Missing
God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Genesis 1:25 NASB
It was good – Sometimes the most important thing is what’s missing. Of course, we wouldn’t notice what’s missing unless we are paying close attention to the differences. The pronouncement that the creation is good occurs in five places. Each new development in God’s creative activity is proclaimed good—except one, the last one, the creation of Man. Each time God finishes a cycle the text adds ki tov, except when He creates Man in His own image. That time there is no such declaration. That missing phrase raises a very important question. Why is everything else considered good from the beginning but Man is not?
Avraham Weiss offers the following: “This is because whether a human being is good or not depends on his or her deeds. Ki tov – ‘it was good’ – is a more appropriate refrain after the human being has lived a wholesome life, after having made the proper choices.”[1] This little bit of missing information has enormous consequences. First, it assumes that Man is created with the capacity for both right and wrong choices. It is not the case that Man is created good and at the Fall becomes evil. Rather, Man is created innocent and must choose between good and evil. The liberal idea that all men are essentially good is just as mistaken as the Christian idea that all men since Adam are essentially evil. To be in God’s image is to choose and choice requires that both directions are possible.
Second, this statement about the creation of Man sets aside any subsequent theology that opposes law and grace. If the final determination about my life is the result of how I choose, then grace does not wipe away responsibility nor does it guarantee eternal reward. Grace provides the means for reconciliation. How I choose after I have been redeemed is the basis for ki tov. I could do nothing to rescue myself, but I must do everything to maintain the relationship with the One who rescued me. Luther’s idea that law was overcome by grace is a mistaken view of creation, a mistaken view that has affected centuries of Christian theology. There is no opposition between grace and law. Both are essential because neither one can function without the other.
Finally, Torah becomes vitally important. How am I to determine which choices will lead to ki tov unless I have God’s instructions? I simply cannot make it up as I go along because the final verdict is not mine to determine. God must decide if I will qualify for His pronouncement and that means I must know what He expects. The Genesis account establishes the utter necessity of Torah. To pretend otherwise is to put life in peril.
Ki tov are the words we seek. At the end of the day, they are the only words that matter.
Topical Index: ki tov, it was good, Genesis 1:25, Man, Torah, grace
[1] Avraham Weiss, Holistic Prayer, p. 7.
What about Gen.1:31a And Elohim saw every thing that He had made, and behold [proclaimed], it was very [much] functional [tob]. ?
And the popular “Christian” view that God proclaimed the creation of man to be VERY good?
In chapter 2 (the second perspective of creation vs chapter 1 the first perspective) man was created outside of the garden and placed in. Since man was created out of the garden and the garden means, “garden of delight” it kind of makes sense that man wasn’t going to be called ‘good’ or ‘bad’ but got put into the flux of free choice from the very beginning. I dont know if that makes any sense or just more confusing.
All organism’s in the garden God is calling good. The organism outside (man) no comment
AFTER He pronounced the creation of Adam “NOT good” in Genesis 2:18, He completed His work. After completing the creation of both parts of humankind, THEN in 1:31 “And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was VERY GOOD!!!” You have to put chapter one and chapter two together to get the whole picture.
Yes same story they aren’t contradicting. But they are told from two different perspectives. Chapter 1 is God telling the story (His perspective) Chapter 2 same story from Heaven and Earths perspective if you will (from my understanding). Gen 2:4 “Here is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created. On the day when Adonai, God, made earth and heaven”
It’s two different perspectives. Just like the snake in the garden. Was the snake flat out lying? Not really from the snakes perspective – but for man’s yes. The word for cunning in Hebrew is the same as ‘naked’ meaning actually very clear cut, “what you see is what you get”. Full circle…
Same thing here is my impression. Good vs indifferent – from my perspective in my opinion is just based on who’s perspective you are looking at. I understand that you are trying use the two stories as bifocals if you will to gain clarity on one – but if they are from two different perspectives does it shed more light? Or is it really at the end from who’s perspective?
At the end, man is not born with original sin – we have the gift of free choice. And if people really did believe in original sin then they wouldn’t have kids because it just brings more sin and death and destruction to the world. I forget where original sin came from but I believe it is Plato. I’m sure someone will correct me if I’m wrong
But it’s like the whole thing of Tree of life vs Tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Tree of life – it gives life. That would make it believe that man is mortal and if you eat from it you gain immortality.
Tree of knowledge of good and evil – it’s consequences are negative and man will surely die. Alluding to man is immortal and would become mortal.
So which is it? The fact of the matter is it’s neither. Garden of Eden was a place of flux. Free choice depicted the consequences.
Which ties back to my original. Man was placed from outside the garden, and put in. Man wasn’t good or bad. Like Skip said, innocent. It’s a place of flux.
Again apologize if you are tilting your head after reading this.
Since we are talking about “it was good,” let’s take a look at the second and third days.
Gen 1:6-13
Genesis 1:6–13 (NKJV)
6 Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.”
7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.
8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.
9 Then God said, “Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear”; and it was so.
10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good.
11 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so.
12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.
Notice YHVH does not say of the second day, “it was good.” (verse 8)
I have always read verses 9-10, as being part of the second day; therefore, adding the “it was good” to the second day events.
But, the second day, according the writing, is finished — and no mention of the dividing of the waters as “it was good.”
So this means that verses 9-10 should be a part of the third day events (verses 11-13). And, the statement, “it was good” was stated prior to declaring the third day (verse 13).
What’s the point? Not only was man not called “good” as Skip points out, but it seems there is something about the second day that is not good. Unfortunately, I don’t have an answer. Maybe someone else does?
Blessings & Shalom!
Hello Rick, I only just read an answer to the same question!
Why doesn’t it say “it was good” on the second day? Because on that day divisiveness was created. (Midrash Rabbah)
Actually there is divisiveness on day one when light is created and the light is divided/separated from the darkness (same word in Hebrew- root badal — as used to divide/separate the waters).
So it leaves the question, “what does the word ‘good’ actually mean?”. Does good mean something like that is subjective vs objective? Inside desire or outside desire ie what is ‘good’ to me? (pre-tree world vs post tree world). I think it goes back to “guide for the perplexed” by Maimonides, where good has the connotation of Truth and non truth maybe?
Rick, I agree with you about vs. 9-10, they should be part of day 2. The poetic symmetry of creation is disturbed otherwise. Days 1 and 4 are about the celestial world of stars and planets and light and darkness etc and they were both proclaimed “good.” Days 2 and 3 together are about the water sky land and vegetation, the things that provide life and they balance with Day 5 which is about the animals fish and birds that occupy days 2/3 and together they are pronounced “good.” That leaves just one more “day” which should be Day 6 for the ultimate creation of mankind that has yet to be determined good or otherwise as we know, but that screws up the Sabbath doesn’t it. What to do, what to do? Who invented that pesky 7th day Sabbath anyway? Does that help you? Probably not.
Hi Rick, here’s a thought. consider that the word “shamim” or what is translated into English as heavens, can be seen as “authorities”. Shem being a name or placement or fame, etc. (it’s what you do, or your authority) and the “im” designating “multitudinous or plurals”. It’s that authority that divides the “waters” or Mem toward the upper from the “towards” the lower. That’s the picture. In short, one could say that although God’s desire is unity of authority (one law for the home born and stranger) it was necessary for this creation to achieve God’s desire (heaven and earth combined and operating under One authority, the last chapter of revelation) to make a separation. Note that it isn’t the authority that is divided, but rather the waters “by” the authority.
Never the less, all the divisions and placements together make it “very good”, even if something was placed in it that challenges the unity.
Hope this may help you. 🙂
YHWH bless you and keep you…….
“The liberal idea that all men are essentially good is just as mistaken as the Christian idea that all men since Adam are essentially evil. To be in God’s image is to choose and choice requires that both directions are possible.”
All men being sinful is not a Christian idea; it comes straight from the Word of God. Romans 3:23 “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Eph. 2:1-3 “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation [lifestyle] in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.” Jer. 17:9 “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” Ps 51:5 “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin my mother conceived me.” I Jn. 1:8 “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Eccl. 7:20 “For there is not a just man on earth who does good and does not sin.” Rom. 3:9-18 “What then? Are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin; as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one. Their throat is an open sepulcher; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: their feet are swift to shed blood: destruction and misery are in their ways: and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes.” John 3:19 “And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” Psalm 14:1-3 “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God. They all are gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.” Mark 10:18 “And Yeshua said unto him, Why callest thou me good? There is none good but one, that is, God.”
This is what made the suggestion some weeks back that Yeshua was just a human being like us so absurd to me. If Yeshua’s bloodline on his father’s side had been through Adam, he would have the above verses applying to Him. But Yeshua’s bloodline was divine. It was not human. It was of God Himself. Therefore, this sin nature was not found in Him. He actually had the opportunity to be sinless, which is exactly what He achieved. 1 Peter 2:22: “Who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in His mouth.” I Jn 3:5 “And you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin.” And in doing so, just as He said (Mark 10:18), He proved Himself to be God (the only one who is good).
But you didn’t read what I wrote. I didn’t say anything about all men being sinful. I said that the Christian idea of original sin means that all men are ESSENTIALLY EVIL. This is not the same thing as saying that all men sin. Please be careful and try not to read what you think but rather what the text actually says.
I will add one more comment. Your statement that Yeshua was not human and that he did not have a “sin nature” is a repetition of 1) something the church found to be heresy – i.e. he is not human and 2) something that requires a doctrine of original sin which is not biblical. If he is not human, then Hebrews 2 (and the gospels) is a lie and we cannot be like him. If, however, the distinction is that he doesn’t have a “sin nature” and we do, then we can’t be like him either. You will have to rethink this, I’m afraid.
I said “it” was not human – referring to Yeshua’s bloodline on His father’s side. Yeshua Himself was all divine (He didn’t have the human bloodline through Adam that we all have) and He was all human (he was born of a woman).
I guess I don’t see the problem of Him and me not being identical because I no longer believe it is possible or probable for me to become “like him” in this earthly body [and believe me, I wasted a lot of my years trying!!]. My flesh is very well and alive, and it is enmity to God, and when I am carnally minded, my attitude and actions will not and cannot be “like him.” But when I am repentant and humble, when I am walking in faith and I am surrendered to His will, when I am presenting my body as a living sacrifice to Him, He lives through me, and I am Spiritually minded, conformed to His image, walking in the fruits of the Spirit. I absolutely know when I am living in the flesh (at any moment of my life I can choose to walk in unbelief and rebellion), and I just as absolutely know when I am yielded to Him so He can live through me, not because of my great insight, but because the Holy Spirit very quickly makes it clear to me! So my goal in this mortal body now is to live less and less in unbelief and disobedience [I John 1:8-9], and more and more in faith and obedience, so that He can live more and more consistently through me. [Gal 2:20] He is not like me (I am a sinner and 100% human), and I am not like Him (He is sinless and both human and divine) but I am very grateful He is willing to live through me when I am a cleansed surrendered vessel for His Spirit to fill. I believe this is what He meant when He said, “For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” [Matt 11:30]. I don’t have to strive in my flesh any longer to become “like him.” I am too weak, and plus, I tried very hard, and all I ever did was fail at it.
I guess the thing is Moses says the commands are not too difficult or out of reach and he was speaking to mortals too (deut 30:11). Yeshua was walking out Torah. So to say we can’t do it isn’t the intention.
If Yeshua was God then yes you are correct it doesn’t prove anything. God came down and did the impossible. Yeshua is divine yes but not God (not trinity), he was challenged just like any of us. Difference is that Yeshua did what was right – we just don’t. Skip has a whole series on the trinity that you might find interesting that goes into depth about this subject based off a book that he recommends.
I don’t think you should have an abundance of guilt that we aren’t like Yeshua, but he’s our example and yes that’s what we strive to become. Yeshua walked out Exodus 34:6-7 perfectly therefore was in God’s image Gen 1:26. If we are created in Gods image then we look at Exodus 34:6-7 which is accomplished by following Torah. If you want to look at an example of how that looks you look at Yeshua.
We are all born with the potential to become human, but it’s a daily struggle with harnessing yetzer hara and doing what is right.
What you have expressed in the first two sentences is the standard Christian doctrine of sinful nature and the two-natures of Christ. But if you investigate the origin of these doctrines, you will find that they came from the thinking of the early Church fathers who drew on Greek philosophy and especially Plato. You will not find these doctrines in the text, either they Tanakh or the apostolic writings. I recommend Dwight Pryor’s excellent material on the origins of these ideas, although there are many other scholars who point out the same thing. What you are expressing is a distillation of Augustine and Luther. Perhaps that’s why no Jewish thinker embraces what you suggest. Furthermore, your position on “bloodline” is internally contradictory. If Yeshua does not share a common human element with the rest of humanity, then he is not human. He is God in disguise. That means everything he says about himself as an obedient servant of YHVH is a lie. He can’t be an obedient servant of himself nor can his remarks indicating that he has human limitations be true. In fact, if he is God in disguise, then he has no relationship to me, can’t really command or assist me and certainly doesn’t understand life from my perspective. That makes Hebrews 2 a lie. Even the early church rejected this kind of thinking (Docetism). You may want to research this a bit more.
Genesis 6:5-8 “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them. But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.”
It’s All Good
The Gospel of Goodness and Godliness
For [Because] the LORD is good..
What He says is good. What He does is good. Why? Because God IS good. Yes, [amen] God IS good.. – all the time – and?? – to everyone. (Note to self..) In absolute faith and bedrock assurance: “Never ever never doubt the goodness of God.” In good times, in bad times, and the in-between times, in sickness and in health, in poverty and in wealth,- God IS good, all the time!! Friends, the LORD IS good. He defines what is good, He gives what is good. He knows what is good! And He is ever looking for a few good men..
God, (who is good) is also the Giver of “all things” that are good. ALL THINGS that pertain unto life and godliness, He HAS given unto us. EVERY good gift and EVERY perfect gift is from Above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. He is the LORD — He does not change! – and God IS always [and forever] good. We have His unchanging, never failing, everlasting, word on this.
And now for the “good news” — uaggélion – the Gospel – literally, “God’s good news.” To live? Christ. To die? Gain. [Literally] “It’s all good!”
Yes. The LORD is good; His lovingkindness is everlasting. And His faithfulness (continues) to all generations. (Psalm 100.5)
Great is Thy faithfulness, O God my Father!
Light does not divide darkness because darkness cannot be defined, measured or quantified other than as the absence of light.
Nothing like a good discussion. I need a cigarette.
wait…i don’t smoke! 😉
Paula asked a question on the post “A Great Casualty” and one other post, anyone want to meander over there and take a stab at a response? I hate to see her hanging.
I hadn’t thought about this before. My first thought was “wow, how did I miss this?” As the end brings us back to the beginning, it’s as if the Father saved us (pun not intended) to declare whether or not each of us was tov. I wonder if being tov is a result of fulfilling the purpose we are created for; you can’t fully know that until the end. The other parts of creation were automatically tov because they were already fulfilling the purpose they were created for.
Great insight. In Hebrew, to be is to become your purpose. Everything exists because it is manifest in its purpose. Rocks have purpose and they manifest it. Lions have purpose and they manifest it (as we hopefully we see in March of 2016). So do men and women, but in our case, purpose is COOPERATIVE. We are not instinctual. We have to choose. And to choose wisely is our purpose. As we fulfill this intention, we BECOME human (I have a lecture on this), so that at the end of our lives here, we finally are what we were intended to be (or we are not). Marriage, or for that matter, any relationship that requires agency, is the same. It isn’t over until it’s over. Then I know what it is.
YES, Skip!
Your African Trip is in 2016, not 2106! hahaaa
May I add that CHOICE ought to always come before action, to pause before ABBA before acting rashly. This calls for discipline, a basic principle for Torah keepers.
YHWH with you all in Israel. Shalom!
I made the correction. My subtle dyslexia.
Beth Mehaffey, Absolutely!! It is all about functioning! Shalom.