{"id":3506,"date":"2018-12-14T21:15:19","date_gmt":"2018-12-15T05:15:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/creationbc.org\/?p=3506"},"modified":"2021-09-04T09:21:46","modified_gmt":"2021-09-04T16:21:46","slug":"time-is-the-hero-of-the-plot-in-genesis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/time-is-the-hero-of-the-plot-in-genesis\/","title":{"rendered":"“Time is the Hero of the Plot” \u2014 in Genesis!"},"content":{"rendered":"
by Richard Peachey<\/span><\/em><\/h5>\n

Summary<\/span><\/span><\/strong>: Despite the doubts of some scholars, it is abundantly clear that chronology features prominently in the creation account of Genesis 1:1\u20132:3. It could even be said that, in a sense, “Time is the hero of the plot” (but without the original evolutionary implications of that quotation).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*   <\/span>*<\/span><\/p>\n

Regent College professor Iain Provan has written, “<\/span>One aspect of Genesis 1\u20132 that becomes clear at this point is that, although we are meant to read Genesis 2.4-25 in the light of Genesis 1.1\u20132.3, within<\/i> each section chronology is evidently not an important concern of the author.<\/span>” <\/span><\/span>(<\/span>Discovering Genesis: Content, Interpretation, Reception <\/i>[Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016], p. 61. Italics his<\/span>.)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

Likewise, another Regent College professor, Bruce Waltke, has stated regarding Genesis 1, <\/span>“<\/span>It seems reasonable to assume that the narrator has offered a dischronologized presentation <\/span><\/span>of the events in order to emphasize a theological point.<\/span>” (<\/span>Bruce K. Waltke and Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: A Commentary<\/i> [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001], p. 76<\/span>)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"But contrary to such scholarly opinions, it’s quite evident that chronology is in fact a major<\/i> concern of the author of Genesis 1:1\u20132:3. The table at right displays all the chronological terminology found in the passage (adapted from Laurence A. Turner,<\/span> Genesis<\/i><\/span><\/a> [commentary], 2nd edition [Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009], p. 10):<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In addition to the simple abundance of chronological terminology in the creation account, we may also note (a<\/strong>) the references to time cycles involving alternation of light and darkness (1:4,18), (b<\/strong>) the description of God’s institution of astronomy-related accounting of time (1:14), and (c<\/strong>) the fact that (in the Hebrew text) the preterite verb tense, or waw<\/i>-consecutive imperfect, is used extensively throughout Genesis 1:1\u20132:3 \u2014 a total of 55 times \u2014 which strongly indicates (with few exceptions) a narrative consisting of chronologically sequential events.<\/span><\/p>\n

Indeed, time features so prominently in Genesis 1 that Turner goes so far as to say, “While the chapter does indeed recount the creation of ‘the heavens and the earth’, its structure actually places primary emphasis not on matter, nor on space, but on time<\/i>.” (<\/span>Genesis<\/i><\/span><\/a> [commentary], p. 10. Italics his.)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

As David A. Sterchi has noted, the Genesis 1 account “is saturated with chronological terminology” (“<\/span>Does Genesis 1 Provide a Chronological Sequence?<\/span><\/a>” The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society<\/i> 39[4]:529, Dec. 1996).<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In a similar vein Derek Kidner has argued, regarding Genesis 1, that “the march of the days is too majestic to carry no implication of ordered sequence; it also seems over-subtle to adopt a view of the passage which discounts one of the primary impressions it makes on the ordinary reader.” (<\/span>Genesis: an introduction and commentary<\/i><\/span><\/a> <\/i>[Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1977], pp. 54f.)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In light of all this, it seems appropriate to say (with a couple of caveats) that in Genesis 1:1\u20132:3, <\/span>“Time is the hero of the plot.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The first caveat is that in applying that statement to Genesis 1, we should not understand it in any evolutionist sense. The originator of the statement was biochemist (and later Nobel prize-winner) George Wald. In his article “The Origin of Life” (Scientific American<\/i> 191[2]:44-53, August 1954), Wald made the following now-famous comment (bold<\/strong> print added for emphasis):<\/span><\/p>\n

…<\/span>The important point is that since the origin of life belongs in the category of <\/span>at-least-once phenomena, time is on its side<\/strong>. However improbable we regard <\/span>this event, or any of the steps which it involves, given enough time<\/strong> it will almost certainly happen at least once. And for life as we know it, with its capacity for growth and reproduction, once may be enough.
\n<\/span>…<\/span>Time is in fact the hero of the plot.<\/strong> The time with which we have to deal is of the order of two billion years. What we regard as impossible on the basis of human experience is meaningless here. Given so much time<\/strong>, the “impossible” becomes possible, the possible probable, and the probable virtually certain. One has only to wait: time itself performs the miracles<\/strong>.<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"But unfortunately for Wald’s evolutionary hopes, unlimited time does not<\/i> increase the probability of an unguided chemical origin of life. This is because polymerization reactions, which would lengthen<\/i> chains of biochemical building blocks, are thermodynamically (entropically) less favoured than decomposition reactions which break down<\/i> complex molecules. Extra time just means greater opportunity for molecular breakdown, as illustrated in the cartoon at left (Sidney Harris. American Scientist<\/i> 79:419, Sept.\/Oct. 1991).<\/span><\/p>\n

In Genesis 1, we can say that “time is the hero of the plot,” not in any evolutionist sense, but simply in the sense that the creation account is packed<\/i> with time-related expressions. The narrator clearly exhibits an intense<\/i> concern for chronology, despite the contrary preference of some scholars.<\/span><\/p>\n

The second caveat is this: in appropriating Wald’s words to apply them to Genesis 1:1\u20132:3, we must not understand “hero” to mean “main character.” In the creation account the main character is of course God, the Creator, who by his spoken word commanded the various elements of the created order into existence. Time is the “hero” of the plot in Genesis 1 only in the sense that time references occur with remarkable frequency in the author’s description of the sequence of events.<\/span><\/p>\n

Now, it is not only in the first chapter of Genesis that time features so prominently: abundant chronological terminology is also found in the flood account (especially in Genesis 7 and 8), and in the genealogies of Genesis 5 and 11. This pervasive characteristic of the early chapters of Genesis is one of several indicators that these chapters, like the later chapters of Genesis, are intended to be understood as historical<\/i> narrative.<\/span><\/p>\n

Other indicators of the author’s intent to describe actual history include (a<\/strong>) the use of the unifying phrase “These are the generations of . . .” throughout Genesis; (b<\/strong>) the tight continuity of genealogy from Adam through to Abraham and beyond; and (c<\/strong>) the fact that all the New Testament writers, and especially the Lord Jesus Christ himself, accepted the book of Genesis (including the early chapters) as true and historical, indeed as the authoritative Word of God.<\/span><\/p>\n

Genesis 1 is plainly intended to be understood as historical narrative; it is neither poetry, nor parable, nor allegory, nor any other non-historical genre; nor was its structure composed as a mere artistic framework.<\/span><\/p>\n

The following articles provide further information on the question of the genre of Genesis:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022<\/span> Five Arguments for Genesis 1 and 2 as Straightforward Historical Narrative<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022<\/span> Christ’s View of the Bible<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

\u2022<\/span> Is Genesis Poetry? (response to a high school student)<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

by Richard Peachey Summary: Despite the doubts of some scholars, it is abundantly clear that chronology features prominently in the creation account of Genesis 1:1\u20132:3. It could even be said that, in a sense, “Time is the hero of the plot” (but without the original evolutionary implications of that quotation). *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   * Regent College professor Iain Provan has written, “One aspect of Genesis 1\u20132 that becomes clear at this point is that, although we are meant to read Genesis 2.4-25 in the light of Genesis 1.1\u20132.3, within each section chronology is evidently not an important concern of the author.” (Discovering Genesis: Content, Interpretation, Reception [Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2016], p. 61. Italics his.) Likewise, another Regent College professor, Bruce Waltke, has stated regarding Genesis 1, “It seems reasonable to assume that the narrator has offered a dischronologized presentation of the events in order to emphasize a theological point.” (Bruce K. Waltke and Cathi J. Fredricks, Genesis: A Commentary [Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001], p. 76) But contrary to such scholarly opinions, it’s quite evident that chronology is in fact a major concern of the author of Genesis 1:1\u20132:3. The table at right displays all the chronological terminology found in the passage (adapted from Laurence A. Turner, Genesis [commentary], 2nd edition [Sheffield, UK: Sheffield Phoenix Press, 2009], p. 10): In addition to the simple abundance of chronological terminology in the creation account, we may also note (a) the references to time cycles involving alternation of light and darkness (1:4,18), (b) the description of God’s institution of astronomy-related accounting of time (1:14), and (c) the fact that (in the Hebrew text) the preterite verb tense, or waw-consecutive imperfect, is used extensively throughout Genesis 1:1\u20132:3 \u2014 a total of 55 times \u2014 which strongly indicates (with few exceptions) a narrative consisting of chronologically sequential events. Indeed, time features so prominently in Genesis 1 that Turner goes so far as to say, “While the chapter does indeed recount the creation of ‘the heavens and the earth’, its structure actually places primary emphasis not on matter, nor on space, but on time.” (Genesis [commentary], p. 10. Italics his.) As David A. Sterchi has noted, the Genesis 1 account “is saturated with chronological terminology” (“Does Genesis 1 Provide a Chronological Sequence?” The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39[4]:529, Dec. 1996). In a similar vein Derek Kidner has argued, regarding Genesis 1, that “the march of the days is too majestic to carry no implication of ordered sequence; it also seems over-subtle to adopt a view of the passage which discounts one of the primary impressions it makes on the ordinary reader.” (Genesis: an introduction and commentary [Downers Grove, IL: Inter-Varsity Press, 1977], pp. 54f.) In light of all this, it seems appropriate to say (with a couple of caveats) that in Genesis 1:1\u20132:3, “Time is the hero of the plot.” The first caveat is that in applying that statement to Genesis 1, we should not understand it in any evolutionist sense. The originator of the statement was biochemist […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[113,7,298,299],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3506","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-articles","category-biblical","category-creation","category-days-of-creation"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3506","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3506"}],"version-history":[{"count":21,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3506\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":7898,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3506\/revisions\/7898"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3506"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3506"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/creationbc.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3506"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}