CHAPTER 1 IN Genesis we have what addresses itself to man in his responsibility, the first Adam placed in it, and what it is needed he should know. We may have counsels in types, but no more; it is the sphere of responsible man, and man in it. The existence of God is assumed, the creation of angels not spoken of; but first the creation of the heavens and earth needed to be known by us, then the forming of this scene in which we are as established in it, where I may notice that the expanse is not called good as no actual part of the things formed in connection with man. Then creatures being finished, and the last pronounced good (chap. 1: 25), the solemn creation of a head to represent Him in it,. is taken up, and a lord or head over the creation that had been made, but quite a different thing; " saw that it was good " (v. 25) closed the creation.
The " image " is the great point (v. 27), though " likeness " is stated, and image is the word used in the New Testament.
We have then, chap. 2:15-17, definite responsibility, and verse 18 and following—Lordship, and counsels as to the church, in this only a helpmeet for Christ found; the Lordship was independent of it, but in all of which He was Lord-no helpmeet, no companion; though a living soul, so far is man from the animal which petty infidelity would, in its low thoughts, persuade us he is.
1. There is an apparent difficulty in viewing this as a primary creation, and then passing on to present formation, when we compare the fourth commandment in Ex. 20; but I think it rather confirms it, for it takes the creation, as we have it now, as the whole subject of the commandment, as a distinct whole; for the firmament is called " heaven," and then we have " heaven, and earth, and the sea and all that in them is" (Gen. 1:66And God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. (Genesis 1:6), a seq): light not being mentioned. Also in Ex. 20:1111For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. (Exodus 20:11) it is "made," not "created," and it is evident that angels do not come into this category of creation. Light, I apprehend, is a peculiar thing—a power, whatever its seat, more than an existence created—and the causing this to be, and seating it anywhere, is surely from the fiat of God, but not the making some material being to exist.
All was created of the universe as a structure. The heavens and the earth universal, as a fact the universe. Elohim created this vast system; in respect of man, earth having its recognized place, we have no stars, they merely come in by the bye, that all might be attributed to God; but God was the Creator of the whole scene.
He then leaves the heavens, and begins with the earth; God's dealings with it, and what belongs to it, hence its heavens so to speak. But first the earth-it was utterly a chaos, but a watery chaos-a desolate waste of unorganized existence, not necessarily without form, all matter must have one, but its condition and state an unformed one-without order and waste-in darkness which rested on the watery waste, for such it was. Darkness was its state when God began to deal with it; being in this state, for we begin with it in such a one, knowing nothing of it between its creation, and finding it in this state, we have here " darkness on the face of the deep."
The state of the heavens we have left behind us; we are conversant with the earth in a state of chaos. The spirit of God brooding on the face of the waters is formative power.
God commanded the light to shine out of darkness, " Let there be light "; it is not said that He made it now, but that where darkness was, there was now light.
" Let there be light " is not formative or adorning by His will, out of the texture of what exists. But He does not say that more than the deep was in darkness. God created the heaven and the earth. " And the earth "; He did not destroy darkness, but brought in light on the face of the deep, and distinguished them for us; for Him they are both alike as to seeing. Light was there, where it was not before God commanded it to shine out of darkness. So in our hearts, there it is created, but not in se, because save in God who is light and dwells in it, light is not a thing but a state, though God may have created what gives it and so it. I do not speak scientifically and materially. Till we come to light again all is a mere ordering of the earth, and light is ordered for the earth, then indeed we have living souls, not said of man; but, God's image, how he became a living soul is in chap. 2:7.
4. " And God saw the light, that it was good "-and divided it from darkness-separated the two-first darkness on. the earth, then light.
5. The first light was day; the evening brought on darkness, then morning, and so one day from first day light to morning. There was evening and there was morning, i.e., light comes in where there had been darkness, and so one day; the continuance of the light is supposed till the next evening darkness, for God called the light " day." Hence though morning came after the darkness day was spoken of, and if we translate it simply it is plain; and there was evening and then morning—one day. That is alternation, and day till next evening; how, is not said. But we have night; first, darkness everywhere on the deep—light—night and day -evening and morning. The light may have been created there, or merely placed. There was light, and darkness separate, but also interchange and passage from one to the other, the gradual disappearing of light, and its dawning—day, night -evening, morning.
As regards the day, evening and morning, the light created out of darkness was called “day” but there was no morning then, hence evening comes first—the disappearance of light. But to complete the recommencement of day, evening and morning must come in—the created light apart from darkness—day; then there was evening, and there was morning, of course with night between, and that counted a day. Although the Jews count from the evening I cannot think this the meaning here; the light had been brought forth and called day; the evening was the close of that—the disappearance of light. Then I read "and there was evening"—evening was—"and there was morning," one day. The night is not taken account of, but by implication, it was the primeval state—absence of light—not a creation. God's works are in the light, only if darkness come on light appeared again—the dawn—there was morning. The evening is noted first, because it closed the day just created, or ordered by light brought in.
Everything a man speaks of as created exists as much in dark as in light. The continued exercise of creative power, I apprehend, we are very ignorant about; that it exists we know, and upholds, which is the same thing—save the exercise of divine will.
6. An expanse.
7, 8. Then the atmospheric heavens, the actual blue sky was formed; waters above—the treasure house for the rain, and below—the heaven or firmament. That was the second day; there was again evening and morning—the disappearance of the light, and its reappearance.
9. Next the sea is made by withdrawing the waters from the surface of a part of the earth, and causing the dry land to appear. Nothing was made the second day, i.e., any new thing; the separation of waters above and below, leaving the heavens free as a firmament between, was not a new substance created, hence it is not said to be very good.
10. But now we have land and sea; this was good. The air (sky or firmament), water, earth and sea are formed, and day and night.
11 and 20: " bring forth " are different—in verse 11 it is da-sha (sprouts forth) " let the earth grow with green grass "; and in verse 20 it is sha-ratz (swarms with) " let the waters swarm with swarms of ne-phesh" (soul); in verse 21 it is sha-ratz'.
I think a-sah (formed) is used for forming, putting them in their order and place according to His will.
He made lights—the firmament—man, in counsel as to what he should be.
" Create " is used for heaven, and earth, and man; ya-tzar (formed as a potter) when it proceeds out of a certain sphere or place it belongs to; so even in chap. 2: 7 of man, see also chap. 2: 3.
11-13. Plants are now formed; the earth "brings forth" -this first here, and it was so, and good; a third day. The dry land and the seas were the actual forming the habitable earth, and then plants.
14-19. Then luminaries were formed, serving to divide day and night, and form epochs, and regulated, or periodic times.
Note.—" To divide "; day and night were already divided; this was a special ordering of the function of light as to the earth, in and by the lights.
It is a mark of revelation this to me, for no one inventing a plan would have separately formed light, and sun, and moon, at such an interval. This is order, not existence of light, nor forming, creating the bodies that bore the light.
20. We have now the living creatures of the waters, and fowl in the firmament; fowl, though flying in heaven, belonging to earth.
21. I do not see more in its being said "God created great whales " than the importance of the thing; vast as the creatures might be, they were mere creatures.
I think " created " comes in with intentional fitness; it is the beginning of living creatures, it begins with great whales.
NOTE.—Up to that it had been the creation of materials, the earth, or mere plants; now of living beings.
Tan-ni-nim (sea-monsters) are very large water animals. And then we have it again when we come to man; there is matter and its forms—life and its forms—and man. He is made as part of the sixth day, but it is a new creation.
NOTE.—In chapter 2 the living creatures consequently are wholly dropped; the heavens, earth, and plants are created by Jehovah Elohim, and then the detail of man, and his responsible connection with the paradisaical earth. We have what man really is first, ya-tzar, he is " formed " as a body, and then God breathes into him, etc.
NOTE.—Also in chapter I we have after the making the beasts (v. 25), " And God saw that it was good "—the closing judgment on each day's proper creation. Man comes afterward, wholly apart.
24. Next, on the sixth day, the earth brings forth animals. The earth brought forth, on God's fiat, all living creatures on it; they had as in the sea ne-phesh khay-yah (soul of life) -man is quite distinct.
25. " He saw that it was good," is said after the beasts habitually, at the end, before " there was evening, there was morning "—day.
26 begins a subject by itself, though on the same day. Man closes the formed creation, but he is not properly of it, and save as he comes in under " everything God had made," there is no pronouncing that he was good; he is not otherwise part of what God looked on and pronounced good—that closed with the animals. You have first light—good; then separation of light and darkness; then the earth formed; firmament; sea; dry land (note, no fire is formed), it is covered with plants, and revolutions of time ordered by celestial luminaries. Then living creatures in water, and fowls, then animals on the earth; these are " good." Thus the form of creation, as such, was complete, and its lord was to be made as a distinct thing; I repeat, the closing " and God saw that it was good," comes before any question of man. On the sixth day the earthly form of creation was complete; yet man was formed as a living creature, with a ne-phesh khay-yah, but it is not said when.
30 seems to say that the beasts of the earth (as a general expression) ate the green herb. We have not " cattle " and " beast of-the field," but whatever was a living thing on the earth (as in the ark I suppose). But the statements are not alike; in chapter 6: 21, it is only cattle; chapter 7: 8, cattle clean and unclean; chapter 7: 21, cattle and beast, without " of the field "; see chapter 2: 19, 20, where they are all first called " beasts of the field " and then " cattle " distinguished.
31. It is not said of man " and God saw that it was good." It is said " He saw all that he had made, and behold it was very good," but man held an exceptional place, and his likeness to God, etc., made it more than a mere good creature; as part of the whole, of course he was so, but he was a distinct being.
Of course all things were perfect and the fruit of perfect wisdom, but there is counsel and plan only as to man.
So we find " it was good "; that is, the ordinary creation of that day closes before He begins with man, who is wholly apart. Counsel is taken when all the rest is already formed- counsel to have man in God's image, not first " like " Him, but in His " image," one that represents Him and is formed to represent Him; he is characteristically one who presents Him to others. In order to this man is made after God's likeness, no doubt without evil in him, but as representing God, a center of the whole system, looked up to as such, the center of all affections; one conscious of being all this, a much more compound and relative being it seems to me, as having body, soul, and spirit, than angels are; and the single center of a vast scene subject to him, which no angels are.
The outgoings of affection, and claim thus of reference to him, as was found in no angel (see chap. 2:20); at any rate, man is here carefully contrasted with the living creature which the earth brought forth, is not called such (though he were so too); then the sixth day creation was finished and pronounced good, and then man is formed, according to counsel, according to God's image. Thus according to Genesis 1 man was a distinct being made, when the subject creation of plants and living creatures was complete, in the image of God.
" In our image, after our likeness " (v. 26); this has always had something vague for me. I am clear it is not righteousness and true holiness; that is the new creation—renewal in knowledge—quite another thing Adam had not the knowledge of good and evil, and therefore could not be righteous wholly. But, indeed, this thought is a total inapprehension of what the new creation is—its difference; nay, man, though fallen; is said to be created after the likeness of God.
I am not yet clear as to all it may mean, but I do see an amazing position in " likeness to God." The consciousness of unity, of a supremacy above all around him, of being the necessary center of all in relationship with himself; this bringing out all the affections of authority, and reception of dependence connected with this position.
Now this self-centered place as regards others (under God of course, for it was only a likeness and an image) was a most amazing one—no angel held it, for—more glorious as a creature—he was a glorious servant, and the center of nothing.
The actual dominion was a consequence; but it was one, " and let him have dominion " Innocent Adam would ascribe all to God; fallen—ransack and overwhelm the world, to subdue it and be a center, with the desire of empire, the Babylon of his creation.
Absence of evil made part of this place; as God created him he would have been a happy, beneficent head. Christ, the Image of God, will have this place.
The autarkeia (sufficiency in oneself) could not be in a creature—it denied his nature; Man did not do to be alone, and he had Eve. Here he is the image of Him to come. As to "image" and "likeness"; "image " is that in which he was created; it was a kind of imitation, or reproduction of something; I believe this is just. " Likeness " is the form in which one is manifested; he was according to the likeness of God (see chap. 5:1) he is in His likeness, because this was them manifested in man. Christ was made in the likeness of men—this manifested form; it is not a creation of reality, but the manifested form He took.
" Likeness " seems to me to be what Adam was in that place till he fell. An image represents—reproduces; likeness is conformed to. Man cannot quite lose the place, he is not another, nor a new creation; the likeness he has. He is still said to be made in the likeness kata theon, as in Genesis gegonotas, the perfect (note James 3:99Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. (James 3:9)), it could not be otherwise as to ginomai; we are renewed after His "image"; this at once shows it is not. We are called upon to be like Him, new creation, moral likeness practically, only we have received the life in which we can; this is a wholly new thing, divine, with the knowledge of good and evil. There was likeness to God in Adam, in that evil was unknown within. Conscience, as necessary from God's nature in him, so by man's constitution, had yet no place internally; but this is different from holiness in this, the absence of moral power, evil being known and kept without by the energy of the divine nature; necessarily by nature in God; and through grace and the participation of the divine nature in us.
An image represents, but a likeness corresponds, but it must be seen how far tze-lem (image) and d'muth (similitude) correspond to the English words in sense.
In Genesis man is created in God's likeness, and man begets a son in his fallen one, this is the main point, but the latter was also after his image. The likeness is the appearance anything affords even if it be itself—I speak of the word -likeness is the fact of appearance by which I can represent to myself what a thing is. The image exists to represent him exactly, and as replacing him. When a likeness is very accurate it becomes an image; hence the shadows of the law were not the very image, they did not strictly represent, though there were analogies—shadows of the highest importance. At Sinai, Israel saw no likeness, such was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. But when man is created, he is created " in the image " of God; next, " after his likeness "; he was the representation de facto of Him on the earth, and not so " like him." Hence man is the eikon (image), the image and glory of God in 1 Cor. 11:77For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. (1 Corinthians 11:7), it is the place he holds as representing God; so Christ is pre-eminently " the image of the invisible God."
But James shows the folly of blessing God, and cursing him who was made in His likeness; it is not his place and glory as representing Him, this would be quite unsuitable, but what was created—like what he blessed; he does not enter, I apprehend, into the question of the likeness being lost (those who cursed did not either), but the original constitution maintained as the archetype of God's mind—not the result of fallen man; hence it is gegonotas, not genomenous—the condition of creation continued to the mind, not the established fact and its actual consequences. But then, I apprehend, when it is growth according and up to a perfect representation of the original of what He is as He expresses Himself—not qualities, but full growth into the whole personal presentation of what He is—it is image. Likeness is in distinct qualities; " image," complete presentation of the person. Hence in Col. 3:1010And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: (Colossians 3:10), they were renewed in knowledge according to the image, the complete presentation of what, and of all of what He was -a wondrous position and calling—here " likeness " would not do, indeed would have no proper sense—" according to the likeness "—it is according to Himself, but as presented, so as to be known in the revelation of Himself. Hence also in 2 Cor. 3:1818But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (2 Corinthians 3:18), it is according to or into the same “image”—("as in a glass” should be left out). "We with unveiled face beholding the glory," "are changed into" the very " image " itself of it; Katoptrizomai (I look into a mirror) is " looking home " or " thoroughly into it," and it is ten auten eikona (the same image).
These, and the passage Eph. 4:2424And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. (Ephesians 4:24) are very remarkable in connection, and in a certain sense in contrast with the “image and likeness" of God in Genesis. Ephesians goes first in thought here, then Colossians; then 2 Cor. 3 I think verse 3 shows it could not be mere likeness; Christ is written on the heart by the Holy Ghost. Analogous qualities would have been likeness, this is more. Still we behold, and are changed into, not Christ of course, but His " image," by life-giving and communicating power of Himself by the Spirit; so Rom. 8:2929For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. (Romans 8:29), we are summorphos tes eikonos. It is a glorious calling, not merely like qualities—through grace we have them as a consequence—but complete, though not Him (see the transfiguration), but as Him. Compare 1 Cor. 15:38, 3938But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and to every seed his own body. 39All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. (1 Corinthians 15:38‑39).
As explanation that " image " has the double sense, formed on the same idea, of anything that represents an unseen being -as the image of Jupiter—which need not be like, but of which the final cause is to represent—and hence perfect conformity, because then it does represent, " he is his very image " we say; and this in moral things, i.e., in moral qualities, goes very far, for we cannot be like, really, without having them. The limit to this sameness in moral things, when there is likeness, is there, subsisting as a source in the Person of God, or of Christ who is God, and derivatively in us, for the Godhead necessarily carries with it a character which is wholly its own; It is divine infinite—has Its source in Itself—sovereign goodness—and the will of a divine nature—not a duty.
There is another division of Gen. 1 besides creation, and the days, made by the words " and God saw " and " it was good." First He creates—He then separating the elements, so-called, to make the kosmos or order out of disorder—makes light to shine out of darkness—the first needed act dispelling the darkness that brooded on the deep; and that was a day. Then the open expanse of heaven or sky; the second day. Then water and dry land, giving each its name; and the world thus prepared He pronounces " good." That is the first division—an ordered kosmos.
NOTE.—The saying “it was good" was not at the end of day.
Then He begins to adorn it, and first produces vegetation on the earth; this is another division, and “it is good"; third day. Then He orders the ephemeris of heaven—lights to order seasons, etc.; only declaring therewith that He made the stars. This is the third division—and “it is good”—the fourth day. Next the waters are peopled, and fowl to fly in heaven, and this “is good”—the fourth division—fifth day.
Then beasts and other creatures having life, and this “was good”—the fifth division—part of sixth day.
The first mention of “life” and “moving creature” is in the seas, in the fourth division; here, too, blessing is first pronounced.
The fifth division of mere creation, and an ordered kosmos adorned, and peopled with moving life, ends with the earth bringing forth living creatures; God closes it by “God saw that it was good."
Man stands wholly apart, as the ruler, by God's purpose and counsel, of the earth He had created. Separated wholly in his nature and place; of, and from God; but yet connected with the living creature too.
There is no blessing pronounced on the living creatures of the earth, but on the Head of them, subjecting them to him; and all is on the same sixth day; their respective food being provided, but not life given to him for food; he had the fruit of trees—the beasts, the green herb; and all was "very good."
Man being set distinctly, and separately at the head of all, after "behold, it was good" pronounced on that division of the work; yet he comes in the same day with the cattle of the earth, and the general order. "Create" is used as to the universe, great whales, and man.
The difference of Gen. 1 and 2 is evident. I do not understand how the infidels make any difficulty or inventions about it. Evidently in chapter 1 he takes his place in the creation, the work of God as God amongst the creatures, male and female, like the other animals (only paired especially, and that noticed), whereas in chapter 2 it is in his whole moral constitution and being, and place, and relationship in the counsels and ways of God, as He has had to say to men, that he is noticed. Yet in one sense, as a creature, he is distinguished from all others; God thinks about the way of creating him, and has pleasure in that which is like Himself and His image. To this no creature could aspire. But it is not relationship, but God's delight in Himself and creation after it. Not the new creation (as often remarked) of Eph. 4; that would never do; it could not fall—ought not. It is not mere creation of a being, but a nature communicated—partakers of the divine nature. Nor is it anthropomorphism (i.e., being the form of His body); that were poor and no purpose worthy of God, and pretentious too in man to think of. What is insisted on, however, is the image, not the likeness. So Gen. 9:66Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. (Genesis 9:6). But in James 3:99Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. (James 3:9), “likeness," not "image." But "likeness" must, I think, come first for him to be so, as " image " must in the birth of Seth. As I have said elsewhere, an image " represents," a likeness is " conformed to." Seth did represent Adam on the earth, had his place, though not the first in it, or he could not be an image, but alas! he was in his likeness, too, a fallen sinner.
So when man's blood was to be shed it was not his moral goodness but the place he held and dignity, his representing God as he had been set, but which made it unfit he should be killed. James will not have man cursed, and here " likeness " is the fit word; we bless what God is and curse His likeness—man, who was made in it, for so he speaks. Hence (as I have said elsewhere) He formed man spotless, sinless, free, with a will to be forever used in the sphere he was placed in, and the center of all the affections and reverence of the sphere he was placed in, and he stood alone as the center of it all, the image of God. Christ will be, though far more, yet this, perfectly; being One that in the highest sense fully partakes of the divine nature.
We have only then to inquire in what sense it is said in Col. 3, " renewed into knowledge (epignosin) after the image of Him that created him"—and this I think when reflected on is profoundly instructive—Ephesians is, it seems to me, more the likeness. " After God in righteousness and true holiness." It is like Him—what He delights in Himself. So in the commencement of the Epistle, " chosen in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love—to himself." Hence too, I add, it is kainon anthropon, a new kind of man, and we are ananeousthai, it is the spirit of our mind, it begins all afresh with a man of a new kind, and there is no question of knowledge. Hence it is God Himself; as such, before whom we stand. In Colossians it is more Christ all, and in all, representative and image, Himself of God; and so in chapter I, " who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of the whole creation."
Now there is the true full image of God only in the whole creation—where in Adam was the image of Him that was to come; and even in forgiveness it is in Colossians, " Christ forgave " us; in Ephesians, " God in Christ." In Ephesians Christ offers Himself to God. So again it is here having put on the neon anthropon, the man that had not been there before, not the kainon, new in its kind of nature (though that it surely was too), but it is renewed (anakainousthat") into knowledge it gets during the apprehension of that which is quite new in nature. It estimates the new man—Christ; for Christ is the perfect manifestation of what this new man is in us—we see God represented in Him. The moral apprehension of what God is in Him, also represents Him before men. Hence too we are in Christ, and God is far more fully revealed, or rather spoken of directly, in Ephesians than in Colossians. We grow up to the stature of Christ, He is the head of the body and the like. Our life is the life of God, a kaine we. We are mimetai Theou.
In Colossians, " worthy of the Lord," we are to walk in Him, and Christ and His fullness are much more spoken of. Christ is our life, Christ is our all in all; the peace of Christ is to rule in our hearts, the word of Christ is to rule in our hearts, the word of Christ is to dwell in us richly. Now this is very precious, but it is different; we have more of the fullness and life of Christ, our association with Him, in Colossians. His glory is more brought out, the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily. In Ephesians He is more the Man once dead, now raised and exalted. How precious to have both. But I think it makes the force of " likeness " and " image " plain for us, and makes the character of the two epistles very precious to us, and how divinely exact in things where man's wits, I am persuaded, would have never worked. And, remark, "likeness" would not apply to Christ, for He is God. "Image" does, because He does, as Incarnate, represent God. He never imitates God, for He is God. We are called to these things, yet He is the pattern of them, because God is revealed in Him, but then it is original in Him. Walk in love as Christ loved us, and gave Himself, and to God; all this is very perfect. Hence in one sense we find Him more exalted in the Colossians, because He does take a kind of official, or representative place, and that has to be guarded against any misrepresentation. " All the fullness was pleased to dwell in him " (the English translation is horribly false) and all the fullness of the Godhead dwells in Him bodily. All this is as it should be. Compare Gen. 5:11This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; (Genesis 5:1), where it is " in likeness," because it is Adam's state. He was made in God's likeness, not what he was before others, but what he was.