Chapter IV: The Order of Creating
CHAPTER IV: ON THE ORDER OF CREATION: OF WHAT ITS FORM CONSISTS
Creation is a work of six days.
§ 21. From God’s revelation, Moses describes the order of creation in this way: in six distinct days God created all things—heaven, earth, the sea, and all that is in them. For this reason Basil and Ambrose call the work of creation “a work of six days” [ἔργον ἑξαήμερον]. Philo (Alleg., bk. 1, p. 27) thinks it is “rural simplemindedness” to think this. Augustine (De Gen. ad lit., bk. 4, ch. 26) seems to assert that “all things were made in a moment (ἀθρόως καὶ ἐν ῥιπῇ), but Scripture separates those things by times of speaking which God did not separate by times of working.” But one must not depart from the letter. God could have produced all things at the same time in one moment, but out of His limitless goodness He wanted to divide the work of creation into six days. The will of God should be enough for us despite the fact that we cannot explain fully the reasons for this plan. Something from the fathers could be cited, but we prefer simply to rest in God’s will. Augustine himself is not consistent with this idea about the instantaneous creation of all things and believes that it is weak (De Gen. ad lit., bk. 4, ch. 28).
How God created all things at the same time.
§ 22. In favor of the instantaneous creation of all things, they used to urge the words of Ecclus. 18:1: “He who lives forever created all things together [simul].” Yet the word κοινῇ [“together”] does not indicate a “simultaneous time” [συγκαιρία], a point in time of the same moment when all things were created, but the gathering of created works. The wise man says that all things were created by the same Workman, but he does not assert that all things were created at the same time. The contrast itself teaches this, since it compares God the Creator, who lives from eternity to eternity, and created things, which were all together produced in time by God. Whatever it may be, one single passage of Scripture—and that, in fact, apocryphal—should not be set against the proper basis of this article, which we find in the first chapter of Genesis.
The work of the first day.
§ 23. On the first day heaven and earth were created (Gen. 1:1). We understand these words to mean the raw material of the work to come, for this is what Moses himself says when he adds: “And the earth was without form and void, and the Spirit of the Lord moved upon the waters” [Gen. 1:2]. From this we conclude that material was: (1) As regards substance, partly watery and partly earthy. (2) As regards quantity, it was huge and like a mass without a bottom. (3) Regarding quality, it was crude, formless, unordered, dark, not yet adorned with trees, grasses and plants, etc.
Also, light was created on the first day. Augustine, Rupert, Bede, and others explain this as a reference to the angels, but not correctly, because Moses’ intent was to describe the creation of this visible world, because physical light was needed to remove the darkness of the abyss, and because the alternation between days and nights would not be possible without light.
Here the question, more thorny than useful, is brought up: Was that original light substance or an accident?1 And if it was an accident, was it in the substance of another [ἐνυπόστατον] or self-existent [ἰδιοσύστατον]? We claim with Luther that that light was a quality grafted in a luminous body.2 This body was undoubtedly the sky which was still covered with water, and for this reason the light was rather dim.
The work of the second day.
§ 24. God’s work of the second day was the firmament which divided the waters under the heavens from those above the heavens [Gen. 1:6–7]. Some of the rabbis and more recent scholars take “firmament” to mean the air, but they are incorrect, because on the fourth day stars were set in this firmament. Therefore we understand “firmament” most simply as the entire system of heavenly bodies and of all orbs,3 if there are any. Therefore it is called rakia because it is spread out like skin, hide, a balloon, a carpet, or a sheet. Ps. 104:2: “He has stretched out the heavens like a tent.” Isa. 40:22: “He stretched out the heavens like a curtain.” Isa. 42:5: “Thus said Jehovah, who created the heavens and stretched them out.” It is called a “firmament” [στερέωμα] not because it is compact like steel nor because of an immovable condition, but because of its firmness “and because here a limit is set for human curiosity,” as Ambrose says (Hexaem., bk. 2, ch. 4). From its function it is called 
“dividing.”
The waters above the firmament.
§ 25. That there are waters above the firmament is not believable according to Rabbi David Kimchi and others. Allegorically and ethically, Origen understands those waters above the firmament as the contemplation of eternal blessedness, the waters below the firmament as the earthly life, and the firmament itself as man, who distinguishes the heavenly from the worldly. Hugh follows Origen. Most Scholastics understand it as a reference to the crystalline heaven,4 because water is like it in terms of clarity. However, we respond from Augustine (De Gen. ad lit., bk. 2, ch. 4): “The authority of this Scripture is greater than the capacity of human intellect.” Consider the power of God! Consider the waters of the Red Sea and of the Jordan standing straight up like a wall [cf. Exod. 14:22; Josh. 3:16]! Think of the clouds carried aloft, and you will more easily be able to take reason captive under the obedience of faith. Ps. 104:3 says that “God fastens together the heavens with water.” In Ps. 148:4 we read that those waters can “praise the Lord” because they provide material for the praise of God. What answer do we wish to give those who ask who profits from those waters? Meanwhile, we leave to its own place how the use of those waters is treated by Justin (q. 93), Basil ([Hexaem.,] orat. 3), Ambrose (Hexaem., bk. 2, ch. 3), Augustine (De civ. Dei, bk. 11, last chapter), Theodoret (q. 11), Bede (on Genesis), and Damascenus (Orth. fid., bk. 2, ch. 10).
The work of the third day.
§ 26. The miracle of the third day is that the waters that were under the firmament were gathered into one place by the almighty power of God, and dry land appeared [Gen. 1:9]. By this, Scripture clearly proclaims the manifest, magnificent power of God in more places than one: Job 38:8[–11]; Ps. 33:7; 104:5[–9]; Prov. 8:29; Jer. 5:22. By its own nature water rushes over the ground, and yet the continents [terrarum orbis] are drawn out of its waves by God’s omnipotent command. It also happens by divine mandate that they are not again overwhelmed by the waters. Accordingly, Luther is correct in writing: “Our entire life upon earth is nothing else but a passing through the Red Sea.”5 Moreover, Basil (Hexaem., homily 4) correctly points out that the gathering of waters must be understood chiefly as that very great and prominent collection of water in the sea. On the same day, the earth, not yet moistened by the rains nor made fruitful by the heat of the sun, produced vegetation by God’s command. Not all those plants are food for man, and yet all are useful to man.
The work of the fourth day.
§ 27. On the fourth day God made the heavenly bodies: the sun, the moon, and the lesser lights, both moving and fixed [Gen. 1:14–16]. Although light was created right away on the first day, yet because it was indistinct and not sufficiently suited to the eyes of living creatures, therefore God wished to create those vehicles of light.
Astrology.
Because Moses says in regard to those lights that, among other functions, they are also signs, the question arises as to what judgment we should make about astrology. We respond from Elijah of Crete, the commentator of Nazianzen, [on] Orat. 2 de theol.: “The Greeks make up birth predictions from the relationship, meeting, and changing distance of the stars that move in the zodiac, especially from those that share the same course for whatever reason, and6 they even contrive the fulfillment of others. Now we ourselves readily admit that some signs can be concluded from them, namely, whether or not it will rain, whether it will be hot or cold, wet or dry, whether the winds will come, and other such things. However, we lay down this rule: that we must by no means attribute the causes of our birth and actions to them.” (Damascenus has the same thing in Orth. fid., bk. 2, ch. 7.)
§ 28. Therefore, as concerns predictions about rains, winds, and droughts, those must not be rejected completely; yet they rest upon a foundation that is very slippery, namely, observations. Luther is correct in warning that experts have noted and committed to writing only those experiments which did not fail, but they omitted the rest.7 Furthermore, not all the stars are known to us, nor is the effect of all those we know clear, nor is their influence known to be the total cause of such sublunary changes. Finally, and what is most important, God very often frustrates those predictions either because He is placated by devout prayers or is provoked to wrath by sins. “The wise man will have dominion over the stars” [Sapiens dominabitur astris].8
§ 29. On the other hand, astrology can predict nothing certain as concerns behavior, pursuits, fortunes, marriages, and other things that depend either immediately on the providence of God or even on man’s free choice. Although the behavior of the mind sometimes follows the temperament of the body, nevertheless actions occur contrary to its inclinations and depend on a person’s will. Scaliger (Exerc. 251) writes: “It is not, then, knowledge but foolishness which from the stars predicts all the fortunes, accidents, events, and everything, including the fate itself of all mortals, as from a military podium.” You see this well said by Averroes (Cant. Avic.): “The art of astrology is weak.” Therefore we conclude with the pronouncement of Luther (Genesis, p. 10): “It is always better to be in awe of the Lord and to pray than to be tormented by the fear of coming events.”9 (See Gerson, Trilog. astrol. theol.)
§ 30. Therefore one must abhor the opinion of those who do not hesitate to refer the thefts, robberies, and other crimes of wicked men to the influence of the stars and to accept them. Against this idea we set forth the noteworthy statement of Augustine (De civ. Dei, bk. 5, ch. 1): “Those who think that the stars have such power do a great injustice to heaven, in whose ‘brilliant senate and most splendid court,’ so to speak, they think crimes are decreed to be committed. Had any earthly state decreed such things, it would have to be overthrown by the human race in combat.” Thomas ([ST,] part 1, q. 64) uses this argument: “Because the stars preserve nature, it is impossible for them to incline toward sin.” Furthermore, sin is committed as a result of the accompanying curse, but the stars were immune to that curse. By no means do they direct people to sin by their influence.
The star of Christ.
§ 31. It is a matter of some obvious stupidity and audacity that Albertus Magnus (Speculum), Petrus de Alliaco (Lib. de concord. astron. cum theol.), and Cardanus of our century were unafraid to attribute the birth, life, and miracles of our Savior Himself to the new star that appeared to the Magi. However, we respond to them from Augustine (Contra Faustum, bk. 2, ch. 5): “We set the birth of no person under the fate of the stars. All the less do we believe that the temporal birth of the eternal Creator and Lord of the universe was influenced by the position of the stars. Therefore that star which the Magi saw was not giving out orders to Christ as He was born according to the flesh but was serving as a testimony to Him. It was not subjecting Him to its power but was pointing to Him with obedience.” Augustine again (Sermon 34 de temp.): “That star did not miraculously cause Christ to live; rather, Christ caused it to appear miraculously. It did not decree the actual miracles of Christ, but rather Christ demonstrated it among His miracles.”
The work of the fifth day.
§ 32. The fifth day is the birthday of aquatic creatures and birds. By name they are called “great sea creatures” [Gen. 1:21], that we may know that bodies so great are the work of God and that we should not believe they are apparitions because we are terrified by their size. It is a simple inference that, because God created such huge bodies, God also created the smaller fish.
The work of the sixth day.
§ 33. On the sixth day God made the beasts of the earth according to their different species and man himself [Gen. 1:24, 26]. If you ask about poisonous plants, harmful beasts, etc., we respond with the words of Augustine (De Gen. ad lit., bk. 3, ch. 15): “Harmful created animals would have done no harm to man, had he not sinned; for they began to do harm to punish vices and to test or perfect earthly creatures for the sake of virtue. Therefore they were created harmless, but because of sin they became harmful.” Note the passage Wisdom 1:14: “God created all things that they might exist, and the creatures of the world are wholesome, and there is no destructive poison in them.”
The creation of man.
§ 34. In the creation of man we must note four things: (1) God deliberates, so to speak, when He approaches this task. This demonstrates not the weakness of God but the excellence of man. (2) Man was created after the work of heaven and earth was finished and after all creatures, for he is the microcosm and epitome of the world. The ancients say it beautifully: Philo (De mund. opif.), Ambrose (Letter 39), and Chrysostom (In Gen., homily 8): “Just as hosts of feasts do not invite people to dinner before the dinner is arranged, and just as those who put on games and athletic contests arrange a host of contestants and delights to the eyes and ears before the invited spectators come to the theaters and stadia, so also the Ruler of the entire world—before He as host of the feast and the prefect of the games invites man both to the most sacred feast and theater—first furnishes the one with abundance and the other with spectacles. Then He brought man into this world as into a home already prepared and furnished.” Basil (Hexaem., bk. 6, ch. 3): “God made heaven, but I do not read that He rested. He created the earth, but I do not read that He rested. He created the sun, moon, and stars, and I do not read there that He rested. But I read that He created man and then rested, because He now had someone whose sins He could forgive.” (3) Man was formed out of the dust of the earth. Man was made on earth and of earth, yet not for nor because of the earth, but for and because of heaven. Bernard (Sermon 3 in nat. Domin., col. 41): “Pay attention, man, for you are dust and should not be arrogant. We are naught but dust. However, dust is nothing but smoke, but smoke is nothing. Therefore we are nothing.” (4) Man is made after the image of God. We shall deal with this in its own commonplace [On the Image of God in Man before the Fall, Commonplace XI].
1 A “substance” is a concrete reality, that which exists. On “accident,” see above, p. 9 n. 1.
2 Cf. Lectures on Genesis (1535–45/1544–54), AE 1:19–20 (WA 42:15).
3 In the Ptolemaic worldview, the earth stood at the center of the universe and was surrounded by various levels of the heavens, called “orbs,” which were like embedded, rotating spheres. Here Gerhard expresses his doubts about the veracity of this worldview. Micraelius (Lexicon philosophicum, s.v. “Coelum”) notes that the most excellent authors of the seventeenth century deny that orbs are in the sky physically, but because they explain how the stars do not change position relative to one another, the term was retained and used hypothetically. (See also Micraelius, Lexicon philosophicum, s.v. “Orbis.”)
4 The “crystalline heaven” was posited by some medieval philosophers as a transparent heavenly orb beyond the planets and stars. Beyond it was the “empyrean heaven,” which was thought to be the dwelling of God and the blessed. See Edward Grant, Source Book in Medieval Science (Harvard: Harvard University Press, 1974), 631–32.
5 Lectures on Genesis (1535–45/1544–54), AE 1:35 (WA 42:26).
6 Read et aliorum with Cotta instead of ex aliorum.
7 Cf. Lectures on Genesis (1535–45/1544–54), AE 1:45 (WA 42:33–34).
8 The original author of this saying is uncertain. It was quoted by Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, among many others. See Jean-Patrice Boudet, “Astrology,” in Medieval Science, Technology, and Medicine: An Encyclopedia, ed. Thomas Glick, Steven J. Livesey, and Faith Wallis (New York: Routledge, 2005), 62.
9 Lectures on Genesis (1535–45/1544–54), AE 1:45 (WA 42:34).