348 
the end, when in addition to the nightly pause there comes a 
whole day's rest, holy and blessed. What meaning now are 
we to assign to these successive rests ? That they are intro- 
duced merely as a sort of framework to the narrative, is an 
idea so utterly inconsistent with the dignity of the cosmogony 
that it may be set aside at once. Like every other detail, 
they must be regarded as the embodiments and visible mani- 
festations of principles of natural theology. Nor when we 
examine them carefully is there much difficulty in discerning 
what these underlying principles are, for the sake of which 
they were introduced. These rests express, in fact, the results 
now apparent in nature of those principles of creation already 
considered — independence, government by law, gradual 
development, and subordination. Thus, first, of indepen- 
dence. The act of creation is an act done once for all ; the 
creature once made, though still in a certain sense dependent, yet 
exists henceforth quite distinct from its Creator. But, secondly, 
mere existence is not all. Every creature has besides some work 
assigned to it, to ensure the performance of which a law has 
been imposed upon it, to be observed not now only, but always ; 
to which also all its parts and faculties are exactly adapted. 
Creation, then, once accomplished, the law once given, and 
the Creator not only may, but plainly must, so far as that item 
of His work is concerned, rest. As Ruler and Governor He 
doubtless works always, but as Creator — the only view of God 
here regarded — His work is of such a character that He works 
once only, and then rests. This is the fundamental idea to be 
set forth. Since now, thirdly, it is a principle of Divine action 
to create gradually, step by step, it follows at once that each 
of these steps of creation must be succeeded by a corre- 
sponding rest. To represent which idea adequately it was 
manifestly necessary that as there were six stages of progress, 
six days of work, so there should be also six pauses, six 
expression for 2,300 days. But no such explanation manifestly can be given 
for the use of such a periphrasis here in Genesis. The main points to be 
observed, however, as decisive of the whole question, are (1) that the verb is 
invariably inserted twice — “ there was evening, and there was morning ; a 
second day,” &c. ; and (2) that this verb is the very same, and in precisely the 
same form (vm) as is used throughout the chapter to describe the suc- 
cessive events of creation. “ There was light” and “there was evening” are 
precisely parallel expressions ; and just as the first requires us to regard the 
light as coming after the command which called it forth, so does the second 
require us to regard the evening as coming after the light, the morning after 
the evening, and the day therefore as not complete until both evening and 
morning had thus succeeded the creative acts previously described. Nothing 
but a nightly rest, then, bounded in this way by evening and morning, will 
satisfy the plain requirements of the language. 
