In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (Genesis 1:1)
Bərēʾšît bārāʾ ʾĕlōhîm ʾēt haššāmayim vəʾēt hāʾāretz. Those may be the most ancient words ever written, and they may be the most fundamental words ever written. Since most people pick up a Bible at some point and start reading, they may be the most read words in the world. They were the words read by the Apollo 8 astronauts as they orbited the moon.
Someone has said that if you believe the very first statement of the Bible, you will have no problem believing the rest of the Bible. In so many ways, these words are the absolute foundation of everything else that will follow. We cannot understand the world, mankind, our problem, the solution, unless we understand and believe Genesis 1:1.
The whole book of Genesis is the foundation of the Bible, explaining the origin of the chosen nation through whom the Messiah would come. It explains the origin, or the genesis of the world itself, the solar system, the laws of nature, life, mankind, marriage and family, language, evil and sin, human government, human culture, the nations and ethnicities, religions. This means that these chapters are really the foundation of human history, of true science, of true philosophy. You cannot answer the big questions of life, Where did we come from? Who Am I? Why Am I here? Where are we going?without Genesis, and specifically Genesis 1-11.
But of course, Genesis is also the most controversial book of the Bible, because its account and its explanation is, and has been under attack for centuries. The first 11 chapters raise all sorts of questions:
How old is the universe? Did God make the cosmos, and then there was a long gap between verses 1 and 2, and then renovated what He had made? Are the days of Genesis 1 exactly 24 hour days, or could they be six long periods or stages? How can you harmonise the first chapter of Genesis 1 with Genesis 2? Isn’t Genesis 1 more of a poem, where God creates three realms and then its rulers and inhabitants, and isn’t meant to be taken literally?
Why is the order of creation different in chapter 1 and 2? Was Adam really a historical person? What about all the skulls found of ape-men? Homo austrolopethicus, homo erectus, neanderthals?
That’s just the first two chapters. With it will go all the attendant questions of creationism and evolution, dating methods, the fossil record. Chapter 3 will introduce its own questions. Was there actually a talking serpent? What did the tree of knowledge really mean and do? Was there really no death before Adam and Eve sinned?
In the next chapters, we have the mysterious pre-Flood world. Were people really living that long, and how? What was the language and religion of the world then? What is this strange union of the sons of God with the daughters of men in chapter 6? Who were the Nephilim born then, who appear again later on? Was it really a worldwide Flood? Could Noah actually have preserved all the animal species on one boat? What about the dinosaurs?
And then we come to the nations in chapter 10 and 11. How is the whole world speaking one language? Why does God scatter them?
Many people have given up any hope of reconciling Genesis 1-11 with the assumptions of modern science, and simply treat them all as allegories, extended parables and metaphors.
But before we put Genesis 1:1 under the microscope, it is worth saying some things about the whole book.
Most conservative writers believe that Moses wrote the book of Genesis, though it is likely that Moses partly compiled the book of Genesis from previous records that he had inherited. We know this because there is a repeated phrase in the book of Genesis translated “these are the generations of” or “this is the history of”, “this is the genealogy of”. When it occurs, it seems to be a marker that it concludes one section, and begins another. The Hebrew word is toledoth meaning origins, or records of origins. It is usually connected with a name, meaning perhaps that that individual actually wrote that section.
This is the history of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,(Genesis 2:4)
This has no human name attached to it, so it may well have been written by God Himself, and given to Adam, or related to Adam, who wrote it.
This is the book of the genealogy of Adam. In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God. (Genesis 5:1). Likely Adam wrote this and recorded the history up to that moment.
This is the genealogy of Noah (Gen 6:9). Noah would have recorded the events of the pre-Flood world up until the Flood.
Now this is the genealogy of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And sons were born to them after the flood. (Genesis 10:1) . Noah’s sons could have authored the events of the flood.
10 This is the genealogy of Shem: Shem was one hundred years old, and begot Arphaxad two years after the flood. (Genesis 11:10). Shem seems to have kept the records of the scattering at babel
(others at 11:27, 25:12, 25:19, 36:1, 36:9, 37:2)
Moses probably wrote in hieroglyphic form, which would have been converted to the paleo-Hebrew script that developed a few hundred years later.
Genesis is the foundation of the whole Bible. Genesis 1-11 is the foundation of the book of Genesis, because it gives us the origins of just about everything else. Genesis chapter 1 is the foundation of Genesis 1-11, and Genesis 1:1 is the foundation of Genesis chapter 1. So here we have the deep foundation of foundations, and it is not surprising that some people have called it the most important verse in the Bible.
Just in this one verse, we have a lot to explore. When was “in the beginning?” Does this mean, when God began to create? Or does it mean, at the origin of time-space? Was God in time, or timeless? What does it mean to create? Create out of something, or create out of nothing? What are the heavens in contrast to the earth? Is this a summary statement, or is it the beginning of day 1?
All of that we can get to. But today I want to consider the foundation of this foundational verse. The most outstanding thing, and yet somehow the often overlooked thing about Genesis 1:1 is absolutely unembarrassed statement, “in the beginning, God”. Beresheet bara Elohim.
Here is the naked assertion and assumption of God’s existence. No defence of that position, no evidence given to prove God’s existence, no arguments that conclude with the statement, “therefore, “God exists”. Instead, “in the beginning, God”.
Given the widespread skepticism in our culture, you might expect the Bible to have opened with a list of arguments adding up evidence for God. Everything needs a cause, and God must be the causeless cause. Things appeared designed, and God must be the Designer. There is good and evil, and God must be the Lawgiver. But it is not simply that the Bible omits to do that. It is as if the Bible refuses to do that.
Here is the greatest assumption of all, and therefore the greatest foundation of all: the existence of God. Not proved, not demonstrated, not even inferred. God’s existence is not the conclusion of a chain of premises. God’s existence is the beginning truth that enables you to make sense of anything else. You do not arrive at the conclusion that God exists; you begin with the truth that God exists.
Let me explain a little of how this works, and why Genesis 1:1 does it. Everyone who is after the truth has certain things he assumes are already true. He doesn’t try to prove those assumptions, those first principles every time. He just assumes they are right. For example, a person doing mathematical calculations assumes that the laws of addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, arithmetic, algebra, trig, calculus are the same every day. Every time he does maths he assumes that 1+1 still equals 2. Now, he has no way to prove that the laws haven’t changed since the last time he did maths. He has no way to really prove they are constant. He must simply assume it is so, and get on with doing maths. That’s his first principle, his assumption, his axiom. Axioms can’t be proved, they are just accepted, believed, trusted in. Now someone might criticise him. They might say, “But this is circular reasoning. You’re assuming maths to be true so as to use maths! You use maths to show that it works! But you must first prove to us that numbers actually exist, that the laws still hold?” But he can’t do that. He has some first principles, some assumptions, some presuppositions, that he begins with.
Let’s make it more practical. Let’s imagine our sceptic who comes to us and says he is a man of science. He only believes what he can see, test, and prove. Since he can’t see, test, and prove God to his satisfaction, he cannot accept that God exists. But our sceptic also has some first principles. He assumes that what his eyes see is always true. He assumes when he does his tests that the laws of physics and nature will be consistent. He assumes that his own investigation is perfectly objective. But how could he prove any of those assumptions? Science can’t prove that his eyes aren’t deceiving him, or that he isn’t hallucinating. Science can’t prove that the laws of nature will be the same tomorrow. Science can’t guarantee that the universe will remain regular and ordered. But he assumes this things, without proving them, he believes in them, trusts in them and does his science experiments. He has some first principles, some assumptions, some presuppositions, that he begins with.
Everyone has these presuppositions. They assume that there is a real world outside of me. They assume their own existence is real, and that their memories were real events. They assume words mean things. They assume logic. They begin with these things, they don’t end with them. All assumptions are somewhat circular, and all assumptions are acts of faith.
Now of all the things in your life that you assume, that you make no effort to prove, that you begin with, what is the most reliable, foundational assumption? Rene Descartes thought the most reliable truth was that he knew he was thinking, and since he knew he was thinking, he could assert that he knew he existed. But that isn’t really the ultimate reliable assumption. We could think of ways to refute that.
You could assume your own existence, the existence of the world, the existence of reason and logic, and laws of science. But none of these things are really stable first principles. They don’t have to exist.
The Bible regards the absolute basic assumption to be what Genesis 1:1 says: God exists. The Bible demands that we reason from there, not to there, that we begin there, not end there, that we assume this to be the most basic knowledge we have, not the most advanced truth we arrive at.
Let me show you a few Scriptures that show this to be the case.
The fool has said in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, They have done abominable works, There is none who does good.(Psalm 14:1)
It is not the honest seeker, or the poor ignoramus who says, there is no God. It is the fool. The stubborn, rebellious scorner of wisdom has to deliberately make an anti-Genesis 1:1. We don’t begin with atheism as our default. We must move to assert the non-existence of God.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, But fools despise wisdom and instruction. 8 (Proverbs 1:7)
Solomon says that if you want to begin in the path of knowledge, believing in and revering God is the foundational principle. God’s existence is the fundamental Fact that connects every other fact. You must assume God’s existence if you want to go any further in learning and understanding.
18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Romans 1:18–21)
Note the language of culpability. Verse 18 – suppress the truth. Verse 19 “manifest in them”. Verse 20 “clearly seen” “without excuse”. Verse 21 “although they knew God”. Paul is not making the argument that they were to look at creation and then come to the conclusion that God exists. Paul is saying that the knowledge of God was hardwired into every human. John Calvin said this
There is within the human mind, and indeed by natural instinct, an awareness of divinity . This we take to be beyond controversy. To prevent anyone from taking refuge in the pretense of ignorance, God himself has implanted in all men a certain understanding of his divine majesty (I.3.1).
In other words, the first principle of assuming God is already in every human being. The human has to be reasoned out of belief in God, not persuaded into it. The created order confirms and validates what is in the human. This is why evolutionary thinking is so damaging, because it assists the human who wants a reason to explain away God. It removes from the table those evidences that keep saying, “the God you know exists, He made these”.
6 But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. (Hebrews 11:6)
Faith consists of assuming God is, and then believing God is a rewarder of those who seek Him. According to Romans, the whole human race has the first part of faith, though they suppress it, deny it, and will not come to the light. The problem is not really with the assumption that God exists; it is with the belief that He is good and can be trusted.
In the beginning God.
Now why is God the first assumption, the first principle?
God’s existence explains any existence. If you exist, and you know you exist, then you should ask “Why do I exist?” And hopefully you should ask one further, “Why should anything exist?” Why is there something and not nothing? And the deep explanation for something rather than nothing is that there was always a Someone rather than a no one. The reason why there are billions of beings asking “why do I exist?” is that there is one Being who has never asked Himself that question. God and His existence are one. He is existence. He is being. Descartes said, “I think therefore I am”. He should have said, “I am, because He is”. If you act as if the world is real, then you deeply assume that God exists.
God’s existence explains knowledge and reason. If you are busy thinking, and reasoning, and using words and logic, you should ask yourself, “Why should random exploding molecules produce minds full of order, logic, rationality? Why should there be regular, predictable, mathematical laws, that are discoverable, comprehensible? Why should there be language where mind can speak to mind in a mindless, material universe?” And while you are asking those questions, you are assuming order and logic and answers, which means you are assuming reality is that way, which means you are assuming a God who is the fount of reason and knowledge. If you don’t assume God, you can’t reason, deduct, or think. Any time a human being thinks, reasons, speaks, they are assuming and borrowing the theistic truth that God exists, and that is why knowledge exists.
A human reasoning and still doubting God’s existence would be like a calculator saying, “do numbers really exist? How would I know?”
God’s existence explains meaning and purpose. In a random world of randomly coagulated stardust, there is no morality, there is no goodness, and there is no beauty. Therefore, there is no meaning to anything, and no purpose to pursue. That is all just an illusion. For there to be any purpose or beauty, it has to have been invested into this cosmos, designed, and fashioned. That means there had to be intention and mindfulness. Only if God’s existence is presupposed, do you have the right to talk about what is good, what ought to be done, what should happen, what is right, what is wrong. All of those words speak of purpose, meaning, and value. When you use them, you are borrowing from the biblical worldview that reality is meaningful because it was made by a Mind. You presuppose God every time you talk about meaning, beauty, morality, purpose, right and wrong.
Now perhaps someone argues, well that’s not what I know about atheists. Or maybe, that’s not how I thought. I was comfortable in my denial of God. Well, this assuming of God doesn’t always take the form of acknowledging the personal Creator. It usually takes the form of borrowing from the Bible when it suits us, borrowing belief in existence, borrowing belief in rationality, borrowing belief in beauty, but then denying a Person behind it all.
And the great problem of putting something else as your first principle and then working to arrive at God’s existence, is that you make that thing the great and final authority. If you make science the way, then science is the authority that coronates God. If you make logic and reason the way, then human logic and reason is the king-maker that coronates God. If you make experience the way, then you make your personal, subjective experience the final authority that grants God existence. If you make tradition the way, then human history and practice is the great authority that votes God into existence.
But if God is God, then He is the first principle. If God is God, He is the deep assumption, the intuitively accepted truth, the grounding principle of all knowledge. He exists. He is.
His name communicated to us is I AM Because I AM. I AM Have Been, Will Be Because I AM. The name of God is the first word, first principle of all of life, all of knowledge.
So, you want to know the story of the Bible? Read Genesis. You want to understand the basis of Genesis? Read Genesis 1-11. You want to understand Genesis 1-11? Read Genesis 1/ You want to understand Genesis 1? Read Genesis 1:1. You want to understand Genesis 1:1? You assume, God is.