwin holds that animals and humans have adapted, evolved, and survived. Animals that were incapable of adapting themselves perished. This principle of survival of the fittest is what Darwin called “means of natural selection.”

If variations useful to any organic being ever do occur, assuredly individuals thus characterized will have the best chance of being preserved in the struggle for life; and from the strong principle of inheritance, these will tend to produce offspring similarly characterized (Darwin, 1958).

The evolutionists hold that humans grew from particles that randomly clang together to form DNA molecules. These molecules grew continuously to be the humans we know today. The possibility of man evolving from tiny living creatures, as proposed by Charles Darwin, is mathematically near impossible. Sapse (2000) states, “For life to be formed, the right mix of life sustaining amino acids must be united.”

Webb (2002) reinforces the idea by claiming that the probability of random processes creating a nucleic acid or a protein is tiny. In further support of this claim, Davis (1999) says that hundreds of thousands of proteins are required to sustain life, and that the probability of these proteins coming together “randomly” is 10 40000 . Additionally, the theory fails to highlight the origin of the tiny particles that randomly unite to give forth life.

It could be easy to believe the evolution process, but without a strong foundation on the origin of the tiny living creatures, it is baseless. The theory also claims that the earth is four billion years old, a time not long enough for the tiny particles to form the complex human life we know today.

The idea that human’s complexity is a result of a superior, powerful, and all knowing designer whose ability is beyond man’s understanding has existed for years. In fact, the theory existed long before Charles Darwin came up with the evolution theory. William Paley, a renowned English theologian, is the accredited exponent of the theory. Paley illustrated the theory with the famous watchmaker analogy.

He claimed that if one found a pocket watch in the field whiles walking, concluding that it is a product of evolution is unfounded. Rather, one should know that it is a result of a designing being’s intellect. Likewise, he concluded that the existing complex life in the world is a result of super natural creator’s activities.

The intelligence design theory is linked to the creationist theory because it supports the existence of a supernatural deity as the designer of the universe. The proponents of this theory differ with the creation theory’s timeframe. Rather, they agree with the evolutionists in the belief that the world has existed for millions of years.

Some believers of the theory claim God designed life and the universe, while others claim it is not clear who designed the universe, but agree that it must be a civilization superior to ours. Still others believe our existence on the universe is the work of aliens, using human race as subjects of experiment. There is not a single evidence of this claim, but refuting it is equally hard as there is no evidence to the contrary of the belief.

This theory may hold ground to some extend since the modern man’s appearance on earth seems sudden and unexplained. Whereas there are many discovered fossils of animals dating back to 540 million years old, the oldest fossil of modern man, Cro-Magnon, is only thirty to forty thousand years old (Fagan, 2010). Furthermore, there seems to be no fossil evidence of humans evolving from any other animals or beings.

The lack of evidence of existence of man until 30 million years ago could probably point out that they “dropped” from somewhere. The supporters of intelligent design argue that the theory offers explanation to some concepts that evolution cannot account for. Irreducible complexity is an example of a concept evolution cannot account for.

Here, they argue that some components of nature or biochemical systems are so well matched to be mere products of evolution. Irreducible systems are only complete as a whole, any attempt to remove any part results to error as all their parts are necessary. The characteristics of the parts being so intricate and interdependent cannot be a result of evolution.

The stand by intelligent design theorists that no evolution has taken place is widely criticized by a section of scientists who believe it is based on ignorance. The critics claim it is unrealistic, improper, and grave to deny evolution as it continues even today. For example, they claim if an individual cuts himself, the blood responds by producing plasma cells that clot the blood around the cut to reduce and eventually end the blood flow.

“The key proteins that clot blood fit this pattern, too. They are actually modified versions of proteins used in the digestive system…evolution duplicated, retargeted, and modified these proteins to produce the vertebrate blood-clotting system” (Curry & Chang 2006). Such responses, they claim have existed from the very existence of man and have ensured his survival (Campbell, 2009).

A group of renowned scientists developed the steady state theory in 1948 as an alternative to the Big Bang theory. The scientists involved in the development of this theory included, Hermann Bondi, Thomas Gold, and Fred Hoyle all whom were Cambridge physicists.

Bondi states, “The Steady State Theory differs from other creation theories…the problem of creation, is brought within the scope of physical inquiry, and is examined in detail instead of, as in other theories, being handed over metaphysics” (Bondi, 1952). The theory made it acceptable in the late 1960s that the universe had no known beginning at all.

Instead, it held that matter is created continuously during the expansion of the universe, which ensures perfect adherence to cosmological principle. This theory further asserts that despite the continuous expansion of the universe, its appearance has not changed over time.

Due to the continuous expansion of the universe, a notable change to its components is only impossible if new matter is continuously created to maintain the average density of matter in the universe. The scientists claimed that hydrogen is the continuously produced matter that keeps the universe stable.

In 1993, the theory was reinforced and additional information that lacked in the initial version added. Quasi-steady state theory is a result of the modifications, which suggest that there are pockets of creations occurring within the universe commonly referred to as mini-bangs. Even though the steady state theory is widely discredited, there are people who believe its premises.

Evidently, the scientific theories put forward by various scientists have failed to address, comprehensively and conclusively, the “missing links” in the creation theory.

Instead, they have torn the world into different directions, pitting people against each other, consequently spinning the world to a completely irrelevant direction, of seeking the dark and little known past, instead of focusing on the future and how to make his stay in the world most comfortable. Humanity has greater enemies in diseases, famine, and poverty.

Therefore, greater effort should be directed at fighting these enemies. Scientific discoveries have helped humans greatly by inventing medicines for curing diseases thereby reducing mortality rate, explaining phenomena that were once mysteries, and introducing new technologies, which have improved living standards.

However, it must be accepted that scientific research on the origin of the universe, has hardly contributed towards improving man’s well being. Instead, it is divisive and baseless. Every individual has the freedom to choose what theory to believe concerning the origin and existence of the universe and all the creatures in it. Whichever the choice, every individual must put effort in tolerating others who hold contrary opinion.

Adler, M. J. (1993). The Difference of Man and the Difference It Makes. New York, NY: Fordham University Press.

Balsiger, D. W. (2010). Miraculous Messages: From Noah’s Flood to the End Times. Florida: ReadHowYouWant.Com.

Bondi, H. (1952). Cosmology (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Dover Publications.

Campbell, B. G. (2009). Human Evolution: An Introduction to Mans Adaptations (4th ed.). New Jersey: Walter de Gruyter.

Caputo, J. D. (2006). The weakness of God: a theology of the event. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

Curry, J., & Chang, I. (2006). Evolution. Bronx, NY: Halsey William Wilson.

Darwin, C. (1958). On the origin of species (6th ed.). New York, NY: Sterling.

Davis, P. (1999). The 5th Miracle: The Search for the Origin and Meaning of Life. London: Penguin.

Edwards, R. B. (2001). What caused the big bang? Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Fagan, B. M. (2010). Cro-Magnon: how the Ice Age gave birth to the first modern humans. New York City, NY: Bloomsbury Press.

Fortey, R. (2009). Fossils: The History of Life. New York City, NY: Sterling.

Fox, K. C. (2002). The big bang theory: what it is, where it came from, and why it works. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.

Genesis. (2011). In Holy Bible: New International Version. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

Harris, N. (1997). The history of ancient Egypt. London: Chancellor Press.

Long, B. (1984). The origins of man and the universe: the myth that came to life. London: Barry Long Books.

Sapse, A. (2000). Molecular orbital calculations for amino acids and peptides. Basel: Birkhäuser.

Webb, S. (2002). If the universe is teeming with aliens– where is everybody?: fifty solutions to the Fermi paradox and the problem of extraterrestrial life. New York City, NY:Springer.

Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, May 25). Modern Science and the Creation Story. https://ivypanda.com/essays/modern-science-and-the-creation-story/

"Modern Science and the Creation Story." IvyPanda , 25 May 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/modern-science-and-the-creation-story/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Modern Science and the Creation Story'. 25 May.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Modern Science and the Creation Story." May 25, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/modern-science-and-the-creation-story/.

1. IvyPanda . "Modern Science and the Creation Story." May 25, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/modern-science-and-the-creation-story/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Modern Science and the Creation Story." May 25, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/modern-science-and-the-creation-story/.

The Big Bang Theory: Experimental Evidence
The Origin of the Universe: The Big Bang Theory and the Creation Theory
Causes of 2004/2007 ‘Big Bang’ Enlargement
Logical Contradiction Between the Existence of God and Evil
Relationship Between Body and Consciousness by Jean-Paul Sartre
Leading with Soul Response
The Ethics of Leadership
Living Consciously in an Unconscious World

Essay on Creation Of The World

Students are often asked to write an essay on Creation Of The World in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

Beginning of the world.

Long ago, the world did not exist. Then, a big event called the Big Bang happened. This made the universe start to grow. Space, time, stars, and planets were born from this.

Earth’s Formation

Our Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago. Dust and rocks came together to make the Earth. It was very hot at first. Over time, it cooled down, and water appeared.

After the Earth cooled, the first tiny living things appeared in the water. These were very simple and could not be seen without a microscope. Life started to get more complex slowly.

Different Beliefs

Many cultures have their own stories about how the world began. Some people believe in a powerful being who made the world. Others have stories about gods, earth, and the sky coming together to create life.

250 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

Long ago, before there were trees, animals, or even people, the world did not exist. Many stories tell us how the world began. Some people believe a big explosion called the Big Bang made the universe. Others think a god or many gods created everything.

Big Bang Theory

Scientists say the universe started with the Big Bang. This was not an explosion like fireworks but a sudden spread of matter and energy. From a tiny point, everything in space started to grow and move apart. This happened about 14 billion years ago.

Religious Stories

Many religions have their own tales about the world’s creation. For example, Christians, Jews, and Muslims believe in a powerful god who made the world in six days. In Hinduism, there is a belief that the universe goes through long cycles of creation and destruction.

The Earth formed about 4.5 billion years ago. It was a hot ball of rock at first. Slowly, it cooled down, water appeared, and life began in the oceans. Plants and animals came much later. Finally, humans showed up and started to build homes, grow food, and create the world we know today.

Wonder and Questions

The creation of the world is a big mystery. Even with science and religion, we still wonder how everything truly began. It’s a question that makes us think and imagine, and maybe one day, we will know the full story.

500 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

What is the creation of the world.

The creation of the world is a story that tries to explain how everything around us began. It is a tale about the birth of the sky, the earth, the animals, and even us, humans. Many cultures and religions have their own stories about how the world was made. These stories are often filled with powerful beings, magic, and amazing events that shaped our planet and everything on it.

Different Stories from Around the World

In many places, people believe in a god or gods who made the world. For example, in Christianity, Judaism, and Islam, there is a story about a single, all-powerful God who created the world in six days and rested on the seventh. On the other side of the world, Hindus believe that the universe is created, destroyed, and recreated in an endless cycle.

Ancient Greeks had their own beliefs. They thought that in the beginning, there was only chaos. Then, some gods appeared, and they started creating the earth, the heavens, and everything else. Each culture’s story is different but all of them try to answer big questions about where we come from.

Science and the Big Bang Theory

Science has its own way to explain the creation of the world. Instead of gods or magic, scientists use evidence and experiments to understand how the world began. The most popular scientific explanation is called the Big Bang Theory. It says that about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe started as a very hot, small, and dense point with nothing around it. Suddenly, this point started expanding. This expansion created all the matter, space, and time that exist today.

Life on Earth

After the universe was created, it took a long time for life to start on Earth. Our planet is about 4.5 billion years old, but the first simple living things didn’t appear until about 3.5 billion years ago. These were tiny organisms that we could only see with a microscope. Over billions of years, these simple forms of life changed and became more complex, leading to all the plants and animals we see today.

Humans and Our Place in the World

Humans are a very recent addition to the creation story. We have been around for just a few hundred thousand years. In the grand timeline of the universe, that’s like showing up at a party right before it ends. Yet, in that short time, humans have changed the world a lot. We’ve built cities, created technology, and explored parts of the earth and space.

Why the Creation Stories Matter

You might wonder why these creation stories are important. They teach us about our history and culture. They help us understand how our ancestors thought about the world and their place in it. These stories also remind us that there are many ways to think about the beginning of everything.

In the end, whether we learn about the creation of the world through old tales or modern science, these stories all share a sense of wonder about the universe we live in. They encourage us to be curious and to keep asking questions about the world and our place in it. And that’s something everyone can understand, whether you’re a school-going student or someone who has been studying these questions for years.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

Essay on Creativity And Innovation
Essay on Crab Mentality
Essay on Cotton

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

essay about creation story

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS

A Summary and Analysis of the Creation Story in the Book of Genesis

Discover more from Interesting Literature

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

The Creation Story: Summary and Study Guide

Watch Now: A Simple Version of The Bible Creation Story

A Simple—Not Scientific—Truth

The Trinity in the Creation

The Rest of God

Questions for Reflection

Most Popular

U.S. Edition

To All The World

A Biblical Theology of Creation

The Beginning

Further Reading

Understanding the Creation Story from Genesis

What is the origin of the creation story?

Formed from the wild and the waste

The style of the creation story

Genesis’ textual depth

What does it mean to create: the creation days

Where does humanity fit in creation?

Comparing humans to the rest of creation

Human responsibility toward creation

The creation story provides history’s backdrop

A Few Reflections on Creation in Genesis 1

Lutheran Theology: Kill Your Passions

Reflection #1: The God of Creation

Reflection #2: The Creation Week of Genesis 1

Reflection #3: The Age of the Earth and Genesis 1

Reflection #4: A Day is a Day in Genesis 1

Reflection #5: Animal Death and the Fall

Share this:

Related posts

Unforgivable? – Dr. Mark Rockenbach and Ted Kober

Sanctify Them in the Truth!

Do you Have Good Theology? – Dr. Joel Okamoto and Dr. Charles Arand

About author

Charles Arand

Pastor Tom Eckstein March 6, 2018

Charles Paulson, retired LCMS pastor May 12, 2018

Daniel Pech November 15, 2021

Daniel Pech February 28, 2023

Alex Goodwin September 11, 2023

Emmanuel Chidziva 21 days ago

Leave a comment Cancel reply

Registration

Choose Your Style

The Biblical Creation Story

Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History Essays

Further Reading

Additional Essays by Ira Spar

Related Essays

Creation Stories Essays

The World on The Turtle's Back: Creation Myth

Cite this Essay

Related Essays

Still can’t find what you need?

Related Essays on Creation Myth

Related Topics

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

Modern Science and the Creation Story Informative Essay

Essay on Creation Of The World

100 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

Earth’s Formation

Different Beliefs

250 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

Big Bang Theory

Religious Stories

Wonder and Questions

500 Words Essay on Creation Of The World

Different Stories from Around the World

Science and the Big Bang Theory

Life on Earth

Humans and Our Place in the World

Why the Creation Stories Matter

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS