Holy Means Whole: According to the Bible in Genesis 1:1-2:3 (Part 2)


This piece of writing is a follow up to the previous piece I wrote on Genesis. I recommend reading the previous piece first, if you have not already done so. This piece of writing is meant to add to the same line of persuasion. Genesis 1:1 starts with the famous: "In the beginning," yet an important part of that beginning is found at the end of the first week, in Genesis 2:3: "because in it [the seventh day]." All through this story of our beginning, is the chronology of a series of seven days. What adds to my previous discussion is evidence for continuity between the seven days rather than discontinuity between the seven days. In other words, I think the section does not point toward separating off the seventh day from the first six.


In an important dissertation that I found on the internet, the author states that when there is continuity in communicating, then there is a certain form that will be associated with it, as shown by five factors. Those five factors of form that are associated with continuity are: 1)Parallelism, 2)Focus, 3)Recency, 4)Goal status and 5)Subjecthood. Obviously, the absence of these factors would argue for a discontinuity in what is being communicated.


Let's look at the five factors and whether they are present when speaking of the seven days of Genesis 1:1-2:3. I will deal with each factor separately and in the order of the 5 factors above.


The parallelism of the first six days is extremely obvious down to use of nearly the exact same words minus the number of the day. The seventh day is also parallel, as far as being yet another numbered day like the other six. They all run side by side like parallel railroad tracks. In the previous piece, I argued for why there is a change in terminology and I will let that piece speak for itself. Yet add to it that there is clearly a parallelism in the numbered days from Genesis 1:1-2:3. So I believe there is evidence for continuity through the entire section. Yet let's wait for the weight of all the factors.


The background for this section is clearly on "in the beginning." As a result, reference is made to "the first day, the second day, etc." rather than on a first day or one of many first days of the week. Here the focus is on "the first day," "the second day," etc. of "in the beginning." It is a very focused section with lots of use of the word "the" to demonstate that the writer is refering not to many days, but to one particular day. The focus is like the focus that happens when I tell you: "That is the dog I am talking about." Here again we see evidence for continuity in the section.


The recency of references should be understood as how long has it been since a reference to the same thing. The references to "day" as the same thing is rather high. As I said in the last piece I wrote, the word "day" occurs every 11 phrases on average and in the last portion of 2:2-2:3, it occurs every 1 phrase, so one after another. It becomes such a recent reference in the end that the pronoun "it" is introduced in that day's place, because confusion over what is most recent in being referred to is not a problem. It's like a recent conversation that you are more likely to recall than one that occured a long time ago. Yet again we see evidence for continuity in the section.


Goal status should be understood as whether or not a goal or intention has been accomplished or not. The goal status, for the intention of communicating with the audience, is well accomplished in making sure the audience understands what is said. Six times it is said: "So the evening and the morning were the nth day." By the seventh day I am sure the original audience had grasped the point of what a day is or how it is to be measured. The unit of time called a day is established. So it could very well be that by the seventh day, "the evening and the morning" can be dropped since now everyone understands what a "day" consists of as a unit of time. We do this all the time when we communicate. Once someone understands what a word means, we don't go back to things like pointing out: "That is a dog" to an already educated listener. So all of this would clearly argue for continuity, because with a break or discontinuity between chapter 1 and 2, no one would be sure what "day" refers to, without the context, when speaking of a seventh day.


The subjecthood (or subject) is not first of all time, yet clearly "In the beginning" sets the tone for background units of time like "day" being a subject matter or topic in the narrative. The topic of "day" runs its course through the entire section. It is never lost from view, as the chronology of "the first day" to "the seventh day" marches forward. It remains a part of the narrative as much as the time left in a game does in a football game. It remains the primary background topic as part of "in the beginning." So yet again we see further evidence for continuity rather than discontinuity in the section.


These five factors lead me to conclude that the seventh day should be seen as primarily in continuity with the other six, rather than being seen as divided off from them. Moving from establishing a clear definition for day to vivid words about the seventh day should not shake us from the continuity that this section oozes from its every pore. So it makes sense, with the recognition of continuity in the section, to see that holy means whole. May God bless your day and make you whole.



In Christ,



Pastor Jon