So what does it all mean? How do those different interpretations of the Genesis days affect the reading of the text? How do we consider the passage in light of those interpretations?
It makes me wonder how often we study our Bibles looking for what the text doesn’t say all the time ignoring what it does say. We can study the book of the Revelation of Christ and ask “What is the nationality of the Beast?” and all the time ignore what the rest of the passage says. We do the same thing with Genesis, either getting caught up in a debate against evolution or a debate on who has the most honest hermeneutic for the perfect interpretation of the text.
Mind you, I’m not saying that different interpretations aren’t beneficial. Indeed, they help us look at the text in new ways and question our own presuppositions. Those contributions by higher criticism where Mosaic authorship is denied and divvied up across historical lines are extremely helpful to more conservative interpreters when they study the passage in contradistinction to that methodology. So these interpretations are helpful, but I want to look at the passage and see what we can learn from it.
God existed in the beginning. He was not a created being or the by-product of some other beings fighting—He was there in the beginning.
God implemented the creation plan. He was the one who decided to create. He was the one who spoke. He was the one who designed and progressed with His creation. This wasn’t a suggested idea by some other person. This was not something He was forced to do?He simply is revealed as doing it.
God created. He was the one who said ?Light? and it was created. He was the one who said “Heavenly bodies” and they were made. He was the one who created matter out of nothing but His creative utterances.
God saw each and every facet of His creation as good. He didn’t sit there and look at His creation as faulty but as accomplished and perfect. He was the one who defined good in this sense by His labeling of His creative works as such. He found this important enough to have a person write it down to record the fact that He judged it ?good?!
God was working towards a purpose. His creation wasn’t arbitrary but it had a pinnacle. Be it the sixth day or the seventh day, it was God in a relationship with His intelligent creation.
God created man in His own image. When God formed the man it wasn’t as a mindless animal but to set him up as a regent with the understanding that he was to be obedient to his God. Man would operate under God?s authority and Man would have authority over the creation of God.
God saw man and woman under one heading: Man. No mention is made of the woman but when we see the second chapter we see her created and standing by the man’s side. Here on this sixth day, whatever it means, we don’t see Man’s bride, but we see them as a single unity—reigning together. I can’t help but be reminded of the New Creation where the only hope is found in the Perfect Man, Christ Jesus. The Lord God in heaven looks down on His Son saying that He is beloved and righteous and satisfying. Thank be to the Lord that here is the Church, the bride of the Lord Jesus, and when the Father looks at the Son and His Bride He sees them as One unit—where we will reign with the Lord as co-heirs in the Kingdom.