The Analogy of Scripture and the Opening pages of the Bible...

The analogy of Scripture is a exegetical tool where scripture interprets scripture. This tool may (and should) help us when discovering the meaning of parts of scripture which are less plain to us, and since the attack on a plain meaning in Genesis chapter 1 is now becoming common we should spend a little time here.

Those that use scripture against the literal view are keen to address this subject. For some when the Bible declares that a day is unto the Lord as a thousand years and the "hour has not yet come"- they see justification to the idea that the Bible frequently uses a time frame to refer to a concept rather than to the historic limitations of the time frame. There is also an idea circulated that the Hebrew words used to depict that the "earth was formless and void" would be better translated "formless and empty" by the analogy of Scripture.

To address the first objection (i.e. the Bible frequently uses non literal time frames) I would like to underline that the Bible does not frequently but rather infrequently use time frames in non literal senses. It should be noted that the bulk of the OT has a contextualized literal time frames, and most importantly that the concept of a seven day week is prominent. It should in connection with this be stressed that this literal concept of the week is often surrounding major redemptive events. First, in the consecrating of the firstborn and food and the people - a major redemptive event - Exo 22:29-31a "You shall not delay to offer from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The firstborn of your sons you shall give to me. You shall do the same with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its mother; on the eighth day you shall give it to me. "You shall be consecrated to me." - obviously a literal week. Also the very first "Atonement offering" done by Aron was done on the "eighth day" Lev 9. And of course there is the circumcision that was to be done on the "eighth day". Connected with the levitical law there is a repeated use of the seven day ceremonial washing or cleansing on the seventh day that is followed by the sacrifice an redemption back into fellowship on the eighth day (cf. Lev 14:10,23 15:14,29 22:27 23:36). Then of course their are the "feast" - particularly interesting is Lev 23:39 "On the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when you have gathered in the produce of the land, you shall celebrate the feast of the LORD seven days. On the first day shall be a solemn rest, and on the eighth day shall be a solemn rest. But who can forget the feast of Solomon after dedicating the "Temple" and praying for the people? (1 Kings 8:65,66 - 2 Ch 7:9). These are just a few of the numerous significant places that the concept of a literal week are used in the OT and tied to redemptive activity or at least significant activity in redemptive-history. It goes without saying that if the concept of the week is literal, then the days with in - or the first day after (8th day) is literal as well. The overwhelming evidence is that the normal mode of communication concerning time frames is itself normal or historical. In fact it is most significant that the Scripture itself utilizes this literal time frame again and again when revealing redemptive events acts. Scripture has no problem then communicating a redemptive message through a historical time frame, which we have already said numerous times - but it bares re-emphasis here, especially considering that the Bible no where else uses the week in non literal terms! 10 days...yes; 1000 yrs...yes; an hour...yes again, but a week...no (unless of course you're a dispensational, then Daniel is loaded with figurative weeks)

Now the second objection is to the effect that the Genesis narrative is purposing some kind of problem to which the creation account is the solution - namely the form-less and empty-ness of the earth. The idea is that the creation days are divided up to address these problems. Day 1-3 address the problem of form and 4-6 take on the "filling" character to address the problem of empty-ness.

We don't need to spend a lot of time here since it will already be assumed that if this is true or not- it should bare no weight to the idea or need for ditching a literal/historical sequence. Still, I would like to say that in terms of content, what ever the earth was in Genesis 1:1 it was contextually different than any other time. Thus of how it was void or empty we have no other model. But if filling this emptiness is the intention behind days 4-6 then so be it, it hurts me not.